[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[no subject]



Pre-Teenage Wasteland

Townshend trapped by deaf, dumb, and blind laws

By Brian Doherty

Iconic rock star Pete Townshend, guitarist and
songwriter for The Who, isn't the first prominent rock
star you might expect to be caught up in child porn
accusations. His image has never been sneeringly
libidinous, like Mick Jagger's, or transgressively
intellectual and blandly creepy, like David Byrne's.
(Since one can't be too safe in this current
hysterical environment, let me underline that I am not
accusing either man of an interest in or possession of
child porn.) 

Townshend's niche has always been more big
brotherishconcerned, conflicted but honest, deeply
fascinated with and understanding of the confusions,
manias, and travails of teens  particularly teen
boys. That used to sound noble and valuable to his
fans. (And yes, I'm one of themfrom age 14 to 24, his
classic saga of a conflicted teen, Quadrophenia, was
my hands-down favorite album.) Now it sounds creepy
and possibly damning, in the wake of Townshend's
arrest (though still without official charges, and he
is not now in custody) on suspicion of possessing
child porn on his computers. The rocker's collaring
was part of an international police operation known as
Operation Avalanche. (Priests, also formerly admired
for an ability to relate to and mentor young men, are
similarly tainted these days.) 

Ah, the dark shadows are easy to see all through
Townshend's career, if you look for them. He's written
two songs about porn and masturbation"Pictures of
Lily" and "How Can You Do It Alone?" The plot of
Psychoderelict, his last album of new material from
1993, centered on an aging rock star disgraced by a
scheming media over an affair with an underaged girl.
The plot of his most famous work, Tommya runaway hit
as a double LP, a Broadway show, and, well, an
interestingly peculiar Ken Russell movieconcerns a
deaf, dumb, and blind pinball messiah who is, among
other things, sexually abused by his wicked Uncle
Ernie. 

The whole case shows how perceptions can change. News
reports might lead you to think that Townshend's
confession that he has viewed internet child porn only
came last week as the police net closed in. In fact,
it came in an impassioned anti-child porn essay that
appeared on his Web site, spun off the suicide of a
friend haunted in adulthood by memories of child sex
abuse. He discussed how horrified he was to discover
how easy it was to find the stuff, and the horrendous
nature of the stuff he found. In that context, no one
anywhere raised an alarm or called for a hanging. But
in the context of a legal investigation, that very
same behavior that seemed perfectly understandable
seems disgusting and damning. 

It could be, of course, that this was a devilishly
clever attempt to lay the groundwork for an alibi a
year in advance. Those who want to hang him will be
quick to believe that. But Townshend has always been
known for a disarming, even if often foolhardy,
openness. Just look at his refreshing declaration,
after being implicated in this current mess, that when
it comes to the adult stuff, "I've always been into
pornography and I have used it all my life." This does
not seem to be a man cleverly manipulating the media
to maintain pure innocence. 

While some mightand havemaintained that the mere
violation of the law about possessing or viewing the
images should be enough to pillory Pete, motive is
important. And if Townshend's motive is as he
maintained, it ought not be a legal matter. To avoid
thoughtcrime, the laws should concentrate on those
committing the abuse of making the stuff, not just
seeing it under any circumstances. Even what seem to
be completely legitimate reporters and researchers can
be snared in the web of current child porn law
enforcement. The disgust many feel for Townshend does
not come from the thought thatmy God!he may have
violated a statute. It comes from the thought that he
is a predatory creep who gets off on and approves of
images of children forced into sexual situations. But
not everyone who might ever have seen such an image
fits into that mold. 

But perfectly proper hatred of child porn and child
sex abuse has become somewhat cancerous in our
culture. When the wildest therapist-induced "memories"
of previously forgotten past abuse are given quick
credence, where the attorney general insists that even
material that isn't actually child porn ought to be
treated that way legally if it seems like it might be,
or where possession of kitschy nostalgic gay erotica
whose specific nature the owner could well not even be
aware of, as with Pee Wee Herman, is considered a
reputation-destroying criminal offence, a sense of
proportion or making fineand importantdistinctions
about motives can't be expected. 

It is perhaps too easy to blame the cops or the media
when circuses like this irreparably destroy a man's
reputation. Of course, they were both just doing their
jobs. It's the people making the unkind inferences who
might want to consider being ashamed of themselves.
There are the usual lessonshoary, but always worth
notingabout the value of not leaping to conclusions,
making unsupported and damaging inferences, sullying
people's names without strong evidence. In this case,
those lessons arise from the enforcement of statutes
that are as deaf, dumb, and blind to important
questions about motive as was Townshend's Tommy. 

Brian Doherty is an associate editor of Reason.


=====
-Brian in Atlanta
The Who This Month!
http://www.thewhothismonth.com
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com