What is it about Hollywood?

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18602
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

What is it about Hollywood?

Post by retrofuturist » Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:03 am

Greetings,

(I'm not interested in discussing individual scandals in this topic, although it is the increased prevalence of such scandals that is prompting this question...)

What is it about Hollywood?

Why is Hollywood such a cesspool of sexual abuse, drug abuse, paedophilia, misogyny, sanctimonious virtue signalling, fraud, crime, hypocrisy, cultural Marxism, cover-ups, pervertion, hedonism and other forms of moral and spiritual degeneracy?

Whilst I'm happy to hear "conventional" explanations about Hollywood's ethical malaise, I'm particularly interested in anything that someone might be able to present from the context of the Dhamma, which might give clarity to the origins of such depravity.

To get things started...

SN 42.2: Talaputa Sutta
On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrel's Sanctuary.

Then Talaputa, the head of an acting troupe, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, I have heard that it has been passed down by the ancient teaching lineage of actors that 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas.' What does the Blessed One have to say about that?"

"Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that."

A second time... A third time Talaputa, the head of an acting troupe, said: "Lord, I have heard that it has been passed down by the ancient teaching lineage of actors that 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas.' What does the Blessed One have to say about that?"

"Apparently, headman, I haven't been able to get past you by saying, 'Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that.' So I will simply answer you. Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on things inspiring passion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more aversion on things inspiring aversion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of delusion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even more delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Thus the actor — himself intoxicated & heedless, having made others intoxicated & heedless — with the breakup of the body, after death, is reborn in what is called the hell of laughter. But if he holds such a view as this: 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas,' that is his wrong view. Now, there are two destinations for a person with wrong view, I tell you: either hell or the animal womb."

When this was said, Talaputa, the head of an acting troupe, sobbed & burst into tears. [The Blessed One said:] "That is what I couldn't get past you by saying, 'Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that.'"

"I'm not crying, lord, because of what the Blessed One said to me, but simply because I have been deceived, cheated, & fooled for a long time by that ancient teaching lineage of actors who said: 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas.'

"Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Community of monks. May the Blessed One remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life."
May we learn from the mistakes of others and not replicate their degeneracy.

:namaste:

I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

binocular
Posts: 4095
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by binocular » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:08 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:03 am
Why is Hollywood such a cesspool of sexual abuse, drug abuse, paedophilia, misogyny, sanctimonious virtue signalling, fraud, crime, hypocrisy, cultural Marxism, cover-ups, pervertion, hedonism and other forms of moral and spiritual degeneracy?

Whilst I'm happy to hear "conventional" explanations about Hollywood's ethical malaise, I'm particularly interested in anything that someone might be able to present from the context of the Dhamma, which might give clarity to the origins of such depravity.
In the context of an existential approach to Buddhism, I think that Hollywood is the epitome of bad faith. Even when it advocates what is generally considered a sober, "healthy," "normal" lifestyle, it does so in terms of YOLO or at least in terms of worldly values.

The bad faith is in saying, or implying, "This is as good as it gets, there is nothing further." "This" referring to the ordinary (upper) middle class lifestyle and mentality.

And once people limit themselves like that, things go down the drain.

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3054
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by Mr Man » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:50 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:03 am

What is it about Hollywood?

Why is Hollywood such a cesspool of sexual abuse, drug abuse, paedophilia, misogyny, sanctimonious virtue signalling, fraud, crime, hypocrisy, cultural Marxism, cover-ups, pervertion, hedonism and other forms of moral and spiritual degeneracy?

Whilst I'm happy to hear "conventional" explanations about Hollywood's ethical malaise, I'm particularly interested in anything that someone might be able to present from the context of the Dhamma, which might give clarity to the origins of such depravity.
Does Hollywood have more of a problem with the above said, than other areas of the US?


SN 42.2: Talaputa Sutta

"Apparently, headman, I haven't been able to get past you by saying, 'Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that.' So I will simply answer you. Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on things inspiring passion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more aversion on things inspiring aversion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of delusion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even more delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Thus the actor — himself intoxicated & heedless, having made others intoxicated & heedless — with the breakup of the body, after death, is reborn in what is called the hell of laughter. But if he holds such a view as this: 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas,' that is his wrong view. Now, there are two destinations for a person with wrong view, I tell you: either hell or the animal womb."

