It's such a shame that some here show that they, too, cannot and do not understand the spiritual understanding of quiet, settled people as the quakers.
Please don't tell us what other people do or do not understand. You have no way of knowing what others understand. Simply because we may not share the same opinions as you do (in this case, about the nature of Drew Barrymore's comments) doesn't mean we don't grasp the idea of the spiritual life of the Quakers or of the meaning of Eliza's actions in momentarily breaking with her faith by assaulting the rebel soldier.
By your own words,
She made a comment that when Eliza rescued Samantha, she was glad to see Eliza's repressed anger pop out when she whapped the rebel with the broom.
all Barrymore did was state her personal opinion that she --
Drew -- was glad to see Eliza's anger "pop out". She's entilted to her opinion. She made no moral judgment nor did she say that this was a proper thing for Eliza to have done (though this does seem implied). She said nothing about this being a sort of "victory" for Eliza any more than she said anything about its being a defeat. Her statement had nothing to do with ignorance or insensitivity. She was expressing her own perspective. Or are people's opinions only valid when they coincide with yours?
Barrymore doesn't understand that such an action was a defeat for Eliza, that she had spent all of her life trying to live by the teachers of her faith and, no doubt, her mother, father, and grandparents. But then, I guess not many Hollywood personalities have the sensitivity to understand the spiritual lives of people who have simple faith--at least, Barrymore obviously doesn't.
Perhaps she doesn't understand the true meaning of this act to Eliza. Does this justify your sweeping, most un-Friendly critique of people (Hollywood personalities in general and Barrymore in particular) about whom you know nothing personally?
Jessamyn West's purpose in writing her novel was to show that it is a struggle for Quakers to do the right thing when society around them--including, apparently, Barrymore--is pushing them to violate their teachings and their way of life.
Barrymore isn't "pushing" anybody to do anything. Once again, she merely opined that she was glad to see Eliza stop repressing her emotions. She wasn't urging people to violate their teachings or anything remotely of the kind.
For Drew Barrymore to insert her insensitive comment shows at the very least, insensitivity. At the most, stupidity. I think it is the most.
Yes, being insensitive certainly shows insensitivity. Granted, I don't think she looked at this event with any depth or great understanding. She seems to have been commenting solely on Eliza's actions in isolation from other factors. But you're still going far overboard in your condemnation and moral high dudgeon.
Again: all she did,
by your own description, was say she was glad to see Eliza ceasing to repress her emotions in rescuing Samantha. That's her opinion, from her personal perspective. Yes, I agree that she doesn't seem to have seen or understood the larger issue, that this was a defeat for Eliza on the grounds you state. But calling her "insensitive" and "stupid" is going pretty far off the beam. Are you always aware of all the ramifications of everything you say or write? Do you always sit down and consider whether anything you say might be "insensitive"? She certainly wasn't advocating that people violate their beliefs.
You ask,
Please demonstrate that Barrymore's comment is sensitive to people who are different from her.
Actually, as the person making the charge that Barrymore is insensitive,
you have the burden of proof regarding that accusation. Citing a couple of individuals' opinions is not evidence of anything, other than that some people such as yourself might have found her comments offensive. In so far as being sensitive to people who are different, just how sensitive are
you? You seem pretty intolerant and self-righteous, especially in impugning all sorts of ideas and motivations to someone who did not express such things and about whom you know nothing.
Lastly, you speak of the kind of quiet, spiritual life at the heart of the Friends' philosophy and religion. In view of that, and your accusations about someone else's alleged insensitivity, it's odd how easily you condemn others, and in such nasty and indeed crude terms...staring with the asinine thread title you chose. I suggest for starters you get down off your high horse (Red Rover?) and try a little Quaker humility and charity yourself.
Disagreeing with Barrymore's statement, and pointing out that she missed the deeper issue, is well and good. Calling her names, making unfounded accusations, asserting your personal opinions as immutable facts, and making coarse and sophomoric references to her anatomy, is both uncalled-for and, indeed, extremely
un-persuasive.
reply
share