The commentary below is a personal opinion, and in no way reflects the views of The Toronto International Film Festival or any of its sponsors.
A few years ago, I worked an event at
TIFF that was at the centre of a controversy regarding
free speech and the ethics of showing
animal cruelty.
The film in question was titled
Casuistry: The Art Of Killing A Cat. The premise of the film was to examine an incident that had taken place here in Toronto a few years previous.
Three
OCAD students had decided to torture a cat to death, film it and submit it as a project in the course of their studies. When the denizens of Toronto were made aware of this incident, we quite properly recoiled at this heinous disregard for the dignity of a living thing, and we wondered how such a perverted act could be interpreted as art by anybody.
The incident did, however, raise some interesting questions, which led to the making of Casuistry, the most central of which is " why are we outraged by the abuse of some animals, but have so little concern about the welfare of animals that are raised to be killed and consumed by carnivores?". (note: I am a person who eats meat) .
Not only were these douchebags convicted in the court of public opinion, they were charged and convicted in criminal court, and in my opinion, rightfully so.
However it is in the furor that followed that absurdity raised its laughable head. When TIFF announced this film would screen at the festival, confusion and misinformation reigned, and the perception was that TIFF was glorifying this abhorrent act.
Many people wrongly believed that Casuistry was that actual film made by these three douchebags. (ya know, like the hijackers were all from Iraq, and they entered from Canada). It wasn't, nor did it contain any footage from that film.
Nonetheless, the flame had been lit under the asses of those who have committed their lives to the cause of moral outrage, and the stage was set for a protest that would make Casuistry the most interesting screening at the fest, even if it wasn't the most interesting film.
When I learned that I had been scheduled to work the premiere of this film, I was elated. With typical decency, my bosses at TIFF offered an out to anyone who was uncomfortable working this screening. I told them that I wouldn't miss it for the world.
On the day of the screening I arrived to see the sidewalks filled with peaceful protesters and a significant police presence. As I stood outside the theatre I noticed a child of six or seven glaring at me with all the hate he could muster, as if I was the one who had tortured a cat. I shook my head with pity for him and despair that his parents were training him to live an outraged life.
While watching all this, a member of the media approached me and asked what I thought about the scene before us. I told him that I was proud that TIFF was screening this film in the face of some oppossition. He then asked what I thought about the protesters across the street. I said that while I did not agree with their position, I embraced their right to be there.
I had also been defending TIFF to some of my outraged cat loving friends. I generally believe that censorship is far more dangerous than anything a film could contain. To those who would argue with me, I would answer thusly: "Are you suggesting that TIFF shouldn't screen films about the worst aspects of the human experience?" "Should TIFF not show films about The Holocaust or Rwanda or The
Khmer Rouge because it shines a light on the perpetrators?"
At the premiere of the film, one of the three douchebags who made the cat killing video decided that it would be a good idea to show up at the screening of this film about his film. As he arrived, I heard a howl of outrage rise from the angered crowd. For his own protection, and in the interest of public safety, the Toronto Police arrested and detained him for several hours.
Civil rights be damned, sometimes pragmatism should rule the day.
Being one of the few who actually bothered to inform themselves by viewing this film, I was struck by the absurdity that the message I took from the film was an elevated awareness of the cruelty that I embrace when I eat meat, which was pretty much the same message as the protesters outside.
All of which leads me to this years brewing controversy. For the first time TIFF is running a program called
City To City . The city that is being featured is
Tel Aviv .
The first sign of trouble came when I logged in to my work computer and saw a note mentioning that
John Greyson had pulled his short film "Covered" from the festival.
Since then, an
online petition has emerged, signed by a number of prominent artists. The basis of this protest is that the films selected present a pro Israeli view, that does not accurately reflect the true story of the city.
Cameron Bailey who programmed the City To City festival has responded to the criticism.
I am not sure what to make of all this, but just like Casuistry, I want these films to be screened and I encourage the protesters to get their message out there peaceably. This could lead to dialogue and hopefully understanding.
Great filmaking reflects ourselves, and I think that each year TIFF strives to present a snapshot of the entire human experience. Perhaps this dispute will lead to a teachable moment for all of us.
www.goyestoeverything.com
Posts
