Language vs. Violence
I’ve had a running conversation with a friend of mine about an interesting question: Why do people react more strongly to crude language in a film than to violence?
I went to see “Definitely, Maybe” this week. No violence there, but the language was objectionable. It wasn’t crude language, in fact, just the opposite. It was anatomically correct terms for male and female body parts. (My Southern upbringing is way too strong for me to be any more specific!) The problem for me was that it came out of the mouth of a 10-year-old girl; someone who should still be innocent and naive. Not this 10-year-old! I read reviews that mentioned the language, but I went anyway. I didn’t really enjoy the movie for reasons beyond the language.
On the other hand, two films I watched in the last 12 months had scenes of extreme violence, and in one case, torture, yet are films that I would recommend to any adult that I know. Beyond the Gates, about genocide in Rwanda, and To End All Wars, about prisoners of war during World War II.
What about when language and violence are combined? Which is more startling? Do we excuse the language because of the violence? Maybe we have some sort of innate trumping system that says violence is OK because we see it every day on the news, but if we live and work around people who don’t regularly use crude language, it’s not OK.
What do you think? Is one more acceptable than the other? Which affects us more, bad language or violence?
I have to admit that I get more upset about language then violence. I expect violence in certain movies because of the topic/story I guess I think it is unavoidable in some movies. However, language can be controlled at all times, just because you are angry doesn’t mean you need to express it with bad language. I just do not see any justification for using profanity.
February 26th, 2008 at 7:31 am
You’re right. And during the course of a normal day, you don’t hear profanity on the level that you do condensed into a 30-minute TV show, or a 90-minute movie. Everything is heightened, so it’s like profanity on steroids.
February 26th, 2008 at 11:17 am
I agree with Ashley & I also think it depends on the setting. I agree with the perception being heightened - you’re trapped in the theater (while watching a movie) without distraction!
But for myself, I am more affected by profanity than violence. For example, the words will swirl around in my head longer than a visual picture (unless it’s particularly disturbing, like a torture scene). But that’s because I’m an auditory learner. Music affects me the same way while these things don’t affect my husband at all. He, on the other hand, is a visual learner & pictures will stay with him longer.
The enemy uses all these tools because each person learns so differently. So, we’re trying to be on our guard in our home regardless of our personal tastes, simply because any others in our home may be more susceptible to violence or profanity than we are.
February 29th, 2008 at 10:30 am
This brings to mind a great statement from C.S. Lewis in his essay “Prudery and Philology.” He describes the problem that arises when one attempts to describe an unclothed person in polite company.
“”When you come to describe those parts of the body which are not usually mentioned, you will find that you will have to make a choice of vocabulary: a nursery word, an archaism, a word from the gutter, or a scientific word. You will not find any ordinary neutral word comparable to “hand” or “nose.” “
February 29th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
I believe that both are powerful. Take Passion of the Christ. Did you need to hear what was being said in order to cringe as Christ was whipped? Now think of Hannibal’s words as he described how he killed his victims and ate them; he did this sitting in a sparce jail cell. Words and acts of violence are powerful. The tongue can be as sharp as the sword.
March 19th, 2008 at 1:47 pm