Cotton Mather Had a Point
“It Happens. So it’s Part of What We Are.” Said Robinson Devor on behalf of his new film about bestiality inflicted by men upon horses.
Now, I’ve heard every miserable and pathetic excuse in the book. We have successfully defined deviancy down to the bedrock and don’t have a sharp enough drill bit to sink it any lower. Daniel Patrick Moynihan would turn over in his grave, but not if Robinson Devor, the director of the movie “Zoo,” were anywhere near his final resting place.
Devor’s descent into the depths of human depravity was unveiled at this year’s Sundance Film Festival. Devor’s new “masterpiece” examines the aesthetic aspects of man-on-horse sexual relationships. No, I’m not exaggerating or making this up. Cine d’Arte now features aesthetic discussions of man-on-horse sexuality.
I’m not reacting angrily to the fact that Robinson Devor decided to make a movie about bestiality. I’m angry that he acts as if bestiality involves never having to say that you’re sorry. I’m even more thoroughly angry that this movie got a glowing review from Kenneth Turin of The Los Angeles Times.
"I aestheticized the sleaze right out of it." Devor claims proudly. I’m sure the creative geniuses that brought us “Laughing Tongues” also felt proud of the money shots. However, there are some things you can’t “aestheticize” the sleaze right out of. Getting your rocks off on a defenseless animal would have to belong on that list.
Twenty-five American soldiers dying in Iraq makes me sad, but I believe we can persevere through that. We made it past The Death March of Bataan and the landscape turned red at Anteitam. America can accept pain and suffering and still survive.
Yet, if this is what our nation’s artistic avant-garde admires, can we remain long on this earth as a nation? Isn’t our cultural heritage something we fight for? If this is the America the world sees at the movies, who can blame Osauma if he hates us. This cannot be what we are letting ourselves become.
The Sundance Film Festival propaganda describes the film as follows:
“The cinematic language invented for the film permits us to examine where we draw the line, how much perversity we can tolerate in others. In a broader sense, Zoo is really about thresholds. What can we stand to know, and, more importantly, what can we stand to accept?”
These guys get their enjoyment from sexually molesting horses. Should I really have to examine whether I’d find this beyond the pale of acceptable human desires? Are there people sitting near my cube in the office thinking? “Gosh, why do we get so bent out of shape over guys who molest the livestock?” Not if our society is any way worth approving.
On most moral issues, I’d probably aggravate a healthy plurality of the modern Conservative Movement. I really don’t care what two human beings above any reasonable age of consent do to one another by mutual agreement and in the privacy of their own homes. It's just that there has to be a limit to the level of acceptable behavior somewhere. A grate has to be installed above the sewer.
“It Happens. So it’s Part of What We Are.” Devor pontificates.
"I aestheticized the sleaze right out of it." Devor brags.
Devor cannot be right in either assertion. He cannot be deemed logical if we are to remain civilized. A line has to be drawn somewhere to arrest this appalling moral decay. It has gotten bad enough that I’m thinking that maybe mean old Reverend Cotton Mather legitimately had a point.