I am not sure where the debate about whether someone could love the art but hate the artist became transformed into a debate about whether if we love the art we can give the artist a rape pass, but it seems to have come to that when various filmmakers signed a petition defending Roman Polanski from extradition.
What follows is a "close reading" of said petition:
We have learned the astonishing news of Roman Polanski's arrest by the Swiss police on September 26th, upon arrival in Zurich (Switzerland) while on his way to a film festival where he was due to receive an award for his career in filmmaking.
It is astonishing that someone who was the subject of an outstanding warrant was arrested?
His arrest follows an American arrest warrant dating from 1978 against the filmmaker, in a case of morals.
For which he pleaded guilty. He also admitted that he gave a minor whom he was supposed to be photographing for French Vogue a quaalude pill and champagne, and proceeded to have sex with her.
Filmmakers in France, in Europe, in the United States and around the world are dismayed by this decision. It seems inadmissible to them that an international cultural event, paying homage to one of the greatest contemporary filmmakers, is used by the police to apprehend him.
It seems inadmissible that when the police have a valid search warrant, they can enter your apartment even if you are on the john. But them's the breaks.
By their extraterritorial nature, film festivals the world over have always permitted works to be shown and for filmmakers to present them freely and safely, even when certain States opposed this.
Most film directors haven't spent 30 years fleeing outstanding warrants, so you can see how the issue might not have come up before. I'm not sure the precedent holds.
The arrest of Roman Polanski in a neutral country, where he assumed he could travel without hindrance, undermines this tradition: it opens the way for actions of which no-one can know the effects.
While militarily neutral, Switzerland does have an extradition treaty with the United States. If Polanski assumed he could not be arrested there, he is gravely mistaken. Stick to Cannes next time.
Roman Polanski is a French citizen, a renown[ed] and international artist now facing extradition. This extradition, if it takes place, will be heavy in consequences and will take away his freedom.
Taking away his freedom is kind of the idea. And this particular French citizen has also pled guilty to a crime that took place in California, in a California court, in which state he was living at the time.
Filmmakers, actors, producers and technicians - everyone involved in international filmmaking - want him to know that he has their support and friendship.
As Noah Cross said in "Chinatown," "Of course I'm respectable. I'm old. Politicans, ugly buildings, and whores all get respectable if they last long enough."
On September 16th, 2009, Mr. Charles Rivkin, the US Ambassador to France, received French artists and intellectuals at the embassy. He presented to them the new Minister Counselor for Public Affairs at the embassy, Ms Judith Baroody. In perfect French she lauded the Franco-American friendship and recommended the development of cultural relations between our two countries.
I call b.s. on any French people claiming an American spoke perfect French, not that it has anything to do avec le prix des oeufs.
If only in the name of this friendship between our two countries, we demand the immediate release of Roman Polanski.
This is some nerve, insofar as France for 30 years harbored said international fugitive.
The fifth signatory, by the way, is Woody Allen. Way to lead on a high note.
Hat tip to LGM.