No matter how great an artist--which I do not for a moment concede--the guy is a first class criminal.
And . . . how would Whoopi Goldberg feel if Polanski had been a priest? Would she still see it more as a seduction than as a “rape-rape”
A couple of years ago, I saw an exhibit of Hitler's artwork at the Williams College Museum. At the entrance to the exhibit there was a sign which said in essence that because Hitler had artistic talent you would believe he would be a fine, idealistic, humanitarian fellow, wouldn't you?
No, Virginia, I wouldn't. There have been lots of persons with artistic or literary talent who were slimeballs. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the famous philosopher, who abandoned his newborn babies on church steps, springs to mind. I guess they didn't have late term abortion in France in those days.
Plenty of others come to my mind, and no doubt to yours. My point is that talent and good character don't necessarily have anything to do with each other. But the enlightened thinkers of our day think artistic talent excuses anything.
Remember Jack Henry Abbott, an inmate who Norman Mailer sprang from jail on the grounds that he was a writer? Within a couple of days of his release he killed an innocent man. His book wasn't even that good, either.
Whoopi Goldberg is, of course, the sage who believes that steel cannot melt and therefore 9/11 was an inside job. Well, no-one could consider her talented, so she'd better abide by the law of the land.