Oh come on… you knew this was going to go up…
July 25, 2008; Page A15
A cry for help goes out from a city beleaguered by violence and fear: A beam of light flashed into the night sky, the dark symbol of a bat projected onto the surface of the racing clouds . . .
Oh, wait a minute. That’s not a bat, actually. In fact, when you trace the outline with your finger, it looks kind of like . . . a “W.”
There seems to me no question that the Batman film “The Dark Knight,” currently breaking every box office record in history, is at some level a paean of praise to the fortitude and moral courage that has been shown by George W. Bush in this time of terror and war. Like W, Batman is vilified and despised for confronting terrorists in the only terms they understand. Like W, Batman sometimes has to push the boundaries of civil rights to deal with an emergency, certain that he will re-establish those boundaries when the emergency is past.
And like W, Batman understands that there is no moral equivalence between a free society — in which people sometimes make the wrong choices — and a criminal sect bent on destruction. The former must be cherished even in its moments of folly; the latter must be hounded to the gates of Hell.
“The Dark Knight,” then, is a conservative movie about the war on terror. And like another such film, last year’s “300,” “The Dark Knight” is making a fortune depicting the values and necessities that the Bush administration cannot seem to articulate for beans.
Conversely, time after time, left-wing films about the war on terror — films like “In The Valley of Elah,” “Rendition” and “Redacted” — which preach moral equivalence and advocate surrender, that disrespect the military and their mission, that seem unable to distinguish the difference between America and Islamo-fascism, have bombed more spectacularly than Operation Shock and Awe.
Why is it then that left-wingers feel free to make their films direct and realistic, whereas Hollywood conservatives have to put on a mask in order to speak what they know to be the truth? Why is it, indeed, that the conservative values that power our defense — values like morality, faith, self-sacrifice and the nobility of fighting for the right — only appear in fantasy or comic-inspired films like “300,” “Lord of the Rings,” “Narnia,” “Spiderman 3” and now “The Dark Knight”?
The moment filmmakers take on the problem of Islamic terrorism in realistic films, suddenly those values vanish. The good guys become indistinguishable from the bad guys, and we end up denigrating the very heroes who defend us. Why should this be?
The answers to these questions seem to me to be embedded in the story of “The Dark Knight” itself: Doing what’s right is hard, and speaking the truth is dangerous. Many have been abhorred for it, some killed, one crucified.
Leftists frequently complain that right-wing morality is simplistic. Morality is relative, they say; nuanced, complex. They’re wrong, of course, even on their own terms.
Left and right, all Americans know that freedom is better than slavery, that love is better than hate, kindness better than cruelty, tolerance better than bigotry. We don’t always know how we know these things, and yet mysteriously we know them nonetheless.
The true complexity arises when we must defend these values in a world that does not universally embrace them — when we reach the place where we must be intolerant in order to defend tolerance, or unkind in order to defend kindness, or hateful in order to defend what we love.
When heroes arise who take those difficult duties on themselves, it is tempting for the rest of us to turn our backs on them, to vilify them in order to protect our own appearance of righteousness. We prosecute and execrate the violent soldier or the cruel interrogator in order to parade ourselves as paragons of the peaceful values they preserve. As Gary Oldman’s Commissioner Gordon says of the hated and hunted Batman, “He has to run away — because we have to chase him.”
That’s real moral complexity. And when our artistic community is ready to show that sometimes men must kill in order to preserve life; that sometimes they must violate their values in order to maintain those values; and that while movie stars may strut in the bright light of our adulation for pretending to be heroes, true heroes often must slink in the shadows, slump-shouldered and despised — then and only then will we be able to pay President Bush his due and make good and true films about the war on terror.
Perhaps that’s when Hollywood conservatives will be able to take off their masks and speak plainly in the light of day.
Mr. Klavan has won two Edgar Awards from the Mystery Writers of America. His new novel, “Empire of Lies” (An Otto Penzler Book, Harcourt), is about an ordinary man confronting the war on terror.
You are a sick, sick man (as is Mr. Klavan) to call Bush a hero. Comic book heroes are usually acutely aware of the moral implications of their actions, and most do not resort to desperate measures as Bush has, instead finding solutions to problems that are morally ambiguous at worst. For instance, at the end of Batman Begins, Batman tells Liam Neeson’s character Raj Al-Goul, ‘I can’t kill you, but I don’t have to save you,’ which is a quote I’ve used on this blog before. This is where your house of cards comes crashing down.
And you obviously don’t understand the political reality of fantasy and comic book movies because if you did you would understand that it’s your party’s religious base which has been railing against many of these movies as being inappropriate for ‘their Christian society.’ Even Harry Potter has come under fire! These are your Neo-cons/Bush Republicans that are the only people complaining… a very vocal minority.
SMS
“Left and right, all Americans know that freedom is better than slavery, that love is better than hate, kindness better than cruelty, tolerance better than bigotry. ”
Actually, not all Americans know those things.
Sarah,
The Green Arrow was a liberal, but Batman really isn’t.
Superman is a bit wishy-washy though.
SMS,
Of course Bush is a hero…10% of the American people say so! LOL.
