NEW YORK TIMES HIT-MAN Frank Rich seems a little miffed that the show 'South Park' has been claimed by conservatives, which author Brian Anderson did in his recent book 'South Park Conservatives.' Rich makes a weak case that Parker and Stone have turned the tables on conservatives, using a single episode out of nine seasons (I believe), as an example.
In the March 30 episode, Kenny, a kid whose periodic death is a "South Park" ritual, lands in a hospital in a "persistent vegetative state" and is fed through a tube. The last page of his living will is missing. Demonstrators and media hordes descend. Though heavenly angels decree that "God intended Kenny to die" rather than be "kept alive artificially," they are thwarted by Satan, whose demonic aide advises him to "do what we always do - use the Republicans." Soon demagogic Republican politicians are spewing sound bites ("Removing the feeding tube is murder") scripted in Hell. But as in the Schiavo case, they don't prevail. Kenny is allowed to die in peace once his missing final wish is found: "If I should ever be in a vegetative state and kept alive on life support, please for the love of God don't ever show me in that condition on national television."
Naturally, he missed the sarcasm inherent in the line "do what we do - use the Republicans," but he also failed to recognize the point of the entire episode, or at least he failed to make mention of it. Moments before Kenny's final wishes are made known, it is noted by either Stan or Kyle that the 'right to die' folks were probably right for the wrong reasons, and the 'right to live' folks were probably wrong for the right reasons.
I've always been comfortable with that analogy and am happy always to be wrong for the right reasons. One can only assume that Rich endorses the analogy as well.
Having seen the episode a time or two, it bears pointing out that Rich paints a very one-sided picture of the show, and fails to note that 'his side' of the argument is led by Eric Cartman, who is trying to pull the plug on Kenny in order to inherit his playstation.
In other words, the 'right to die' crowd is portrayed as a shamelessly clueless group, led by a manipulative child obsessed with what he's got coming to him, not the life of his friend. Either that escaped Rich's attention, which should come as no surprise, or he decided it would erode the point he was trying to make. Either is possible, but the latter is probable.
No comments:
Post a Comment