What Do We Do with the Art of Monstrous Men? (5200)

Claire Dederer, the author of this piece, does well to introduce many concepts of human characteristics and conditions with a simple question: “what do we do with the art of monstrous men?” She begins with some background about said monsters- Bill Cosby, Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, and the like- and what they have done. They’ve been accused of and defamed for horrendous crimes like rape and assault, but their works remain important to their successes. They live within the art they produce, so how exactly do we separate these seemingly genius works from their seemingly demonic creators?

Dederer uses an anecdote of her own to illustrate how she feels, and to suggest how others might feel, when faced with this dilemma: what do we do with the art of monstrous men? This strategy really pulls the reader’s attention, as it seems like she is speaking to you directly. And later, she even addresses the “we” in commentary as “I” and “you,” which makes her audience place themselves into the situation. She really sets her readers up for a self-examination, while also telling a narrative about her life and inner struggles. She, in a way, takes us through her stream of consciousness, her turmoil about liking Annie Hall though Allen liked young children. 

These inner thoughts lend themselves to a greater purpose, something along the lines of “how monstrous do we have to be to become successful?” Are all of us just as monstrous as these men, though in unique ways? She discusses personal faults, the faults of her friends, the faults of famous writers and movie stars, all while creating dialogue about the human condition and feminist approaches to criticism. There are so many layers to unravel, and she found a way to weave all of these elements together to present a topic far greater than Woody Allen’s “Soon-Yi Hurricane.” Her use of “we” and “you” draw attention that this issue is not only occurring in the realm of famous Hollywood stars, but in the everyday humdrum of our average lives. 

I think the very best part of this piece, though, was her last line. She restated the question she’d been asking since the introduction. We never get a straight answer because the answer is not clear. The answers are myriad and make us think about the human condition. We start to become our own philosophers, and we relate her “urpy” feelings to our own-though maybe in a different situation. A piece of writing that makes someone think is a successful piece in and of itself. Having to think about the layers of humanity within yourself makes the piece exemplary.