Bakin.SSID@HI-MULTICS.ARPA (12/22/85)
From: Jerry Bakin <Bakin@HI-MULTICS.ARPA>
As a professional writer, I abhor censorship. However, there is a
great difference between censorship and maintaining some level of
good taste, especially in a collaborative medium like television.
. . .
Even if the resolution of the episode had proved otherwise, the
mere asking of the question may have been inappropriate to ask in
prime time.
. . .
Consider, for instance, an episode from actor/director/child star
Jackie Cooper's autobiography. A director wanting boy-actor Jackie
to cry his heart out on camera told Cooper that his pet dog had
just been killed. Cooper did indeed cry to the director's
satisfaction. Afterwards, the director revealed it had all been a
"harmless" joke and Jackie's dog was fine. The question: was it
(either Ellison's raising the question of whether St. Nick likes
visible minorities or the director's suggesting the dog was dead)
justifiable? Or are some ideas, especially those relating to and
(given TZ's timeslot) targetted at children, best left unspoken?
. . .
RJS in Toronto
Posted c/o
Tom Nadas
I think that whomever this RJS is, this letter is very unfair to Mr.
Ellison.
My thoughts -- jumbled because of the brevity in which to write this.
Nackles (sic?), a story by Donald Westlake, was a story to have been
directed by Harlan Ellison. I understand that the story has been around
awhile, yet this letter seems to imply that Ellison wrote the story.
Producer DeGuerre has sided with Ellison on this issue.
Maintain your own good taste on TV, exercise the off switch. Censors
should not maintain my good taste for me. Since when has good taste
had anything to do with TV. Commercialism, genericism, and blandism
is the normal criteria for judging TV scripts.
Since when has TZ been a kiddy show? If you are upset about kids viewing
it, two solutions: move it later in the evening, present a notice
about parental guidance is suggested.
The analogy of a director lying to Jackie Cooper about a real dog
has nothing to do with Harlan presenting a story on televison.
All in the family was presented at 8:00 at night on the same station
for a lot longer than the new TZ will be around.
Do children think the A-Team is real? Do the networks think it is
alright to show children that violence and retribution is ok? It's the
same thing, in any media, if the viewers cannot discern between
truth and fiction, should we ban that story? Does RJS understand the
difference? If you are afraid some viewers cannot understand the
difference then stick a disclaimer in the front. But I assume it is
not an issue, since I see no disclaimers on other CBS shows. Dallas
is on right after TZ on the same channel (I think) Talk about
tasteless shows! Talk about values? Hey kids, what do you think
of J.R's sexual proclivity? Hey isn't that great how J.R. can plot and scheme
so well. And J.R. gets away with it. I suspect Ed Asner and Nackels
were going to have a run in by the end of the show.
Ellsion (sic) has walked off virtually every long-term commitment he has
ever had and bitched about virtually every short-term media project
that has ever come to fruition. It was predictable that he would
leave TZ in a huff. It was only a matter of time. I, too, think
he has a wonderful way with the English language, but he is hardly
irreplacable. C'est la vie.
Present some facts along with your interpretation. Present some cases
where Harlan has walked off a long term commitment in which you can say
he was wrong. Present the short-term media projects. Yuor implication
is that Ellison does this merely as a ploy to exit contracts. I want
some evidence. I think Ellison does it to protect something that as a
writer you might find some use for too: his ethics.
Yes, I was afraid that sooner or later, Ellison would leave TZ. I
suspected that sooner or later, probably sooner, the networks
would screw him JUST LIKE THEY SEEM TO HABITUALLY SCREW ANY CREATIVE
PERSON. The fact that Harlan takes exception to this is laudable.
Harlan has not been the only writer to comment on Hollywood.
Read "Chandler Speaks" (I think). Raymond Chandler has several
things to say about what Hollywood does to artists. Look at
Hammett's career to see what effect Hollywood can have.
