Search Salon

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Recently in Salon Arts & Entertainment

Television
Behind "Behind the Music"
Is there a VH1 special in your future? Take this simple quiz and find out now!
By Julia Goldberg
[03/21/00]

Music Review
Sharps & Flats
Pedro the Lion's acoustic pop aims to reconcile evil, pain and weakness with belief and compassion.
By Michelle Goldberg
[03/21/00]

Column
The top 10 reasons David Letterman's heart bypass operation was a good thing

By Joyce Millman
[03/20/00]

Music Review
Sharps & Flats
Former Lonesome Stranger Randy Weeks' thin, wobbly voice conveys the pain and emotion of a grown-up cowpunk.
By David Hill
[03/20/00]

Movies
Warren Beatty
The ambitious and radical star -- actor, producer, director -- crafted a remarkable and uncompromising slate of mainstream movies.
By Stephanie Zacharek
[03/20/00]

Complete archives for Arts & Entertainment

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Lucas blamed the rash of criticism on a single Los Angeles Times writer who he said had misheard Jar Jar say the word, "Massa." "The L.A. Times took that little statement that was in a review and turned it into a whole thing about the film was racist, anti-Semitic and misogynist and everything else they could think of."

"Critics aren't creators, they're destroyers," he said. "And I don't think any creative person will ever argue with me about that."

I mentioned that I review films, but that didn't do anything to slow him down. "Most of them that I've met are reasonably dim-witted," he said of critics. "I mean, they aren't like the rest of us. They don't have any knowledge of anything. They're not successful in any world that I've ... They certainly don't know anything about history; they don't know anything about film. They don't know anything about politics. They don't know anything about sociology or psychology or anything. I mean, it's like, you get into a conversation with them and it's hard to find a subject that they can actually converse on."

Well, that tore the room up. "And I'm being kind," he added as soon as the laughter died down. Another student asked him a question about the next installment of the series, and Lucas said goodbye.

I was reeling. The only thing more offensive than his name-calling was the implication that filmgoers are sheep. Without the Los Angeles Times article, he suggested, no one would have thought the film was racially problematic. Of course, Lucas didn't bother to mention that at least 15 other articles and reviews in papers from Salt Lake City to Omaha to New York had suggested that the film contained racist elements before the L.A. Times article ever appeared.

But Lucas had his mind made up. The critics were out to get him, and he hadn't made any mistakes. In essence, his opinions, his facts, precluded the possibility that he could have, in his words, hurt anyone's feelings. If you thought the film was racist, by his estimation, your view wasn't "credible." Or, if your feelings were hurt by his images, it's because you just can't see him the way he sees himself -- as a benevolent creator who gives the world his gift, celebrates universal harmony and the triumph of good over evil.

Lucas wasn't willing to take responsibility for his characters because he couldn't accept that a lack of racist intent does not absolve him of that responsibility. It goes to his statement that there are different, equally valid perceptions of reality. It's just unfortunate that he doesn't seem to buy that, either. "It's your truth," he told us. But apparently, in Lucas' world, his truth is the only one that matters.

And that hurt my feelings.
salon.com | March 22, 2000

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

  Get a printer-friendly version

  E-mail a friend about this article

  Backflip this article to find it again

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Search Salon