New site!

Featured

I’ve moved over to my fancy new website Chris Hill Author. To read my latest blog posts from now on please click here and join me there!

Advertisements

The Interview – is it ok to laugh?

The_Interview_2014_posterThe recent controversy over the film The Interview has made me think about the issue of what it’s ok to write about – what is fair game in fiction?

For those who have been living in a cave for the last few weeks The Interview is a broad comedy which offers a fictional account of two inept TV journalists who travel to North Korea with a secret brief from the CIA to kill the leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-Un. Spoiler alert on this next bit I suppose.

They do succeed eventually in killing Jong-Un – which makes this a film about the assassination of a real, living national President. And people have been racking their brains without success to think of a movie which takes this extreme line.

It’s funny, by the by – at least I thought so, it’s a perfectly good movie which would have made people laugh without controversy had it been about a fictional country, not dissimilar to North Korea. But is it acceptable?

If we were to take a strictly ‘freedom of speech’ approach then we would say that virtually anything that could be said should be allowed, unless it breaks an existing law, such as the libel laws or laws against hate speech.

On the other hand, some would say that making entertainment of the assassination of a country’s leader is so disrespectful as to be out-of-bounds, even if that country is, to say the least, not an ally. It’s also not as brave as it might first appear for the film makers, and Sony, the company behind them, to make a film about the killing of the leader of North Korea. He’s a figure of fun they may have thought, a pantomime villain, and his regime has nothing to recommend it, to Western eyes anyway – he’s fair game.

But would they have made a similar movie about the assassination of Russian leader Vladimir Putin who is currently not on the West’s Christmas card list? I think we know the answer to that. They would have been aware of the likely repercussions, politically, economically and so on. I don’t believe that film would ever have been given the green light.

What we can deplore I believe, is the response to the film. Destructive computer hacking and terrorist death threats are not a proportional reaction to the supposed slight involved.

People have been asking – what would the US have done if a movie had been made somewhere else in the world about the killing of the President of the USA? Or how would the UK respond to a similar movie about the death of the Prime Minister?

My view is that there might have been public protests outside the appropriate foreign embassy in Washington or London, though not as well attended as those we mount against our own governments on controversial issues. There would also of course have been endless media chatter – with angry editorials and forthright bluster in the Daily Mail in the UK and on Fox TV in the states. But would there have been terrorist threats or destructive hacking? I can’t imagine it to be honest.

Atelier_de_Nicolas_de_Largillière,_portrait_de_Voltaire,_détail_(musée_Carnavalet)_-002Because we have long enjoyed freedom of speech, we are used to seeing it exercised. There’s a phrase in an early 20th Century biography of Voltaire used to sum up the great man’s beliefs, it’s often wrongly attributed to him. It says:

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

That’s the modern West’s view, it’s our default position. But it isn’t the prevailing view in many other parts of the world, particularly those ruled by dictators who find free speech inconvenient. The content of The Interview may be acceptable to us – but it isn’t to them. We might wish North Korea would take a more benevolent view of the fictional slaying of their Supreme Leader, but that was never going to happen. They were always going to see it in the worst possible light and take whatever action they could to gain redress.

So it comes down to this I suppose – is the game worth the candle? There a lot of things in life you could say, things which would deeply anger and upset people, but are they worth saying? Are you achieving anything worthwhile by saying them? I don’t believe The Interview really takes a brave stand or adds to the cultural debate – I don’t know that it achieves anything it couldn’t have done by featuring a fictional dictatorship. So we can laugh at The Interview, we have that freedom. But there is a price to pay for the making of this slight, funny, throw-away movie. And the time to decide whether that price is worth paying is before, not after, you say something ‘unsayable’

What’s your view on The Interview and the controversy surrounding it? Do you think there are things which shouldn’t be written about? Let me know in the comments.

Song of the Sea GodIf you get a moment to take a look at the award-winning Song of the Sea God.

You can look inside to read the first few pages free and download a free Kindle sample for UK readers here. And for readers in the USA here