When this was said, Talaputa, the head of an acting troupe, sobbed & burst into tears. [The Blessed One said:] "That is what I couldn't get past you by saying, 'Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that.'"
So the actor is responsible for increasing the negative mind states of the audience and as a result of this is reborn in a hell realm?

User avatar
zerotime
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by zerotime » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:53 am

in other places there are explanations in that same frame, in where for every action there is a retribution of hell or heaven. This frame of explanation appears in many other situations.

Just I note the actor's job or the Theater it is not in the list of the five ways of life to avoid taught by the Buddha:

- selling weapons
- selling human beings
- animals involving killing
- selling intoxicants,
- selling poisons

I wonder also if in those ancient times, the "actors" were something quite different. Here it mentions the 140 BC as a feasible date for the beginnings of theater in India as something close to what we know today:.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_theatre

and also note how the Buddha says "is reborn in what is called the hell of laughter". I wonder if maybe the laugh was the main purpose in those days and perhaps they were closer to some type of jester or something like that.

Because we can see inside the Dhammapda 348, how one actor belonging to a theatrical troupe he reached the arhanthood:

Once, a wandering theatrical troupe consisting of five hundred dancers and some acrobats came to Rajagaha and performed on the grounds of the palace of King Bimbisara for seven days....
[...]
At the end of the discourse Uggasena, who was still on top of the pole, attained arahatship. He came down and was soon admitted to the Order by the Buddha.


http://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/ve ... ?verse=348


Hope somebody can clarify this issue. This is not the first time I read such comments on theater, although it is not supported by the list of bad ways of life that the Buddha taught.
Last edited by zerotime on Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 5634
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by Aloka » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:56 am

"retrofuturist" wrote:Why is Hollywood such a cesspool of sexual abuse, drug abuse, paedophilia, misogyny, sanctimonious virtue signalling, fraud, crime, hypocrisy, cultural Marxism, cover-ups, pervertion, hedonism and other forms of moral and spiritual degeneracy?
I don't think what you're refering to as "moral and spiritual degeneracy" is confined to the film industry, it can be evident wherever there is fame, money, and eager fans, such as in the music business for example.
"There are, young householder, these six evil consequences in frequenting theatrical shows. He is ever thinking:

(i) where is there dancing?
(ii) where is there singing?
(iii) where is there music?
(iv) where is there recitation?
(v) where is there playing with cymbals?
(vi) where is there pot-blowing?

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nara.html

Depravity amongst human beings has existed for centuries, its just that people are more aware of it in the modern world because of the media .

.

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 3778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Ban Sri Pradu Cremation Ground, Phrao District, Chiangmai

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by Dhammanando » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:16 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:03 am
"Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on things inspiring passion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more aversion on things inspiring aversion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of delusion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even more delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival.
The early Quakers wrote rather insightfully on the evils of theatre, in effect saying at enormous length what the Buddha said to Talaputa in brief. Much of what they had to say about the acting profession of their day would probably apply with full force to Hollywood, inasmuch as the latter seems to exhibit a comparable degree of moral degeneracy to that of Stuart Restoration comedy.

In 1806, Thomas Clarkson, an Anglican priest who worked alongside Quakers in anti-slavery campaigning, published a three-volume work, A Portraiture of Quakerism, in which an entire chapter is given over to a summary of the Quaker objections to theatre. The whole work can be read here. A few excerpts:
The first class of arguments comprehends such as relate, to what may be called the manner of the drama. The Quakers object to the manner of the drama, or to its fictitious nature, in consequence of which men personate characters, that are not their own. This personification they hold to be injurious to the man, who is compelled to practise it. Not that he will partake of the bad passions, which he personates, but that the trick and trade of representing what he does not feel, must make him at all times an actor; and his looks, and words, and actions, will be all sophisticated. And this evil will be likely to continue with him in the various changes of his life.

