With Progress Comes Indecency
November 12, 2009 • By Whitten Maher, The Breeze
Print This Post
Email This Post
The subject of vulgarity, of indecency, has captured me lately. Being a college student in a bubble of like-minded (more or less) 18 to 22-year-olds tends to make one forget about the world. One need only post up at the Port Republic/Devon Lane intersection or listen to conversations on the Quad see the near-complete freedom — of behavior, of expression — we take full advantage of. As a senior, however, thoughts of the workday world and acceptable adult behavior start to grow in the back of your head.
Will you be able to get away with the dorm-room shenanigans, the off-color jokes or the Friday night vernacular after you enter a world complete with children, families and senior citizens?
As I pondered the irreverent and the blasphemous, I stumbled upon a piece in London’s Daily Mail by Quentin Letts about what he views as the sad state of British culture. His column is more or less a hit piece on Germaine Greer, a 1960s-era feminist whom I wager few on this side of the pond would know of. If one believes Letts, however, you’d think Greer single-handedly took a hammer not only to patriarchy but to society itself. Her feminist activisim, if you believe Letts, has brought a plague upon Britain in the form of “loose-kickered lady louts” and binge-drinking women.
It’s apparent even from the get-go that Letts is a social commentator of a distinctly puritan persuasion. Some of the blights of modern British society he focuses on are women drinking like men, the royal family wearing (gasp!) normal attire when out on the town and men with shaved heads (whom he finds particularly brutish and untrustworthy).
I found myself reacting in much the same way one does when listening to the late Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson or any of the cranky old men still complaining about loosening standards of decency.
At the same time, one of the basic tenets of this social critique remains eternally true: Breaking down societal conventions and barriers (however archaic or repressive) tends to leave a vacuum filled by, well, whatever we want.
As Letts put it, “one consequence of [Greer’s] convention-shattering ways was a destruction of modesty and decency.”
The culture wars of so many societies have been between the repressive and the expressive. But when you break down the barriers and shatter restrictive norms, what’s left is a vacuum that will be filled with a great variety of expression and behavior — some bad, some brilliant.
The commodification of shock value in entertainment has brought us horrors like “Hostel” but also the witty “House.” The comedy of Larry David — an irreverent but essentially true portrait of the worst of human nature — is stuff that would have never indulged in decades ago. Progress in the arts (and thus society) naturally will include the likes of Robert Mapplethorpe (if you’re not familiar with him, I’d advise against a Google image search) and the recent film by Lars von Trier called “Antichrist” (I’d advise you view the trailer, at least). It will also include poignant social commentaries such as “The Crucible.”
I’m not defending vulgarity nor am I extolling the virtue of brashness. However, we must accept the sad truth that progress will naturally accept some foul-mouthed hooligans and be inherently forgiving of some irresponsible behavior.
At the end of the day, though, indecency is the sign of a progressive society, for the shackles of convention that instill stability also tether the soul and the mind.
Whitten Maher is a senior political science major and design editor at The Breeze.
Contact Whitten Maher at mahercw@jmu.edu
Comments
Got something to say?
Best of the 'Burg Supplement
April 29, 2010 Issue in Print
