By Reid Collins on 4.12.04 @ 12:05AM
Or was it Janet Jackson on SNL, again displaying license without a license?
Make no mistake. Pornography is now as acceptable as cigarette
smoking in a 1936 film. That one of the Hilton sisters could
achieve worldwide acclaim because footage of a one-time boyfriend
and herself in delicto made it onto the Internet is a benchmark of
the taste of our time. And though FCC Chairman Powell seems
determined to clean up Howard Stern's act for him by fining the
stations that air him, there are signs Powell is alone in the
Augean stable and working with a teaspoon.
Take Saturday Night Live -- please. A lot of folks
wondered if Janet Jackson's appearance as guest mammal would
produce anything reminiscent of her Super Bowl performance. It was
said the show would be produced without a delay and therefore
without the censor's thumb on anything. Janet produced some highly
athletic dance routines, displaying a nicely healed navel,
demonstrating a sacroiliac of wondrous suppleness, but did not
venture beyond the copulating simulations that pass for modern
dance. She was a passive partner later in a sketch that in any
other time would have closed the network and put everybody in the
RCA building onto the avenue.
The scenario involved a wine-making group speaking with Italian
accents and concerned with "cork soaking." The merits of "cork
soaking" were examined at length, with a suggestion that perhaps
Janet would like to learn to "soak corks." At one point an elderly
woman was introduced briefly who proclaimed that her absence of
teeth made her a better "cork soaker" than in the past. And two of
the protagonist men engaged in some other ill-concealing chatter
about a number larger than 68 but smaller than 70. Janet's role was
mainly to stand and stammer when asked a question. The single
entendre lasted several minutes. Much longer than Sarnoff would
have had he been around to see it.
So, what are we, some kinda prudes? You don't like it, don't
watch. Our First Amendment rights are under attack already in the
name of terrorist control. You want a fascist dictatorship here?
Howard Stern is a hero to millions of testosterone-soaked males.
Lay off.
One little thing. Freedom, as enshrined in that First Amendment,
does not stand unexercised. It lives when it is used. The question
is not "Can I do this?" It is, rather, "Should I do this?" And that
question is answered by a cursory examination of the cultural
limits and the license that lies beyond. We knew what "cork
soaking" was intended to mean at the first mention. The repeats
were like the little boy who keeps chattering a newly discovered
dirty word at dinner time. There is soap in the bathroom. For
grownups producing television fare there is judgment.
Self-administered, or supplied (as it is in these times) by a
federal entity representing public taste.
It isn't entirely academic. We are now engaged in a dicey
venture intended to see if a diverse people with no experience with
freedom can be made capable of exercising it.
We have put more than 650 American lives into this investment
which cannot be retrieved. At the end of June we are to ask those
people to ask themselves the question we are increasingly failing
to answer: not "can I?" but "should I?"
topics:
Television, Oil