Poster image for the "Shocked! Shocked!" conference
Poster image for the "Shocked! Shocked!" conference (New York INstitute for the Humanities)

Not So Innocent

October 05, 2007

How often can America lose its innocence? Again and again, as we feign shock over events that shouldn’t, if history is a guide, be all that surprising. Johns Hopkins professor Richard Halpern parses the “innocence industry” through the paintings of one of its major manufacturers, Norman Rockwell.


Listener Comments Leave a Comment | Refresh Comments
[1]
Posted by: Gianni Lovato
October 07, 2007 - 07:22AM
Huntington, NY

Thank you for airing “Not so innocent”.

Once again you managed to touch on a potentially explosive subject without trying to sensationalize it or being too judgmental.

Prof. Halpern’s medicine is sure to leave a bitter taste in many mouths, but hopefully it will help some of us who are afflicted by chronic optimism.

Perhaps some of the products supplied by the “innocence industry” are needed some of the times, but as a society, we will never get better if we keep ignoring our ills by looking through rose-colored glasses all of the times.

After re-listening to piece on line and reading link with the excerpt from the book, I can’t help thinking of Bob Garfield as a friendly, honest nurse preparing the listener for some needed surgery: “…this will hurt for a while, but afterwards you’ll feel a lot better…”

Thanks, Mr. Garfield, I guess now I’ll have to go out and buy the book. Ouch!

[2]
Posted by: Parsley
October 07, 2007 - 05:16PM
Yonkers, New York

Innonence? How about willful ignorance or willful naivete? That's more like it!

[3]
Posted by: Gary Keys
October 07, 2007 - 08:34PM
Kannapolis NC

This was an interesting discussion. As I was listening to Prof. Halpern talking, I had to check my calendar to make sure it wasn't one of those NPR April fools jokes. I guess everyone has an opinion and their own interpretation as to what they see when they look at a picture, but come on! A girl looking into a mirror applying lipstick is one thing. Arguing that the doll is displayed in a sexual position in the same frame is a stretch. And had the good professor talked to the artist. I guess he was already expired.

[4]
Posted by: Bermard Katz
October 10, 2007 - 06:39PM
Reston

Oh, come on, professor! This reminds me of the old story about the navy pilot, up for his periodic physical and going through the psychiatric testing. Being shown a Rohrschack ink blot and asked to say what he sees, the pilot says, “A guy and his gal ‘doing’ it in the darkened balcony of the movie house!” The psychiatrist flips the page, and another ink blot is displayed. “Hey, this fella and girl friend messing around in the back seat of their car!” And so it goes, page after page elicits a similar sexual response from every view. This prompts the psychiatrist to exclaim, “For gosh sakes! You have the dirtiest mind of any pilot I’ve examined in ten years!”

Somewhat afronted, the pilot says, “Why blame me? You’re showing me the dirty pictures!”

[5]
Posted by: MadJo
October 11, 2007 - 04:52AM
The Netherlands

Is it true what Bob said in the beginning of this segment? Almost none of the mainstream media mentioned the approved-by-Congress torture? Wow, now that shocks me. How can anyone trust the mainstream media then?

Leave a Comment

Please keep your comments relevant to this entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. All comments on On the Media are moderated. On the Media reserves the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the onthemedia.org Comment Guidelines before posting.

Your comment


* required
The information entered into this form will not be used to send unsolicited email and will not be sold to a third party.
 
Back to Episode
Supported in part by: