Torture Porn
February 3rd, 2009 by Jon Taplin
I’ve written before about Joel Surnow, the pinhead producer of 24, who singlehandedly has made the job of training competent interrogators for the armed forces so much harder. Last week, I was invited to a Princeton gathering at the home of Surnow’s producing partner Howard Gordon. Even though one of my favorite professors and poets, Paul Muldoon was the guest of honor, I just couldn’t go because I was sure I couldn’t help telling Gordon he had used his Princeton education to poison the minds of Americans. Now a group of interrogators has spoken out against the role of TV producers like Gordon and Surnow in glorifying torture. Important stuff, this public shaming.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmjEH0-sqv8&eurl]
It’s the military’s responsibility to take recruits, with a broad range of backgrounds and previous experiences, and train them to a uniform level of competence in some esoteric (and often dangerous) skills.
If this connection is true – that military interrogators copy what they saw on TV instead of following their training – then it exposes a catastrophic failure in the military training system.
Despite the fact that it’s the military’s responsibility to train its people, I agree that the makers of torture porn shows like 24 are also doing wrong. But I especially appreciate your emphasis on public shaming, Jon, as opposed to some sort of legal sanction.
It’s the military’s responsibility to take recruits, with a broad range of backgrounds and previous experiences, and train them to a uniform level of competence in some esoteric (and often dangerous) skills.
If this connection is true – that military interrogators copy what they saw on TV instead of following their training – then it exposes a catastrophic failure in the military training system.
Despite the fact that it’s the military’s responsibility to train its people, I agree that the makers of torture porn shows like 24 are also doing wrong. But I especially appreciate your emphasis on public shaming, Jon, as opposed to some sort of legal sanction.
Popular “entertainment” has had a pernicious effect on the popular idea of law enforcement at least since the days of Dirty Harry and Death Wish.
I remember lots of cop shows from the 70′s (even “Starsky and Hutch”) in which our heroic protectors beat “bad guys” until they spilled the beans. What was worse is that, in shiny-happy TV land, the beating was frequently anesthetized to merely shoving a guy up against a wall, at which point his hardened criminal exterior shattered and he became a blubbering baby. No need to crack bones or spill blood or shove wooden plunger handles into places they don’t belong.
I just finished a novel by Tom Sharpe, The Midden, one of whose central themes is that the English constabulary is far more interested in making arrests for terrorism, drug dealing, and that most golden of all prizes, pedophilia, than they are in arresting criminals. If the people they arrest are guilty of the crimes they’re charged with, the police have no objections. But it doesn’t figure into their calculations.
Pretty harsh satire. And I fear, too true.
As for 24, I thought from the very first season (when I watched a couple of episodes) that it was hackneyed, dull, and sickening in its casual violence.
Popular “entertainment” has had a pernicious effect on the popular idea of law enforcement at least since the days of Dirty Harry and Death Wish.
I remember lots of cop shows from the 70′s (even “Starsky and Hutch”) in which our heroic protectors beat “bad guys” until they spilled the beans. What was worse is that, in shiny-happy TV land, the beating was frequently anesthetized to merely shoving a guy up against a wall, at which point his hardened criminal exterior shattered and he became a blubbering baby. No need to crack bones or spill blood or shove wooden plunger handles into places they don’t belong.
I just finished a novel by Tom Sharpe, The Midden, one of whose central themes is that the English constabulary is far more interested in making arrests for terrorism, drug dealing, and that most golden of all prizes, pedophilia, than they are in arresting criminals. If the people they arrest are guilty of the crimes they’re charged with, the police have no objections. But it doesn’t figure into their calculations.
Pretty harsh satire. And I fear, too true.
As for 24, I thought from the very first season (when I watched a couple of episodes) that it was hackneyed, dull, and sickening in its casual violence.
Meanwhile, Strangelove predicts that the terrorist-loving Obama will be responsible for a future nuclear or biological attack.
If there is one case where making a direct comparison between modern American leaders and, say, Heinrich Himmler, is entirely apt, it’s in the case of Strangelove.
Meanwhile, Strangelove predicts that the terrorist-loving Obama will be responsible for a future nuclear or biological attack.
If there is one case where making a direct comparison between modern American leaders and, say, Heinrich Himmler, is entirely apt, it’s in the case of Strangelove.
Lots of reasons why one human inflicts pain on another. I wouldn’t presume to have a handle on even a fraction of them. But parsing my own baser impulses (including the fantasy wish to have Strangelove in a “quiet room” for a couple of hours, all to myself, alone, seems to me that the tendency is innate.
There’s the response-to-authority angle, like the repeatedly proven experiments like Prof. Milgram’s . And the “justification” angle, like undergirds the “24″ premise. And the “just because we can” and “because it’s fun” and all the other bits of the sadistic impulse.
Why single out “24″ out of all the visual and audible flood of content that floats around like turds in a toilet out there? And why can’t we humans just accept what we are and what we are capable of, and stop trying to hide behind facades of “innocence” and “righteousness” and “justification?” I am not a torturer, I am a patriot. I am not a torturer, I am following orders, guidance, example, suggestion, impulse. So what if people are maimed, killed, utterly destroyed by the millions on TV and in SinCity and DoomLand and all those “combat simulations” and Grand Theft Auto? Big deal. Only “a sick few” school teachers/priests/police officers/jail guards/”our boys” in the Service/ sugar-and-spice young ladies engage in what our purblind visions of ourselves, paragons of virtue all, say is behavior “beyond the pale.”
And what does the Army teach? Any of you folks been through basic training recently? That hotbed of lovingkindness and gentle days and nights? And of course there’s this, about the aptly acronymed SERE program , out of which part of “the government’s” culture of ineffective abuse supposedly grew.
Accept what we are, what we do every day, and what we’re capable of. Then try to figure out how you teach empathy and altruism across the world.
Altruism? What’s in it for me? An answer to that might be a step forward.
Lots of reasons why one human inflicts pain on another. I wouldn’t presume to have a handle on even a fraction of them. But parsing my own baser impulses (including the fantasy wish to have Strangelove in a “quiet room” for a couple of hours, all to myself, alone, seems to me that the tendency is innate.
There’s the response-to-authority angle, like the repeatedly proven experiments like Prof. Milgram’s . And the “justification” angle, like undergirds the “24″ premise. And the “just because we can” and “because it’s fun” and all the other bits of the sadistic impulse.
Why single out “24″ out of all the visual and audible flood of content that floats around like turds in a toilet out there? And why can’t we humans just accept what we are and what we are capable of, and stop trying to hide behind facades of “innocence” and “righteousness” and “justification?” I am not a torturer, I am a patriot. I am not a torturer, I am following orders, guidance, example, suggestion, impulse. So what if people are maimed, killed, utterly destroyed by the millions on TV and in SinCity and DoomLand and all those “combat simulations” and Grand Theft Auto? Big deal. Only “a sick few” school teachers/priests/police officers/jail guards/”our boys” in the Service/ sugar-and-spice young ladies engage in what our purblind visions of ourselves, paragons of virtue all, say is behavior “beyond the pale.”
And what does the Army teach? Any of you folks been through basic training recently? That hotbed of lovingkindness and gentle days and nights? And of course there’s this, about the aptly acronymed SERE program , out of which part of “the government’s” culture of ineffective abuse supposedly grew.
Accept what we are, what we do every day, and what we’re capable of. Then try to figure out how you teach empathy and altruism across the world.
Altruism? What’s in it for me? An answer to that might be a step forward.
I’m less concerned with the impact these programs have on interrogators and more concerned with the desensitizing effect these programs have on the civilian audience. Voters watch these programs and see the “effectiveness” of these techniques and assume that anyone against their use is against American.
These programs are a test of our souls. If we condone them. If we accept the fallacious premises. We, the general public, are the guilty parties. If interrogators know that giving in to their “inner beast” will not draw sanctions from their fellow man why should they not give in to this seductive temptation? Only our own moral code can save us.
I’m less concerned with the impact these programs have on interrogators and more concerned with the desensitizing effect these programs have on the civilian audience. Voters watch these programs and see the “effectiveness” of these techniques and assume that anyone against their use is against American.
These programs are a test of our souls. If we condone them. If we accept the fallacious premises. We, the general public, are the guilty parties. If interrogators know that giving in to their “inner beast” will not draw sanctions from their fellow man why should they not give in to this seductive temptation? Only our own moral code can save us.
Well, as I see it, it’s hard to single out a series about a torture-equilibrist as something special.
I don’t watch ’24′, as it’s not in my taste, but I have seen some clips of it.
But what’s so special about it? There’s a lot of fiction about violence, drugs, sex, etc., and there’s probably a lot of young men who got their inspiration for some variety of anti-social behavior from such films (or – not to forget – computergames), but they are still a vast minority.
SO, should we ban something that entertains the majority, but warps the mind of a very few persons (who anyway might dream up some perversities of their own, if they didn’t get them readymade from the screen or the pc), or what?
My suggestion is; – why not “tax” the industry? Not in cool cash, but simply in production minutes per so-called “action movie”. Why not just demand that all these guys, who make a living from this, are requested to present their personal opinion directly in a preface to every movie – and IMO, they can say whatever they like … if Sutherland thinks torture is ok, let him say it.
But: it’s cowardly to come out in some obscure programme and try to redeem yourself by saying that e.g. “torture is a bad idea”, if you’ve made millions on demonstrating the opposite.
… put your mouth, where you earn your money!
Well, as I see it, it’s hard to single out a series about a torture-equilibrist as something special.
I don’t watch ’24′, as it’s not in my taste, but I have seen some clips of it.
But what’s so special about it? There’s a lot of fiction about violence, drugs, sex, etc., and there’s probably a lot of young men who got their inspiration for some variety of anti-social behavior from such films (or – not to forget – computergames), but they are still a vast minority.
SO, should we ban something that entertains the majority, but warps the mind of a very few persons (who anyway might dream up some perversities of their own, if they didn’t get them readymade from the screen or the pc), or what?
My suggestion is; – why not “tax” the industry? Not in cool cash, but simply in production minutes per so-called “action movie”. Why not just demand that all these guys, who make a living from this, are requested to present their personal opinion directly in a preface to every movie – and IMO, they can say whatever they like … if Sutherland thinks torture is ok, let him say it.
But: it’s cowardly to come out in some obscure programme and try to redeem yourself by saying that e.g. “torture is a bad idea”, if you’ve made millions on demonstrating the opposite.
… put your mouth, where you earn your money!