Awards Season 2021

[cpetrizzi]

But even more so, I'm saddened by the court of public opinion where some are in favor of what happened. The consensus also seems to be falling along racial lines, i.e., someone here previously mentioned African-American and Latino Twitter are condoning this type of violence. That terrifies me, as well, because it seems like our Courageous Conversations about race will have a hard time continuing with this VAST divide in principles.

This sentiment makes me extremely uncomfortable. There is a centuries-long and well-documented history of white-instigated violence which victimized and oppressed both black and latin peoples all over the western hemisphere. The idea that history can exist without granting some empathy to people subjugated by this violence for literally centuries, feels wrong.

I would challenge that claim of "vast divide in principles" is both overgeneralized along racial lines, as well as inaccurate at its core. Any divides in principles are far less clean than racial lines, or gender, or political affiliation, or any other direct association.

With that said, I now feel obligated to state my own opinion on this matter. I agree that Will Smith's actions were reprehensible, specifically his physical assault on Chris Rock. I think the Academy's approach from the moment it happened up until now has been nearly as reprehensible. Their failure to take swift action and condemn Will Smith's actions (edit: reworded this to clarify my viewpoint) was shameful. The academy showed no support for someone representing them, who had been the victim of violence.

I am also uncomfortable with the diagnosis of root cause for this incident, both here and elsewhere online. There are too many unknown dynamics at play between these individuals that I doubt we will ever know to make an accurate assessment. I can appreciate posing questions and looking at evidence, but I am not seeing that. I am seeing diagnosis from those who have as a majority never seen these people beyond a camera. And I don't think such diagnosis is necessary, either.

My point was not to pass judgment on anyone. Overall, the entire situation makes me uncomfortable in about 1000 different ways as well, and it all feels wrong. In education, we have on-going meetings called "Courageous Conversations" where teachers and students alike talk about race and inequality. They are sometimes uncomfortable; they are often educational. Based purely on observation without judgment (I admit I would be the LAST to judge being a white male making above the US median income) is that more black and latin people are in the corner of defending Smith's actions than white people. This is not a statement about anyone one, particular person. On this forum, many have commented on this exact observation that they are seeing on social media venues. I don't have a social media presence and am relying on others for that. You are saying this is not racial, but the intent of the joke by Rock has been interpreted as such (even though I didn't perceive it as such). So therefore, many have perceived race as part of the conversation now.

I have been judged on these forums very intensely before for putting my foot in my mouth. However, the intent of my comment was not to be judgmental in any way. It was merely an observation that I have seen and many others have seen here as well. I was more or less posing a question as to why this might be the case.

Let's take race completely out of the equation. A person violently hits another person in front of billions of people on TV. Is this appropriate behavior? That's about the only thing that should be discussed.

[therewillbeblus]

I am also uncomfortable with the diagnosis of root cause for this incident, both here and elsewhere online. There are too many unknown dynamics at play between these individuals that I doubt we will ever know to make an accurate assessment. I can appreciate posing questions and looking at evidence, but I am not seeing that. I am seeing diagnosis from those who have as a majority never seen these people beyond a camera. And I don't think such diagnosis is necessary, either.

That's fair, and apologize if I'm perseverating on my hypotheses in a way that seems simplistically diagnostic. I realize that I've probably insinuated the opposite due to my dislike of Smith, but my intention is to actually give Smith some slack by formulating that there are very relatable shades of ego-bruising going on here, even if, yes, I don't think he's been supported into a position of addressing them. The idea is to contrast what I see as the main line of action with cases like this that reduce him to a sociopath or an icon for depleting faith in humanity, with something that is both unique to him in all the unknowns and also universal in discomfort when we perceive we are becoming our negative core beliefs about ourselves in the public eye. I don't personally like Smith, and I think he's exhibited narcissistic traits (which I've been very careful to label as such vs. identity-first language of him being labeled "a narcissist" - a linguistic default many use here and elsewhere, i.e. 'so-and-so is a racist' that I have expressed vehement opposition to for reasons already exhaustively stated) but nonetheless I think there's something sad going on around his mental health (outside of any automated pathological 'disorder', but dissecting emotional fragility is not exactly a diagnosis, it's something I have too, as does likely everyone to some degree) and I have sympathy for that part of the equation.

I'm actually very hopeful by the quote Smith made in his apology regarding life-long work. We often need the "gift of desperation" to initiate change, especially when that involves engaging with whatever impulses are going on underneath our protective psychological 'parts', and I have faith this will be a turning point for him. The fact that he clearly has faith on his side- in whatever form that takes- will hopefully help as well.

Soothsayer, I really appreciate you calling this out. I recognize I'm probably perpetrating an at-least-interpretable reading of dehumanization while intending to grant complexity to Smith's psychosocially-driven behavior, simply in the act of trying to define it. I mean, I kinda feel weird about drawing up formulations in my initial assessments with clients after a first meeting, but that's kinda my job. Not making excuses, it's just a kneejerk reaction and I actually agree with you and therefore am far more vague in those writeups than most of my colleagues! I'll also try to phrase these formulations as questions rather than facts, the former posits are what I'm doing in my head.

[Soothsayer]

But even more so, I'm saddened by the court of public opinion where some are in favor of what happened. The consensus also seems to be falling along racial lines, i.e., someone here previously mentioned African-American and Latino Twitter are condoning this type of violence. That terrifies me, as well, because it seems like our Courageous Conversations about race will have a hard time continuing with this VAST divide in principles.

This sentiment makes me extremely uncomfortable. There is a centuries-long and well-documented history of white-instigated violence which victimized and oppressed both black and latin peoples all over the western hemisphere. The idea that history can exist without granting some empathy to people subjugated by this violence for literally centuries, feels wrong.

I would challenge that claim of "vast divide in principles" is both overgeneralized along racial lines, as well as inaccurate at its core. Any divides in principles are far less clean than racial lines, or gender, or political affiliation, or any other direct association.

With that said, I now feel obligated to state my own opinion on this matter. I agree that Will Smith's actions were reprehensible, specifically his physical assault on Chris Rock. I think the Academy's approach from the moment it happened up until now has been nearly as reprehensible. Their failure to take swift action and condemn Will Smith's actions (edit: reworded this to clarify my viewpoint) was shameful. The academy showed no support for someone representing them, who had been the victim of violence.

I am also uncomfortable with the diagnosis of root cause for this incident, both here and elsewhere online. There are too many unknown dynamics at play between these individuals that I doubt we will ever know to make an accurate assessment. I can appreciate posing questions and looking at evidence, but I am not seeing that. I am seeing diagnosis from those who have as a majority never seen these people beyond a camera. And I don't think such diagnosis is necessary, either.

My point was not to pass judgment on anyone. Overall, the entire situation makes me uncomfortable in about 1000 different ways as well, and it all feels wrong. In education, we have on-going meetings called "Courageous Conversations" where teachers and students alike talk about race and inequality. They are sometimes uncomfortable; they are often educational. Based purely on observation without judgment (I admit I would be the LAST to judge being a white male making above the US median income) is that more black and latin people are in the corner of defending Smith's actions than white people. This is not a statement about anyone one, particular person. On this forum, many have commented on this exact observation that they are seeing on social media venues. I don't have a social media presence and am relying on others for that. You are saying this is not racial, but the intent of the joke by Rock has been interpreted as such (even though I didn't perceive it as such). So therefore, many have perceived race as part of the conversation now.

I have been judged on these forums very intensely before for putting my foot in my mouth. However, the intent of my comment was not to be judgmental in any way. It was merely an observation that I have seen and many others have seen here as well. I was more or less posing a question as to why this might be the case.

Let's take race completely out of the equation. A person violently hits another person in front of billions of people on TV. Is this appropriate behavior? That's about the only thing that should be discussed.

I am going to quote you in the post I initially replied to:

The consensus also seems to be falling along racial lines, i.e., someone here previously mentioned African-American and Latino Twitter are condoning this type of violence.

Is there any evidence beyond your visual observation or anecdote? I think this is a major claim to make without empirical or statistical evidence which can objectively back it up. And to avoid being coy, I don't think you have that evidence to present. I won't imply intent, but I will state that I think such a claim without evidence is irresponsible and goes a long way to hindering rather than helping any kind of conversation regarding understanding between different races.

Your final question, I respectfully ask you to review my initial post in this thread, as I clearly answer it there.

[Soothsayer]

I am also uncomfortable with the diagnosis of root cause for this incident, both here and elsewhere online. There are too many unknown dynamics at play between these individuals that I doubt we will ever know to make an accurate assessment. I can appreciate posing questions and looking at evidence, but I am not seeing that. I am seeing diagnosis from those who have as a majority never seen these people beyond a camera. And I don't think such diagnosis is necessary, either.

That's fair, and apologize if I'm perseverating on my hypotheses in a way that seems simplistically diagnostic. I realize that I've probably insinuated the opposite due to my dislike of Smith, but my intention is to actually give Smith some slack by formulating that there are very relatable shades of ego-bruising going on here, even if, yes, I don't think he's been supported into a position of addressing them. The idea is to contrast what I see as the main line of action with cases like this that reduce him to a sociopath or an icon for depleting faith in humanity, with something that is both unique to him in all the unknowns and also universal in discomfort when we perceive we are becoming our negative core beliefs about ourselves in the public eye. I don't personally like Smith, and I think he's exhibited narcissistic traits (which I've been very careful to label as such vs. identity-first language of him being labeled "a narcissist" - a linguistic default many use here and elsewhere, i.e. 'so-and-so is a racist' that I have expressed vehement opposition to for reasons already exhaustively stated) but nonetheless I think there's something sad going on around his mental health (outside of any automated pathological 'disorder', but dissecting emotional fragility is not exactly a diagnosis, it's something I have too, as does likely everyone to some degree) and I have sympathy for that part of the equation.

I'm actually very hopeful by the quote Smith made in his apology regarding life-long work. We often need the "gift of desperation" to initiate change, especially when that involves engaging with whatever impulses are going on underneath our protective psychological 'parts', and I have faith this will be a turning point for him. The fact that he clearly has faith on his side- in whatever form that takes- will hopefully help as well.

Soothsayer, I really appreciate you calling this out. I recognize I'm probably perpetrating an at-least-interpretable reading of dehumanization while intending to grant complexity to Smith's psychosocially-driven behavior, simply in the act of trying to define it. I mean, I kinda feel weird about drawing up formulations in my initial assessments with clients after a first meeting, but that's kinda my job. Not making excuses, it's just a kneejerk reaction and I actually agree with you and therefore am far more vague in those writeups than most of my colleagues! I'll also try to phrase these formulations as questions rather than facts, the former posits are what I'm doing in my head.

Thank you for this post. I appreciate and agree with all of this.

Discussions about factors around identification that can impact why something happened and the surrounding fallout are worthwhile. I want to make sure anyone who is scrutinizing my posts in this thread knows how I feel there. I also believe it's fair to scrutinize what people say in those discussions as their own signs of causation or bias. I want to see more of that in discussions surrounding the incident with Will Smith and Chris Rock. Right now I'm seeing more outward projection, rather than internal examination of why these myriad thoughts are springing up from an incident which doesn't objectively support it without a *lot* of explanation and exposition.

[cpetrizzi]

I had hoped I’d feel better after sleeping on it, but I’m waking up to most of the world unapologetically defending Smith and I’m just, like, done. This is the Bad Place

I'm actually seeing the complete opposite on social media with people saying that Smith was completely wrong about it and that he needs mental help. Still, I'm also seeing a complete cultural divide with what happen last night as Black and Latino twitter are defending for the most part Will Smith (although many said that it could have been resolved in a better manner) and White twitter condemning the actions and many equating Smith's actions and words to those of people that commit domestic/spousal abuse. Black and Latino twitter for the most part defend Will because they see it as another microagression that minorities have to deal with almost on a daily basis, including making fun of a black woman's hair, which is a no-no in the culture. The fact that Chris Rock had already roasted Jada 6 years ago about her movement to boycott the Oscars adds another layer to the situation. White twitter, especially comedians, are scared shitless and wanted Smith's head last night. Almost every white comedian, from Jeff Ross to Nikki Glaser to Meredith Salenger (wife of comedian Patton Oswalt), and so on, wanted Will thrown out of the building, charged and arrested and his membership to the Academy revoked and his award taken away from him. They fear that they will go now from being heckled for a bad joke to actually being on the receiving end of a violent attack and I completely understand their fear.

After sleeping on it and coming from a Latino background were I have been bullied in several ways for my accent or my place of origin, I understand that what Will Smith did is completely wrong and there should have been some consequences to his actions. Still, I understand his frustration and why he slapped Rock. It's not right at all, but seeing the pain in the eyes of someone you love because they were insulted in front of millions for something they can't control... well, everyone reacts differently to a set of circumstances like this. It's also of note that not only didn't Rock defended himself from the attack, he didn't retaliate. I don't know what crossed his mind in that moment, only he knows. But at the end of the day, I believe whatever beef they had was squared then and there and what happened was as simple as someone stepping over the line and another one responding to it. It's not about domestic violence. Is not about toxic masculinity. It's about mental health and emotions and a bad tasteless joke.

You are correct, Soothsayer. Part of my statement comes from own, personal observations. And it might be completely inaccurate. However, as you can see from above, others on the forum have made this observation about the racial/cultural divide as well.

Disregarding culture, race, religion, or beliefs, I am truly curious as to how or why anyone can defend (or condone) Smith's public display of violence. This includes the Academy itself, which displayed blatant disregard for the welfare of Rock and in its own way "condoned" Smith's actions.

[Soothsayer]

You are correct, Soothsayer. Part of my statement comes from own, personal observations. And it might be completely inaccurate. However, as you can see from above, others on the forum have made this observation about the racial/cultural divide as well.

Disregarding culture, race, religion, or beliefs, I am truly curious as to how or why anyone can defend (or condone) Smith's public display of violence.

From my previous post above replying to therewillbeblus

Discussions about factors around identification that can impact why something happened and the surrounding fallout are worthwhile. I want to make sure anyone who is scrutinizing my posts in this thread knows how I feel there. I also believe it's fair to scrutinize what people say in those discussions as their own signs of causation or bias. I want to see more of that in discussions surrounding the incident with Will Smith and Chris Rock. Right now I'm seeing more outward projection, rather than internal examination of why these myriad thoughts are springing up from an incident which doesn't objectively support it without a *lot* of explanation and exposition.

[therewillbeblus]

Reportedly they’re halting production on Bad Boys 4 post-slap, which makes sense and is not indicative of any long-term blacklist (we’re still under a week), but now I’m wondering if Smith’s choice to resign was also strategically career-motivated, as in the longer he waited around for the Academy and various systems to investigate, the longer this would be a topic of conversation in the public eye and on social media. Maybe resigning within the week is a smart diversion to avoid a scarlet letter brand, and be nothing more than the hot celeb story of the week.

[vsski]

While this incident may reverberate longer than others, especially in Hollywood, the public has a short memory and the next mass shooting in a public high school or ice storm in Texas will soon push it from public view. I’m fairly certain that the resignation was not due to some profound acknowledgment of wrong doing and making amends, but a calculated career move to preserve as much of his earnings potential as possible. In the end not being able to vote for others in upcoming ceremonies or being a presenter means little compared to making 10+ million for your next movie.

If the academy has any spine they hand out a fine that makes him ineligible to ever receive a nomination again, as this would sting at least a little bit, but given their behavior thus far, I highly doubt this will happen.

[BrianB]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hollyw ... 23936/amp/

Denzel’s first public comments on the Oscars incident are with televangelist T.D. Jakes of all people. He refuses to condemn anyone and says he and Tyler Perry prayed with Smith

[therewillbeblus]

I can appreciate the simplicity of action directed to prayer once the incident was over and done with and no longer unsafe, and the unconditionality of Christian forgiveness is fitting within his belief system, and so no judgement there. Denzel did his best to aid given his subjective worldview and I think there’s a lot of value in it, even if I’m subjectively seeking accountability according to my value system

[swo17]

Has Smith not now been held accountable?

[therewillbeblus]

Sorry, to rephrase, my position was to seek accountability for his actions, past tense. Denzel prioritizing unconditional forgiveness and refusing to condemn behavior based on said belief system that it is not up to anyone except God to judge (vs, I don’t know, leaders of systems refusing to take action out of fear- of rustling feathers based on Smith’s “power” or whatever) is understandable

[vsski]

Never expected to read this in Forbes, but found it to be a very good write-up, especially its discussion on what should have happened and how Will Smith is not the only one to point fingers at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/terinaall ... d48ca2175a

[dekadetia]

One of the things I keep reflecting on is how we got to a point where making jokes at the expense of invitees became an essential part of the Academy Awards in the first place. I recognize that this incident has made it impossible to pull that back at this point — the Academy's focus is going to be on making sure presenters know they have a safe place to speak freely without fear of reprisal, and understandably so — but I can't help thinking it would be a positive thing if these affairs were more sincere and reverent in the first place, even if that means alienating a certain faction of the audience who come first and foremost to laugh. I actually think Soderbergh's iteration in 2021, despite other glaring issues, went some way toward envisioning what such a presentation might look like.

[domino harvey]

The Oscars have always been like that, at least as far back as when Bob Hope hosted. And I think broadly audiences like seeing celebrities take a joke at their expense with good humor. This is part of the awards season territory and every star knows how to do this— look at Bardem’s reaction to Rock’s lame joke right before Smith’s to see but one of thousands of examples

[hearthesilence]

Questlove tonight at the Grammys: “I’m going to present this award, and I trust that you people will stay 500 feet away from me.”

[Finch]

At this point, the only thing that's going to save the academy some face is to come through with the threatened expulsion for ten years including a ban on Smith getting nominated in any capacity. They have to show that Smith resigning isn't going to make them more lenient because right now, his resignation only means he can no longer vote. If he does come good within the next few years, they can always reduce the length of his ban. I'm hoping Winfrey and King or any other primetime interviewer will resist requests for interviews taking place anytime soon and not become complicit in ploys to get him rehabilitated sooner than later. From the Academy, it'd also be good to see a public admission that they have failed Chris Rock in acknowledging that he de-escalated the situation and that they provided no moral support to Rock by letting Smith not only stay but proceed with a self-serving speech. To that end, a full, unreserved apology from the Academy to Rock is the least they can do.

[Brian C]

I guess we’ve now entered the “no punishment is good enough” phase of the proceedings. We cannot rest until every shred of the man’s dignity is destroyed!

I mean, can we just dial down the hysteria a little bit, please? There’s just no need for a full-blown moral panic here. I promise, it’s possible to think that Smith did a horse’s-ass thing while also thinking that … well, it’s ultimately not that huge of a deal.

And why in the hell would we want him to be banned from being nominated? If he does good work and people like it, by all means, they should vote for him! It would be incredibly stupid for the Academy to set this precedent of deciding who is and who isn’t socially acceptable to be eligible for awards, for the exact same reason I gave up thread for why it would be stupid to rescind awards.

[spectre]

Totally agree. It's frustrating that people find it so hard to deal with things proportionally – it seems the only two gears are either to disappear and pretend it isn't happening (as the people in charge of the event did at the time) or else come down like a ton of bricks later with an excessive punishment.

[swo17]

I like Jim Carrey's response, which was initially to rebuke until there were consequences but is now asking valid questions about the pressure we put on celebrities

[flyonthewall2983]

He’s got the drop on Hollywood more than most. I find it sad but unsurprising that he’s strongly considering retirement from acting, but him not seeing it as the be-all end-all of his life is really cool on his part.

[therewillbeblus]

And why in the hell would we want him to be banned from being nominated? If he does good work and people like it, by all means, they should vote for him! It would be incredibly stupid for the Academy to set this precedent of deciding who is and who isn’t socially acceptable to be eligible for awards, for the exact same reason I gave up thread for why it would be stupid to rescind awards.

Agreed, and maybe if this had happened a few years ago I’d actually see it possible for them to make such a move, but cancel culture (in its most surface-level form) is not moving so hard in that direction any longer

[domino harvey]

They’re not going to ban him from being nominated, and they shouldn’t. If members want to vote for him for categories in which he’s eligible, let them. If the Academy wanted to be very vindictive, they could reclaim the statue / ban him from receiving a future statue, as it’s Oscar property, but still keep the award record and eligibility regardless

[hearthesilence]

I don't agree with having anyone banned from getting nominations and awards, and I don't think it will ever happen. To take a much worse example, Louis CK won a Grammy last night - what he did was much worse, and he's been less apologetic, but I wouldn't advocate for his ban either. (But I'm still surprised he was even nominated, especially in the light of the massive backlash over his win.)

[therewillbeblus]

It's been six years, he has apologized, and basically set fire to his career as the first person ousted post-Weinstein openly admitting his actions against the advice of probably every rep he had at the time. I think Matt Damon had it right when he said to Peter Travers how we were sending the message to young boys to not take accountability by everyone setting an undefined bar for Louis CK that was always going to be 'higher' than what he did/said ("He apologized but it wasn't enough" without defining what "enough" would be) vs. all the celebs who stayed quiet and continued their careers. Also, how are you quantifying what's "much worse"? One man struck another man physically, while another man sexually harassed women in a non-physical way. Is it because one of the actions is 'sexual' so it's taboo? I'm not saying I necessarily disagree, but this is comparing apples to oranges and one of these people actually put their hands on another human being which can carry physical trauma and potentially induce death. Think about it.