So apparently Daniel Radcliffe, of Harry Potter fame, is starring in a London production of the play Equus, in which he appears not only nude, but nekkid. Daniel is currently 17 years old and, as must be expected, there are those who are all in a tizzy over the idea of the poor innocent babe appearing naked on stage. There seem to be two primary camps of indignation, which have significant overlap:
- Dan is too young! How could he, and more importantly, how could his parents let him??
- But, he—he—he’s HARRY POTTER!!! My children will be warped for life because Harry Potter was naked somewhere…totally unrelated…that they didn’t even see…!
As is no doubt obvious, I find both arguments laughable.
First, he isn’t six. Or twelve. He’s 17. In fact, he’s 6 months away from being 18. He’s already achieved the age of consent in his country (England) and as much as it probably kills some prudish people to think about, he’s almost certainly not a virgin. I applaud his parents for realizing that he is an artist and allowing him to participate in the production of a work that is so critically acclaimed. I also applaud Daniel for his bravery in stepping outside the “safety zone” of the public’s conceptualization of him. It is the curse of the child actor to be forever cast in the archetype of the roles of their youth, if they are cast at all. So many are doomed to never break out of the public’s idea of them as children and their career dies as they reach their maturity. Hopefully actions like this will help Daniel make a successful transition to adult roles.
The other is even more ridiculous. Parents who somehow think that their children will be affected by this are living in a delusional world. Parents who are saying they will not allow their kids to see future Harry Potter movies because of this are especially mockable. It’s not like the next Harry Potter movie is going to feature Harry dangling his junk in the camera, for crying out loud! Children below a certain age are not going to be aware of Daniel’s other roles (tell me what 8 year olds you know of who are well informed about what stage shows are currently in production, and who is in them? And what kids that age know anything about Equus??) and the kids who are older and do know about it either won’t care or will deal with it. A 15 or 16 year old will not be scarred for life by realizing that an actor they’ve seen in one movie did something naked in another production.
The irony is that the kids are going to ask their parents why they can’t go see the new Harry Potter movie, and the parents are either going to have to explain it to them (removing the blissful ignorance that would otherwise have been the case) or the kids are going to get curious and ask around/look it up on the internet until they find out on their own (with pictures and everything!). What possible rational argument can be made for Daniel Radcliffe being expected to stunt his own career so that parents don’t have to do their jobs? If you don’t want your kid to see Equus, then for cryin’ out loud, don’t take your kid to see Equus!
I have two regrets. First, that I don’t live near London (or have the money to travel there) and so I won’t be able to see the show… and second, that the story of Equus disturbs me on other levels in such a way that I’d be unlikely to see it anyway.
— 12:06:00 PM
[1249]
06/16/2007 09:47 PM Reply
hi i think that the movies are great.the movies a so cool because they have a lot of magic