Depardieu: the absurdity of RTS's choice, in five points

By temporarily suspending films starring Depardieu, the public broadcaster is making at least five mistakes in one. Not only do we have to distinguish between the man and the work, but this choice opens a Pandora's box, and RTS is shooting itself in the foot.

Following in the footsteps of Belgian broadcasters, Radio Télévision Suisse (RTS) decided at the end of December to «selectively exclude» from its programming films in which Gérard Depardieu plays a leading role. This is because the French actor, accused of rape and sexual assault by several women, has made headlines by appearing in images broadcast by the program «Complément d'enquête», in which he is seen making obscene outbursts directed at women. A little girl on horseback passing by is even sexualized in one of the bad jokes he plays on his entourage. The RTS decision is also a bad joke... for at least five reasons.

1. Works are distinct from man.

Although we can't separate Strictly speaking, it's possible to admire a person's artistic talent independently of the rest. Even if we were to take the view that a work of art is marked by the conduct of its creator, this would not be his or her fault. only dimension. Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to read the famous Journey to the end of the night Louis-Ferdinand Céline other than through the prism of the author's anti-Semitism, which is absurd. There are readers of this novel who appreciate it without knowing anything about Céline.

A majority of French-speaking people may have been shocked by Depardieu's behavior in the «Complément d'enquête» images - if that many have seen them, which is unlikely: these same French-speaking people may also have been shocked by Depardieu's behavior in the "Complément d'enquête" images - if that many have seen them, which is unlikely. at the same time like the films the actor stars in. Assuming the opposite, isn't RTS taking its viewers for idiots?

2. Suspending films on the grounds that the public may «feel predominantly offended» raises the question of the criterion.

At what point does a personality become unwanted by the French-speaking world, and how does RTS «feel» about it (the spokesperson interviewed by AFP used the verb twice)? Is there a level of immorality to be reached? For that matter, does RTS know what exemplary morality is? As for Pierre Palmade, we've understood that we won't be seeing him anymore. But what about Polanski's films? Those produced by Weinstein? Besides, are we only talking about acts and words relating to sex, or do other types of wrongdoing also come into play? And should they be prosecuted?

As far as «Gégé» is concerned, it was apparently his gravelly comments that prompted the rejection, not the criminal complaints. But let's imagine that this is the legal criterion: Depardieu is presumed innocent. RTS could say that the withdrawal of these films is provisional and that if the actor is found guilty by the courts, it will confirm its decision, but why this double penalty for the actor? Why should the media do the judges' work a second time?

Read also | David de Pury: artistic dialogue rather than debunking

Even Mein Kampf is available in bookshops, in a highly annotated version to contextualize the subject matter. It's precisely the content of this book that makes it so relevant: in this pamphlet, Hitler calls for violence. No film starring Depardieu condones a crime.

3. Public service should not aim to show the public only what it wants to see.

On the contrary! As long as it offends us. Just as journalism aims to convey information and thoughts to the public, whether they like it or not, fiction has the ability to make us think, and sometimes change our minds. A good programmer doesn't try to pamper his clientele, he aims to offer them a quality product.

4. What's more, a film is a collective work.

It's a shame to punish an entire team of artists and employees for the misbehavior of one man.

5. By taking this decision, RTS is weakening public service.

Anyone who wants to watch a film with Depardieu in a leading role can still do so: they will go to private channels or to streaming who didn't choose for him what might shock him. This situation is all the more ironic in that it takes place against the backdrop of a forthcoming vote on the amount of the audiovisual licence fee, which some would like to see lowered. RTS would like to saw off the already notched branch it's sitting on, but it wouldn't have it any other way.

Infrarouge's back-to-school debate on Wednesday January 10 was devoted to this topic. Jonas Follonier was there:

You've just read a free editorial. Debates, analyses, cultural news: subscribe to support us and get access to all our content!