Yesterday I praised Viola Davis’s speech at the Oscars for being memorable without being overtly political — because it simply spoke about her job in a poignant and well-written way. Twitter quickly told me I had missed something. On social media and conservative-leaning news sites, Davis’ speech actually sparked outrage.
After explaining that she felt her mission was to “exhume…the stories of people who had big dreams and never saw those dreams come true, people who fell in love and lost,” Davis said the following:
I became an artist – and thank God I did – because we are the only profession that celebrates what it means to live a life.
The claim became a topic of discussion on the right-wing internet after the Oscars. “The art is great. Art enriches. “Art can connect us to each other,” Ben Shapiro writes. in Daily Wire. “But the sheer arrogance of saying that artists are ‘the only profession that celebrates what it means to live a life’ is astonishing. What about doctors? What about stay-at-home mothers, who help shape lives rather than pursue their own professional interests? What about morticians? What about almost everyone in a free market economy, who gives of themselves to others to improve their lives?
This sentiment has been echoed online, with Davis sometimes misquoting it as if she said that only “actors” celebrate what it means to live a life, or, worse yet, that they are the only ones who “know” what it means to live a life. life. .
Do people have the right to feel insulted? Did she say that artists are better than everyone else? When reading her words literally, in the context of her speech, and extending her skepticism, it’s hard to see the backlash against Davis as anything other than a symptom of our bloated culture wars.
Anyone may “celebrate what it means to live a life” in their own personal way, but for whom is this the primary function of their profession? Artists for sure. Maybe the clergy. doctors Save They live rather than celebrate them, and it does not discredit them to say so. Parents stay at home Helps Others, and Davis, might agree that this is more noble, important, and important than “celebrating” the meaning of life.
Her point was simply that artists play a unique role in telling stories about the human experience, and she’s happy to be a part of that.
It certainly could have edited itself to make it less controversial, though less interesting, statement. If she had simply said: “I became an artist – and thank God I did – because we celebrate what it means to live a life,” the complaints might have been harder to swallow. “The One” highlights the specific way in which artists are unique, but it also serves as a whistle-blower for anyone who feels deeply disaffected by Hollywood’s elitism and condescension. There is rarely a better time to express this discontent than now.
On the right, reflexive disgust for the entertainment industry has gained new fervor under Donald Trump. during Fox and friends After the Oscars ceremonythe confusion where La la land The Best Picture award was mistakenly announced by Steve Doocy, as “Hollywood got the election wrong, and last night Hollywood got the Oscars wrong.” Guest Tucker Carlson agreed but added that moonlight “He had to win” because the politically correct moral establishment wanted it to. Yes, the Oscars were an out-of-touch disaster and a maliciously rigged game.
Donald Trump offered his own explanation for the academy’s failure, saying: “I think they were so focused on politics that they didn’t get a deal in the end.” Breitbartas if he were a PricewaterhouseCoopers accountant Warren Beatty handed the wrong envelope He did it because he was jabbering so hard when Kimmel tweeted the president “You awake?”
Liberals may complain that Trump takes credit for his critics who make a logistical mistake. But, of course, both sides see a lot of politics in entertainment these days: see Whatever it takes Making Like Doocy and comparing the end of the Oscars to Election Night.
For many viewers on Sunday, Davis’ speech seemed remarkable because he cut across almost partisan differences and spoke passionately about representation. But one word — “just” — was enough to make it a true test of the culture war. Perhaps she wanted to fight a battle over the place of art in society, or perhaps she was simply portraying her profession as she honestly saw it. Either way, it was a challenging move in an era when artists are increasingly held to the same standards as candidates for office: where they are expected to choose their words not for the sake of truth, but for the sake of politics.