They hold it also to be contrary to the spirit of Christianity. For men who personate characters in this way, express joy and grief, when in reality there may be none of these feelings in their hearts. They express noble sentiments, when their whole lives may have been remarkable for their meanness, and go often afterwards and wallow in sensual delights. They personate the virtuous character to day, and perhaps to-morrow that of the rake, and, in the latter case, they utter his profligate sentiments, and speak his profane language. Now Christianity requires simplicity and truth. It allows no man to pretend to be what he is not. And it requires great circumspection of its followers with respect to what they may utter, because it makes every man accountable for his idle words.

The Quakers therefore are of opinion, that they cannot as men, either professing Christian tenets, or Christian love, encourage others to assume false characters, or to personate those which are not their own.

[...]

The Quakers also believe, that dramatic exhibitions have a power of vast excitement of the mind. If they have no such power, they are insipid. If they have, they are injurious. A person is all the evening at a play in an excited state. He goes home, and goes to bed with his imagination heated, and his passions roused. The next morning he rises. He remembers what he has seen and heard, the scenery, the language, the sentiments, the action. He continues in the same excited state for the remainder of the day. The extravagant passions of distracted lovers, the wanton addresses of actors, are still fresh upon his mind.

[...]

They are of opinion also, that dramatic exhibitions not only tend, of themselves, to make home less agreeable, but that they excite a craving for stimulants, and, above all, teach a dependence upon external objects for amusement. Hence the attention of people is taken off again to new objects of pleasure, which lie out of their own families, and out of the circle of their friends.

A Portraiture of Quakerism, Taken from a View of the Education and Discipline, Social Manners, Civil and Political Economy, Religious Principles and Character, of the Society of Friends. Vol. I. ch. iv)

binocular
Posts: 4095
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by binocular » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:43 am

There's a discussion at Dharmaoverground about Jim Carrey's problems as an actor -- how he began to feel like Jim Carrey doesn't really exist and such: https://www.dharmaoverground.org/discus ... ge/6755429

binocular
Posts: 4095
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by binocular » Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:06 pm

Dhammanando wrote:
Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:16 am
The early Quakers wrote rather insightfully on the evils of theatre, in effect saying at enormous length what the Buddha said to Talaputa in brief. Much of what they had to say about the acting profession of their day would probably apply with full force to Hollywood, inasmuch as the latter seems to exhibit a comparable degree of moral degeneracy to that of Stuart Restoration comedy.

In 1806, Thomas Clarkson, an Anglican priest who worked alongside Quakers in anti-slavery campaigning, published a three-volume work, A Portraiture of Quakerism, in which an entire chapter is given over to a summary of the Quaker objections to theatre. The whole work can be read here.
This is a very good piece, thank you!
Thomas Clarkson wrote:The Quakers also believe, that dramatic exhibitions have a power of vast excitement of the mind. If they have no such power, they are insipid. If they have, they are injurious.

Absolutely!
They are of opinion also, that dramatic exhibitions not only tend, of themselves, to make home less agreeable, but that they excite a craving for stimulants, and, above all, teach a dependence upon external objects for amusement. Hence the attention of people is taken off again to new objects of pleasure, which lie out of their own families, and out of the circle of their friends.
And theatrical and film performances breed in the audience's mind an erroneous estimate of what it takes to get things done. On film, things often look so easy, things that in reality require an enormous amount of effort and motivation.


I cannot but wonder how come the performing arts have gained the prominence that they did.
I studied literature in college. The question of the justification of art, specifically literature, or more specifically, drama, is strictly tabooed. I can't say I have come any closer to understanding literature or the appeal of literature. Some of the objections that Clarkson raises seem self-evident to me (but without the Christian references); they are why I have such qualms about watching tv or going to the theatre (or being "educated" and an "intellectual").


To better answer the OP's question, I think it would help to look into how come the (performing) arts are so popular, so appealing.

User avatar
Will
Posts: 801
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:26 pm
Location: So Cal

Re: What is it about Humanity?