Talk to Terry Gilliam about Hollywood.
Many people at many times have discussed the problems in Hollywood.
Many people have problems in many fields. We don't need screeds
like RJS's which assume guilt. RJS will have a wonderful time
in Hollywood, I think they are looking for spineless irrationals.
And sign your letters.
Jerry Bakin <Bakin at HI-Multics>tom@utcsri.UUCP (Tom Nadas) (12/22/85)
All right. Let's catalogue the commitments that Harlan
Ellison is alleged to have walked off of. He quit the Science
Fiction Writers of America, a professional organization of which
I'm an active member. He walked off "The Starlost," a TV series
he created. He hasn't managed to fulfill his contracts to edit
"The Last Dangerous Visions" or to produce the novel "Blood's a
Rover." He raised a huge stink about Gene Roddenberry re-writing
his "City on the Edge of Forever" script for Star Trek (Ellison's
original, by the way, can be found in the book "Six Science
Fiction Plays," edited by Roger Elwood. My opinion: the
Roddenberry version is smoother, faster-paced, better focussed,
and more gut-wrenching in its conclusion.) He walked off the
"I, Robot" movie. He demanded a recall of the first volume of
the recent reissue of his works. And, Harlan Ellison, apparently
considered by some the last bastion of free speech, allegedly
hunted down writer Charles Platt, and, to quote Platt, "came up
behind me, grabbed me by the collar, and (in front of several
witnesses) hit me on the jaw ... I had provoked this by writing
a column last year containing four sentences that criticized
Ellison's worldcon tribute to Larry Shaw."
It was in my original posting, but let me amplify it: HARLAN
ELLISON IS A GREAT WRITER, ONE OF THE BEST AUTHORS WORKING IN THE
ENGLISH LANGUAGE. I do agree that Ellison might have been able
to do a beautiful, moving story about Santa Claus, making a
powerful statement about prejudice. But CBS is the client. If
he can't do it to their specifications, then that's his problem.
The commercial TV networks are in the business of making a buck.
We may not like that (I don't. That's why I, an American
citizen, work in Canada, where airwaves are considered a public
resource instead of part of the private sector).
I didn't mean to imply that TZ was a children's show. I was
referring to the U.S. networks' voluntary enforcement of a family
viewing hour, which (I may be wrong, here, and if so, I
apologize) I believe is still adhered to. A disclaimer in front
of sensitive material is a good idea, I think, in any timeslot.
Television is a collaborative effort. The series is not called
"Harlan Ellison's THE TWILIGHT ZONE." If Phil De Guerre is on
Ellison's side, good. I have always been a fan of De Guerre's
and I applaud his gutsiness. I did not have that information
when I responded to the original posting.
My analogy about Jackie Cooper was meant to show the following:
Creative people are not always justified in pressing the deepest,
darkest, emotional buttons just to get an easy reaction.
Reviewers of Speilberg's films have frequently talked about how
he jerks his audiences around. To me, personally speaking,
writing a story with such an abhorrent image as a bigotted Santa
Claus just so you can say, no, he's not bigotted after all, is
jerking the audience around. Of course, Harlan might have had a
deeper message in mind and he might have changed the world with
this episode, but we don't know that.
I'm sorry if my postings on this topic have bothered some people
(at least two, anyway). I probably went overboard, as I
sometimes do when I'm angry. I just get tired of Ellison's
attitude. There _are_ writers who have managed to change
television for the better: Norman Lear, Paddy Chayefsky, and Rod
Serling leap to mind. But they did it by working within the
confines of the medium, not throwing tauntrums and storming out
the soundstage door.
Anyway, unlike Harlan's Santa Claus, I wish you all a safe and
happy holiday. :-)
>:o) ...A smiling Rudolph...
[R]obert [J]..
--
Tom Nadas
UUCP: {decvax,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,allegra,utzoo}!utcsri!tom
CSNET: tom@toronto