Well I hope everyone had a wonderful time at Spring Fling. I'll admit, having Guster back at Tufts induced some good old college spirit and camaraderie that usually tends to be absent from our wonderful campus.
In other related news, women in Iran will finally be able to attend soccer games due to the recent and somewhat surprising benevolence the country's leader. Unfortunately, with the upcoming bombing campaign that will be launched by the United States, the soccer games will probably have to be postponed. Bummer.
Regarding last week's column, I was astounded that so many people had no idea who Jonathan Swift was. For those of you who failed to pay attention to your high school English teacher, allow me to enlighten you. Swift is perhaps the most famous satirist of all time. His works included "Gulliver's Travels" and "A Modest Proposal," the work on which my column was based. Although Swift died over 250 years ago, I still expected people to know who he was. I figured that incorporating his name into the title of my column might convey what I was trying to do, but apparently I made a terrible miscalculation. I guess if you don't know who Jonathan Swift is, then you are not going to understand the point I am trying to make.
Instead of garnering a few laughs, I seemed to have offended quite a few people.
I am tempted to apologize for not making it obvious that I was not serious, but that just wouldn't be my style. And also, why should I apologize for the collective literary historical ignorance of Tufts student body?
In any case, I didn't really plan to write about anything specific this week because it's my last column of the year. I figured I would review my past columns and end on an especially arrogant and pretentious note (Would there be any other way?) You know, take credit for things like whipping the Greeks into shape and inspiring the people on this campus to take some extra care in their appearance... things of that nature.
But as fate would have it, I saw an excellent film this past Friday that presented some very interesting and controversial ideas of justice and revenge. I suppose it's only appropriate that I end with a discussion of a movie, just as I began. The movie I went to see is called "Hard Candy," and it is not a porno, so relax.
"Hard Candy" begins, as most classic movies do, with an instant message conversation. We soon learn that the people chatting away are actually a 32-year-old photographer/pedophile, and an innocent 14-year-old girl who is apparently just looking for some attention. It turns out that "Jeff" and "Haley" have been talking online for the past three weeks and have finally decided to meet in person as the movie commences. The two agree to rendezvous at a caf?© called "Nighthawks" for some coffee and conversation, and maybe even something more.
Haley arrives first and orders a very scrumptious looking dessert. She is in the middle of eating it when Jeff walks in, introduces himself, and then wipes the excess chocolate off her lips with his hand. He then proceeds to strangely lick his fingers, which is completely revolting. The caf?© scene is expectedly painful as the two create an odd sense of sexual tension that is obviously inappropriate.
Using very passive aggressive techniques, Haley begins to lobby Jeff into taking her home with him. Being the slick and charming child molester that he is, Jeff is at first hesitant. He thinks that this might be too risky because they have already been seen in public, but Haley is practically irresistible, so he finally agrees. The two drive back to Jeff's upscale modern crib and continue their uncomfortable banter when Jeff suggests afternoon screwdrivers. The audience feels as if Haley might soon face her inevitable fate as the helpless victim but things are, however, not what they appear.
Haley slips some sort of drug into Jeff's drink that causes him to pass out. When he wakes up, he's bound to a chair as Haley roams menacingly around his house. The once harmless Haley has morphed into the genetic spawn of Hannibal Lector, with medical scalpel in hand. I won't say anything else because I wouldn't want to ruin the ending, but you can guess what she intends to do.
The audience is left questioning whether Jeff deserves his fate. I mean, how can one have sympathy for a child molester? Then again, does Haley have the right to trick Jeff into taking her home? These are all questions that the audience is left to reconcile. What is right and what is wrong? It's all very ambiguous, but being forced to figure it out is what makes this movie so good. It compels you to sincerely question what you believe.
OK, so I would have normally ended on that last sentence, but this is my last column so bear with me. I would sincerely (I can be sincere!) like to say thanks to the Daily and the Viewpoints editors for allowing me to write a column these past few months. I really appreciate them letting me indulge in my own narcissistic exhibitionism for an entire semester. To those of you who enjoyed my column, I say rightfully so. To those of you, who didn't, spare me.
Do you think Ben is a terrible person/writer? Are you disgusted by his arrogance? Would you like to silence him? If so, he can be reached at benjamin.bell@tufts.edu.
