Comments on: Just Condemn!

By: Randal Powell

Randal Powell — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 04:53:28 +0000

Perhaps the situation could have been mitigated had there been an explicit acknowledgment by the library that a discussion would be held after the movie and that citizens with diverse points-of-view were encouraged to participate. Also, the library could add a general legalese disclaimer: [The opinions expressed in "Movie J" are "Director K's" and do not represent the views of "Library X" or "Town A" in any way. Nothing asserted in "Movie J" should be considered official or sanctioned by "Library X" or "Town A" or any other affiliated organization.] By the way, I like the idea of citizens going to see a movie that they disagree with in order to debate their point-of-view. I’d like to see Literary Societies come back – I think that the country desperately needs them. Public libraries could start “Open Literary Societies” at little financial cost and, in the process, convincingly reassert themselves as educational and intellectual centers for the community. Literary Societies have been all but abandoned by colleges and universities and are ripe for the taking. They automatically connote sophistication, self-improvement, rational discourse, and prestige. Literary Societies would imbue the public library brand with a powerful halo effect and change society for the better in the process. –Think about it.

By: Spekkio

Spekkio — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 16:08:32 +0000

“Honestly, when you show a 2007 movie on a Friday afternoon in the winter at most libraries, you’d be lucky to get half a dozen people to attend – hardly worth making all that noise about, is it?”

That depends on your point of view. If you equate the Political Left with Commies or Nazis, then they become the enemy – and that means that you cannot tolerate the existence of even one of those “villains.” Likewise – though I think to a lesser extent – demonizing the Political Right has a similar effect. And it doesn’t seem to matter anymore whether one is anonymous or pseudonymous or using their “real name.” On Facebook, where (almost) everyone is under their real name, people have little fear of throwing around insults – socialist, communist, brownshirt, Nazi, fascist, librul, libtard, libturd, Repug, Rethug, RepubliCan’t, theocRAT, baby-killer…. Around the time of the State of the Union, half the messages were something about “resign” or “impeach him” or “where’s the birth certificate.” And when Keith Olbermann and MSNBC parted ways, you might have thought that American conservatives had won the Super Bowl.

So yes, to their minds, “SiCKO” and Michael Moore matter a great deal. “Evildoers” must be stopped.

By: Barbara

Barbara — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 00:05:59 +0000

Right, AL, many of these politicians have never set foot in a library, especially their local library that they are so eager to censure. I think the point you’re missing here is that four residents of Enfield should not be able to dictate what all the other residents of Enfield can view at a program at the public library. That’s why all we Connecticut librarians were so riled up. And let’s get real – how can you present a “balanced” view every time you show a movie? Show movies that present every possible viewpoint, supposing such movies exist? That would make for a very long & boring program. Actually, I was discussing the Sicko fiasco with a colleague, and we agreed the Enfield town council and town manager were crazy to make such a fuss, calling down all that bad publicity on themselves. Honestly, when you show a 2007 movie on a Friday afternoon in the winter at most libraries, you’d be lucky to get half a dozen people to attend – hardly worth making all that noise about, is it?

By: Annoyed Librarian

Annoyed Librarian — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 20:57:41 +0000

Maybe “anti-intellectual” wasn’t the right term to use, since I’m not saying everyone should be an intellectual, whatever that is. I just thought it was weird that showing a movie was considered the equivalent to advocating its ideas. For people who only read or watch things they already agree with, I guess that makes sense. After posting this, I also thought about what a huge gap there is between what these residents and politicians think a library is supposed to be and what many librarians think a library is supposed to be. A library is supposed to be a place to discover ideas, but you wouldn’t know it from listening to some of these politicians. Maybe they’ve never been in a library.

By: Joneser

Joneser — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 20:32:57 +0000

So what is the difference between being “cultured” and being “intelectual” (sic)? Or do we have to parse out the difference between “being intellectual” and “being an intellectual”, or simply being somewhat “intelligent”? Which is acceptable, and which isn’t? I don’t think we’re talking about merely being able to pronounce “Chopin” here.

I must agree with AL on this. The level of stupidity – arrogant stupidity – makes my head hurt.

By: Libraryman

Libraryman — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 19:46:57 +0000

I will agree with you, but I think a big reason anti-intelectualism is so rampant is that many intelectuals are so arrogant and annoying. I consider myself cultured but I don’t think less of those who don’t know how to say Chopin.