Post by Will » Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:58 pm

Perhaps Buddha would update his remarks thusly:
Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on things inspiring passion presented by any media - books, music, movies, internet, TV etc.
Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more aversion on things inspiring aversion presented by any media - books, music, movies, internet, TV etc..
Any beings who are not devoid of delusion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even more delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by any media - books, music, movies, internet, TV etc.
Distrust everyone in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Nietzsche

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 810
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by cappuccino » Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:22 pm

At the least, in the Kalisampana Upanishad, the Vedic Shastra says, “Kalau shudra sambhavat” or “Everyone born during Kali Yuga is a Shudra until they are otherwise improved by some process.”

Obviously, in this case Shudra must mean an unrefined and unregenerate state of the human being that is universally capable of improvement somehow or another. This applies to India as much as anywhere.
Dhamma is karma & rebirth.

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 810
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by cappuccino » Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:27 pm

The "Kali" of Kali Yuga means "strife", "discord", "quarrel" or "contention"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_Yuga
Dhamma is karma & rebirth.

User avatar
Pseudobabble
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 11:11 am
Location: London

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by Pseudobabble » Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:37 pm

The Quaker arguments pretty much sum it up.
"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'" - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta


'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.' - Genesis 3:19

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 2466
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:46 pm

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:03 am
I'm particularly interested in anything that someone might be able to present from the context of the Dhamma, which might give clarity to the origins of such depravity.
Interesting question. Would it not be accurate to say that the origins of depravity are everywhere the same (i.e. ignorance) but that Hollywood and similar cultural settings merely provide the setting for the increase and cross-fertilisation of that depravity?
This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "It is in accordance with their properties that beings come together & associate with one another. Beings of low dispositions come together & associate with beings of low dispositions. Beings of admirable dispositions come together & associate with beings of admirable dispositions. In the past, it was in accordance with their properties that beings came together & associated with one another... In the future, it will be in accordance with their properties that beings will come together & associate with one another... And now at present, it is in accordance with their properties that beings come together & associate with one another. Beings of low dispositions come together & associate with beings of low dispositions.
Hollywood is not just something that one stumbles across and is "caught". Because of the enormous power of the media, it is one very effective "lonely hearts club" for beings with low dispositions. If you want to indulge your low disposition, it is a non-stop recruitment agency.

chownah
Posts: 6609
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by chownah » Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:30 am

Wealth, fame, and power, in the business of selling make believe.
chownah

binocular
Posts: 4095
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by binocular » Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:34 am

chownah wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:30 am
Wealth, fame, and power, in the business of selling make believe.
But apparently, there is something that makes make-believe so attractive. What is that?

chownah
Posts: 6609
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by chownah » Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:37 am

binocular wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:34 am
chownah wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:30 am
Wealth, fame, and power, in the business of selling make believe.
But apparently, there is something that makes make-believe so attractive. What is that?
That is another topic.
chownah

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18602
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by retrofuturist » Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:42 am

Greetings,
chownah wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:37 am
That is another topic.
It could warrant a topic in itself, but since the attraction of "make-believe" is so entwined in acting and the Hollywood culture, I'm happy for it be spoken of in this one...

UPDATE: But I see you've created a new one anyway, so here's the link...

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

binocular
Posts: 4095
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by binocular » Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:42 pm

As for make-believe -- reveling in fabrications:

SN 56:46 Andhakāra Sutta | Darkness — The intergalactic darkness is smaller and less frightening than the darkness that comes from reveling in fabrications.
“There is, monks, an inter-cosmic [intergalactic?] void, an unrestrained darkness, a pitch-black darkness, where even the light of the sun & moon—so mighty, so powerful—doesn’t reach.”
When this was said, one of the monks said to the Blessed One, “Wow, what a great darkness! What a really great darkness! Is there any darkness greater & more frightening than that?”
“There is, monk, a darkness greater & more frightening than that.”
“And which darkness, lord, is greater & more frightening than that?”
“Any contemplatives or brahmans who do not know, as it has come to be, that ‘This is stress’; who do not know, as it has come to be, that ‘This is the origination of stress’ … ‘This is the cessation of stress’ … ‘This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress’: They revel in fabrications leading to birth; they revel in fabrications leading to aging; they revel in fabrications leading to death; they revel in fabrications leading to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. Reveling in fabrications leading to birth… aging… death… sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair, they fabricate fabrications leading to birth… aging… death… sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. Fabricating fabrications leading to birth… aging… death… sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair, they drop into the darkness of birth. They drop into the darkness of aging… the darkness of death… darkness of sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. They are not totally released from birth, aging, death, sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. They are not totally released, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN56_46.html