“That’s real moral complexity. And when our artistic community is ready to show that sometimes men must kill in order to preserve life; that sometimes they must violate their values in order to maintain those values…”
It think this is the same moral complexity Bin Laden’s benn sharing with his clan, that and, “you’re either with us or against us.”
Bush is no hero. He is the worst president in history.
Allow me to shatter this ridiculous Batman analogy;
In Gotham City, Batman is beloved.
In America (not to mention just about anywhere else), Bushman is not beloved.
how soon all these far left liberals forget 9/11 . we have not been hit here since . so bush is doing something right . of course people like vern and others might not like his methods but he is getting done . but you folks are so hatefull of him that it blinds you . post 6 he is not the worst . iknow bush has not been very good in his 2nd term i will give you that but he has protected us . the worst was jimmy c . or god forbid the new rock star that has everyone fooled that is running this year .
#8 –
Bush barely has a 2-digit approval rating so why you blame liberals is beyond me. Clearly they don’t represent 90% of the electorate.
Also, it’s easy to prevent terrorist attacks when you’re complicit in them. Yeah, I said it, so what? So does Alex Jones.
SMS
A double digit rating is better than the single digit rating of the democrat controlled congress.
junior –
I agree. I’m pissed at them too, but this isn’t a popularity contest, so I’m trying to stay on topic.
*sigh* That’s really sad though, isn’t it?
SMS
Not-so-great one,
If whether or not we’ve been “hit” again since 9/11 is the standard by which you measure this President, then I dare say your standards are quite low. But then maybe they need to be that low to feel like he’s done anything right.
Something tells me your standards won’t be that low under President Obama.
speaking of low post 12 that is where this country will be if NOBAMA gets in .. i dont judge a president by one standard but its a real main factor in keeping us safe . and junior you took the words right out of mouth . nancy strech face pelosi the other day called bush a failure . perhaps but I HOPE SHE HAS A LARGE MIRROR .
Tall tales of Saddam’s WMD and Al Qaeda connections, to convince us to back an invasion of Iraq. Torture and rendition. Broadcasting the identity of an invaluable undercover CIA operative just to punish her husband for disagreeing with the war. Running roughshod over the Constitution with signing statements and contempt of congressional subpoenas. Turning the Justice Department into an arm of the Republican Party. Etc etc etc.
None of this was to protect us, none of it was intended to protect us. Protection of America was the farfetched PRETEXT at best. All of it was to consolidate political power and wealth.
None of these things are comparable to Batman’s accidental collateral damage chasing down the fiendish, implacable Joker. Or for that matter anything like Abe Lincoln’s measured and reluctant suspensions Constitutional provisions to keep our Union together.
I saw Dark Knight last night with my sons and we all loved it. Dunno if the guys who made it were trying to make a Bush apologia, but it doesn’t really work if they were.
One good example: the eavesdropping dragnet Batman sets up near the end of the film which so disturbed the Morgan Freeman character. Batman did that as a final desperate measure and made sure that it would be completely dismantled as soon as the Joker was caught.
On the other hand, Bush and Cheney began eavesdropping on us illegally without warrants LONG BEFORE 9-11. They started it practically as soon as they took office. This fact is often forgotten and overlooked even by my fellow leftists and civil libertarians. It had nothing to do with protecting us from terrorists, and in fact DIDN’T EVEN PREVENT 9-11.
I’m gonna do a whole post on just that fact. How early the illegal eavesdropping started. Meanwhile, I know Batman. I worked with Batman. President Bush, you’re no Batman. (apologies to Lloyd Bentsen for those of you too young to remember…)
“Holy W, Batman! You’re like Bush?”
I read the Wall Street Journal’s piece comparing the trials and tribulations of Batman to those of President Bush. Wow! Was that a bat signal in the sky, or the letter “W?” I found the comparison interesting but have my own opinions about heroes and battles against evil.
On the rope of life, heroes climb above their weakest point, putting themselves at risk for the benefit of others. Love, compassion, duty and honor call them forth and they respond. Still, even heroes on a worthwhile quest against evil must search their own hearts for smoldering embers of hate or vengeance that could influence their actions and bring dishonor and disaster. We are only human. Heroes or not, we often fight our deadliest battles against ourselves and the best way to tame our dark, snarling inner desires is to flood those beasts with light.
We live in the real world, one with presidents and CEO’s but no superheroes of fantasy fame. Public awareness and debate about all sides of political and social issues must comprise the beams of light in our darkened skies. And we should all vote according to the signals in which we believe. That “W” stands for “We, the people,” if we let it.
Laurel Anne Hill
Author of “Heroes Arise,” a parable about the necessity and complexity of breaking the cycle of vengeance. (KOMENAR Publishing, October 2007)
Did anyone catch the vote taken on one of the hostage boats in the Batman movie the Dark Knight?
Without giving away the outcome of this scene; the hostage citizens boat voted to blowup the hostage prisoners boat – to save their own lives. The cowardly citizens voted 140 to 396 to blowup the prisoners boat.
140 and 396 total 536 – the same number who may vote in the US Congress; 435 members of the House of Representatives, 100 US Senators and 1 vice president of the US who is President of the Senate and would vote in the case of a tie in the Senate.
Same total, 536 cowardly citizens and 536 cowardly congressman. Coincidence? I think not !