WRONG MESSAGES TO YOUNG PEOPLE

i've been brooding in a positive manner about the new movie "The People vs. Larry Flynt." Thanks to this movie, Frank Rich, among other major critics, now seem to think that Larry Flynt is some kind of freedom-of-speech martyr. Well OK, I guess he is. So what? Are we supposed to take a newfound pride in America? Having difficulty. I'm sure that Woody Harrelson as Larry Flynt is much more entertaining than, say, Nick Nolte as Thomas Jefferson in "Jefferson in Paris." Yet, ironically, Thomas Jefferson is an even bigger giant than Flynt when it comes to constitutional rights. And he was quite a rake in his own right (allegedly). In fact, he was what we now call "deeply human" (that is, racist, but redeemed by his otherwise Jeffersonian qualities). Jefferson was not, however, despite his many faults, a pornographer. Poor dude doesn't stand a chance in the '90s. I've forgotten more about Larry Flynt than I ever knew about Thomas Jefferson. (This is the essence of my education as a white male, by the way — and yet we complain about Ebonics? Hello? This nation needs professional help.) Myself, I've never felt the need for a "role model." Given that, I have nothing against Larry Flynt, aside from his sleaziness, as a role model paradigm. Yet I would be more thrilled about seeing the movie if Danny DeVito or John Goodman were playing Larry Flynt — some actor who looks like he has actual appetites. I like Woody Harrelson all right, but he just doesn't strike me as a sexually obsessed drug-addicted megalomaniac with a bizarre fixation on anuses and feces. Civil rights advocate maybe, but geez, that's only part of the story, isn't it? Just the other day, if I can switch gears here, I saw a commercial in which Daffy Duck tried to cash a check. The friendly (and "real") clerk asked him for identification. He didn't have it, of course. But then Bugs Bunny showed up and cashed his check easily, because he had a Visa Check Card. This so infuriated Daffy that he fell down a big hole, leading straight to Toon Hell. The last shot in the ad showed Bugs and the clerk staring down the hole after Daffy, with Bugs saying, "What a maroon!" Well, once again, what has happened to our role model here? Since when does a goddam animated forest creature need a checking account? I thought that cartoon animals only needed cartoons, anvils and obvious disguises. Bugs Bunny has no need of pocket, portfolio or resume, for God's sake! But Bugs is also a corporate symbol. It is deeply depressing to think of Bugs this way, but it is an unhappy fact of life. There was a time when Bugs was merely a barely noticed appurtenance of a motion picture studio. He was given away for free, almost, to regional television stations during the '50s, providing a role model (of sorts) to preteen boomer anarchists in small towns everywhere — at the very least a useful antidote to Huckleberry Hound, Yogi Bear and the Flintstones. Hanna-Barbera is the Antichrist of animation. I have no problem imagining Huckleberry Hound obtaining a credit card. I can envision Huckleberry Hound's Brentwood home. I can envision Huckleberry Hound's painful divorce. I can envision Huckleberry Hound hiring me as an image consultant. Bugs never needed help from anybody. I hate to get nostalgic on you, but remember that? Remember when Bugs Fucking Bunny never stood for anything at all? Remember when Larry Flynt was just a trailer park version of Hugh Hefner? Yet I saw Bugs Bunny whip out a credit card, and use this capitalist piece of plastic to humiliate Daffy. What am I going to believe, the truth? Or the evidence or my own eyes? That's the goddam dilemma in a nutshell. So how does this relate to the drug problem? I'm glad you asked. California's Proposition 215, which attempts to legalize the medical use of marijuana, is hitting a very soft wall, a wall so soft it achieves hardness without any of the harsh effects. Kind of like an airbag. The bill has been characterized as having come into being thanks to "out-of-state elites." This is a new one on me. I've heard of out-of-state "agitators," but never out-of-state "elites." Harvard professors are meeting in smoke-free rooms to engineer the future of mild intoxicants in California? The Clinton Administration and/or the federal government has indicated a desire to prosecute physicians who prescribe marijuana as a palliative for agony, or for anything else. Big government has decreed that California's Prop 215 sends the wrong message to young people. As near as I can tell, judging by our culture's attitude as expressed through the media, our young people are lazy, value-free thugs, who'd just as soon deal methamphetamines as puff a doob. So what's the problem? The thing is, we human beings have both appetites and responsibilities. Must we always look to Hollywood or D.C. to help us find the balance between them? I believe — I deeply believe— that only Sir Paul McCartney can help us. Or, better, Lord Bugs.

---

Last 5 columns:45 | 43 | 41 | 39 | 37 | Ill Humor archive
Bookmark: http://www.salon1999.com/weekly/shoales.html