santa100
Posts: 2725
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by santa100 » Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:03 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Why is Hollywood such a cesspool of sexual abuse, drug abuse, paedophilia, misogyny, sanctimonious virtue signalling, fraud, crime, hypocrisy, cultural Marxism, cover-ups, pervertion, hedonism and other forms of moral and spiritual degeneracy?

Whilst I'm happy to hear "conventional" explanations about Hollywood's ethical malaise, I'm particularly interested in anything that someone might be able to present from the context of the Dhamma, which might give clarity to the origins of such depravity.
Simple case in point, why did Harvey Weinstein commit such horrible things against women? The simple answer is: because he can. For such a long time, not a single person was able to even touch him and the horrible acts kept going on and on for 20 plus years!

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6555
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: What is it about Hollywood?

Post by Cittasanto » Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:31 pm

Hi Paul,
I believe due to the amount of money, power, influence in Hollywood (or other institutions) an echo chamber arises where power and influence (and someones perceived power & influence in the level they are) promotes idealism when they are not in a position of power in the hierarchy, so a subservient mindset develops which promotes and idealism becomes the escape. Look at Sony, they have apparently been in trouble for a long time but went to idealism and attacks when promoting the new Ghostbusters. and many of the people I have heard could have reported the current scandal (which was an obvious open "secret") are some of the most idealists in Hollywood.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto
retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:03 am
Greetings,

(I'm not interested in discussing individual scandals in this topic, although it is the increased prevalence of such scandals that is prompting this question...)

What is it about Hollywood?

Why is Hollywood such a cesspool of sexual abuse, drug abuse, paedophilia, misogyny, sanctimonious virtue signalling, fraud, crime, hypocrisy, cultural Marxism, cover-ups, pervertion, hedonism and other forms of moral and spiritual degeneracy?

Whilst I'm happy to hear "conventional" explanations about Hollywood's ethical malaise, I'm particularly interested in anything that someone might be able to present from the context of the Dhamma, which might give clarity to the origins of such depravity.

To get things started...

SN 42.2: Talaputa Sutta
On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrel's Sanctuary.

Then Talaputa, the head of an acting troupe, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, I have heard that it has been passed down by the ancient teaching lineage of actors that 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas.' What does the Blessed One have to say about that?"

"Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that."

A second time... A third time Talaputa, the head of an acting troupe, said: "Lord, I have heard that it has been passed down by the ancient teaching lineage of actors that 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas.' What does the Blessed One have to say about that?"

"Apparently, headman, I haven't been able to get past you by saying, 'Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that.' So I will simply answer you. Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on things inspiring passion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more aversion on things inspiring aversion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of delusion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even more delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Thus the actor — himself intoxicated & heedless, having made others intoxicated & heedless — with the breakup of the body, after death, is reborn in what is called the hell of laughter. But if he holds such a view as this: 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas,' that is his wrong view. Now, there are two destinations for a person with wrong view, I tell you: either hell or the animal womb."

When this was said, Talaputa, the head of an acting troupe, sobbed & burst into tears. [The Blessed One said:] "That is what I couldn't get past you by saying, 'Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that.'"

"I'm not crying, lord, because of what the Blessed One said to me, but simply because I have been deceived, cheated, & fooled for a long time by that ancient teaching lineage of actors who said: 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas.'

"Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Community of monks. May the Blessed One remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life."
May we learn from the mistakes of others and not replicate their degeneracy.

:namaste:

I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests