When 'great men' abuse artistic licence to act on

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   When 'great men' abuse artistic licence to act on grubby impulsesBy Jacqueline Maley
15 June 2018 — 9:09am
Bob Ellis is still hero-worshipped by many younger Australian writers for his terrific turn of phrase and his irascibility. During his life he was given great artistic licence, but many this week wondered if that licence was too great, following reports he had sex with minors.
Kate and Rozanna Lilley, daughters of the late poet Dorothy Hewett, have both published new works describing what went on at their home in the 1970s, revealing a “long list” of male artists who assaulted, exploited or had underage sex with them. The list included Ellis, pop artist Martin Sharp and photographer David Hamilton, all dead.Kate says she had consensual sex with Ellis four times when she was 15 and 16. Rozanna said Ellis “shoved my hands down the front of his trousers” when she was 14.Ellis would have been in his mid-30s at the time.
Rozanna now calls it her “carelessly broken girlhood”, a phrase more evocative than any the allegedly brilliant Ellis ever wrote.Kate, a professor and poet, says that what went on at their home was well-known, “a very ordinary story”.
For contemporary Australians, Ellis is probably the most well-known on the list.For journalists and writers of my age and younger, he was a rebel hero, a court jester to the great Labor men of recent history, a self-demolished idealist who churned out brilliant prose.
My former colleague (and friend) Brigid Delaney wrote movingly this week about seeking Ellis out as a mentor.
But what Ellis actually put on the page was over-shadowed by the life he led off it. Whatever you think of his talent (I am among the heretics who think it’s been over-rated), it was undeniably less than the personal image he cultivated and the cloud of controversy he caused.And controversy over what? Did he push the boundaries on free speech, on the great progressive causes of his time, or in the service of the vulnerable and the voiceless?Nah. He was famous for defaming a woman who happened to be married to a Liberal politician (Peter Costello’s wife, Tanya) with a fabricated sexual slur which forced a huge defamation payout. There was also a public extra-marital affair, with doubt cast by Ellis over the paternity of the child produced from it. Ellis went on radio to publicly insist he was not the father, in gross detail that showed no respect for any of the individuals involved, not least the blameless baby (remind you of anyone?)
DNA testing subsequently proved he was the father. In an earlier 1997 interview with Good Weekendfor the “Two of Us” column, Ellis said he and his wife “share a concern for the fate of children, particularly children of divorce”. So he was a hypocrite, too.
But as long as he kept up with the brilliant Tony Abbott put-downs, and continued as a great Labor speechwriter, Ellis fans didn’t care that he routinely denigrated women and wrote drivel, such as: “Women, it seems, are tough enough for service on any battlefront but not tough enough to be peeked at in the shower”.
That, from a 2011 comment piece on reports of sexual harassment at the Australian Defence Force Academy, was published on the ABC website (since removed), and quoted favourably by Andrew Bolt on his blog.It is such a candidly stupid remark it’s not even worth calling a “point of view”. And yet Ellis continued to be feted by Labor types (including some politicians) and progressives, all of whom are now silent on reports of their hero’s alleged sex with minors.
One wonders if the same would be true if it was one of John Howard’s speechwriters who was so accused, or Tony Abbott’s.
Because of the largeness of Ellis’ personality, few remember that his screen-writing work was done in collaboration, and all of his novels were either written in collaboration or based on screenplays.As playwright Louis Nowra wrote in a 2012 book review, “[Ellis’s] literary oeuvre doesn't add up to anything substantial” (Ellis wrote an angry rejoinder to Nowra).
Ellis’ speechwriting was much praised, but, as with all speechwriting, it is not always clear what was written and what was extemporised by the orator.
The only people who can really know are the politicians who hired him - Bob Carr, Mike Rann, Nathan Rees and Kim Beazley.One of the only Labor prime ministers with whom he had no association was Julia Gillard. Ellis wrote scathingly about her, in terms grounded in misogyny. He also wrote that Hillary Clinton was frigid and a stranger to oral sex. What a rascal, right?
The truth was that Ellis hated feminists. Loathed them. He dressed up his loathing in libertarian, anti-authoritarian cant about how feminism was totalitarian and retrograde. He said wowser feminism was a “threat to everything”.
An egocentric through and through, it seems what he really meant by “everything” was “me”.
People talk about the 1970s as though different rules applied, as though it was medieval England, not a decade which the majority of Australians have stored in their recent memory. As though age of consent laws didn’t exist then. As though human decency didn’t exist then.
We don’t accept the “those were the times” excuse for the churches, or for the defence forces, so why accept it for the literati, or the so-called Bohemian circles of the '70s, where free love was so often used by men as a tool of exploitation?
Creativity and sex have long been linked, as has art with the contravention of bourgeois values. Long may it be so.
But too many perverts have taken cover in art for too long. Too many artists have callously used their non-conformity to justify grubby behaviour.
These kinds of “great men” were never about artistic freedom. Nothing nearly so romantic.  They just wanted a licence to act on their impulses.

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
Isaac soloman Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Champion Joined: 13 Oct 2015 Status: Offline Points: 6085	Post Options Post Reply Quote Isaac soloman Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Topic: When 'great men' abuse artistic licence to act on Posted: 16 Jun 2018 at 9:10am
	When 'great men' abuse artistic licence to act on grubby impulses By Jacqueline Maley 15 June 2018 — 9:09am Bob Ellis is still hero-worshipped by many younger Australian writers for his terrific turn of phrase and his irascibility. During his life he was given great artistic licence, but many this week wondered if that licence was too great, following reports he had sex with minors. Kate and Rozanna Lilley, daughters of the late poet Dorothy Hewett, have both published new works describing what went on at their home in the 1970s, revealing a “long list” of male artists who assaulted, exploited or had underage sex with them. The list included Ellis, pop artist Martin Sharp and photographer David Hamilton, all dead.Kate says she had consensual sex with Ellis four times when she was 15 and 16. Rozanna said Ellis “shoved my hands down the front of his trousers” when she was 14. Ellis would have been in his mid-30s at the time. Rozanna now calls it her “carelessly broken girlhood”, a phrase more evocative than any the allegedly brilliant Ellis ever wrote.Kate, a professor and poet, says that what went on at their home was well-known, “a very ordinary story”. For contemporary Australians, Ellis is probably the most well-known on the list.For journalists and writers of my age and younger, he was a rebel hero, a court jester to the great Labor men of recent history, a self-demolished idealist who churned out brilliant prose. My former colleague (and friend) Brigid Delaney wrote movingly this week about seeking Ellis out as a mentor. But what Ellis actually put on the page was over-shadowed by the life he led off it. Whatever you think of his talent (I am among the heretics who think it’s been over-rated), it was undeniably less than the personal image he cultivated and the cloud of controversy he caused.And controversy over what? Did he push the boundaries on free speech, on the great progressive causes of his time, or in the service of the vulnerable and the voiceless?Nah. He was famous for defaming a woman who happened to be married to a Liberal politician (Peter Costello’s wife, Tanya) with a fabricated sexual slur which forced a huge defamation payout. There was also a public extra-marital affair, with doubt cast by Ellis over the paternity of the child produced from it. Ellis went on radio to publicly insist he was not the father, in gross detail that showed no respect for any of the individuals involved, not least the blameless baby (remind you of anyone?) DNA testing subsequently proved he was the father. In an earlier 1997 interview with Good Weekendfor the “Two of Us” column, Ellis said he and his wife “share a concern for the fate of children, particularly children of divorce”. So he was a hypocrite, too. But as long as he kept up with the brilliant Tony Abbott put-downs, and continued as a great Labor speechwriter, Ellis fans didn’t care that he routinely denigrated women and wrote drivel, such as: “Women, it seems, are tough enough for service on any battlefront but not tough enough to be peeked at in the shower”. That, from a 2011 comment piece on reports of sexual harassment at the Australian Defence Force Academy, was published on the ABC website (since removed), and quoted favourably by Andrew Bolt on his blog.It is such a candidly stupid remark it’s not even worth calling a “point of view”. And yet Ellis continued to be feted by Labor types (including some politicians) and progressives, all of whom are now silent on reports of their hero’s alleged sex with minors. One wonders if the same would be true if it was one of John Howard’s speechwriters who was so accused, or Tony Abbott’s. Because of the largeness of Ellis’ personality, few remember that his screen-writing work was done in collaboration, and all of his novels were either written in collaboration or based on screenplays.As playwright Louis Nowra wrote in a 2012 book review, “[Ellis’s] literary oeuvre doesn't add up to anything substantial” (Ellis wrote an angry rejoinder to Nowra). Ellis’ speechwriting was much praised, but, as with all speechwriting, it is not always clear what was written and what was extemporised by the orator. The only people who can really know are the politicians who hired him - Bob Carr, Mike Rann, Nathan Rees and Kim Beazley.One of the only Labor prime ministers with whom he had no association was Julia Gillard. Ellis wrote scathingly about her, in terms grounded in misogyny. He also wrote that Hillary Clinton was frigid and a stranger to oral sex. What a rascal, right? The truth was that Ellis hated feminists. Loathed them. He dressed up his loathing in libertarian, anti-authoritarian cant about how feminism was totalitarian and retrograde. He said wowser feminism was a “threat to everything”. An egocentric through and through, it seems what he really meant by “everything” was “me”. People talk about the 1970s as though different rules applied, as though it was medieval England, not a decade which the majority of Australians have stored in their recent memory. As though age of consent laws didn’t exist then. As though human decency didn’t exist then. We don’t accept the “those were the times” excuse for the churches, or for the defence forces, so why accept it for the literati, or the so-called Bohemian circles of the '70s, where free love was so often used by men as a tool of exploitation? Creativity and sex have long been linked, as has art with the contravention of bourgeois values. Long may it be so. But too many perverts have taken cover in art for too long. Too many artists have callously used their non-conformity to justify grubby behaviour. These kinds of “great men” were never about artistic freedom. Nothing nearly so romantic. They just wanted a licence to act on their impulses.

Tlazolteotl Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Champion Joined: 02 Oct 2012 Location: Elephant Butte Status: Offline Points: 31448	Post Options Post Reply Quote Tlazolteotl Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 16 Jun 2018 at 9:25am
	So they've accused and named some dead men but the live ones don't get named in the books. Hmm.