Nathalie’s Work

1. What are the main messages of the poem?

The main messages of the poem revolve around the complicity and silence of those who were aware of Harvey Weinstein's predatory
behavior within the Hollywood industry. Rosenberg, the author admits his own complicity for not speaking up during the Miramax
years (working at Harvey’s), also emphasizing that "everybody-fucking-knew" about Weinstein's actions, which ranged from
aggressive behavior to sexual harassment, but chose to remain silent due to various reasons, such as fear, complicity, or benefiting
from his success.
The poem also tells people who knew about Weinstein's actions to speak up and be honest, highlighting the tough choice faced by
those who knew about his behavior but didn't say anything. It makes us think about the difficulty of staying quiet when something
is wrong, especially when you might lose personal benefits.

2.Why do you think Rosenberg wrote it?

Rosenberg wrote this poem to admit complicity and apologize for staying silent about Harvey Weinstein's inappropriate behavior
towards women. He emphasizes that many in the industry were aware of Weinstein's actions, criticizes the hypocrisy of those who
now claim ignorance, and calls on others to acknowledge what they knew.

3.Rosenberg makes dozens of allusions throughout the poem to specific people, movies, and events. Why does he do so, and what is
the effect of these allusions?

In this poem, Rosenberg reflects on his time working with Harvey Weinstein at Miramax and acknowledges his complicity in
remaining silent about Weinstein's predatory behavior towards women in the film industry. The allusions to specific people, movies,
and events serve to contextualize the timeframe and the cultural atmosphere of Hollywood during that period. These references place
the poem in a particular cultural and temporal setting, enhancing readers understanding of the environment where the incidents
occurred and the complicity of individuals within that setting.

4. What other literary devices does Rosenberg use, and what effects do they have?

In This poem, Rosenberg uses repetition, similes, irony, metaphors, illustrations and humor to paint a detailed picture of Harvey
Weinstein's behavior, intensifying the impact of his misconduct and the involvement of those around him. The repetitive phrase
"Everybody-fucking-knew" is repeated throughout the text, creating a powerful and accusatory rhythm and emphasizing
widespread awareness of what’s happening. Similes are used to describe Harvey's behavior. Phrases like "like a gluttonous ogre"
and "like a cartoon flasher out of 'MAD MAGAZINE'" create strong
Images that show how disgusting his actions were. Irony is shown in the contrast of Harvey's generosity and the dark reality
behind the scenes . Metaphors are employed, like referring to Harvey as the "Golden Goose" to highlight the benefits he provided to
those in his circle and the industry at large. Rosenberg's detailed descriptions intensify the impact of Weinstein's behavior, making
it more disturbing for the readers. And finally he uses terms with humor to minimize the significance of Weinstein's behavior
initially, reflecting a collective blindness to the severity of the situation.

5. Connect this poem to another work that you have read inEnglish or French class. You might connect one of the themes, the tone,
the use of certain literary devices, or something else. Whatever you choose, make sure to explain the connection(s).

This poem by Rosenberg reflects a tone of regret and complicity in the face of Harvey Weinstein's misconduct, acknowledging that
many in the industry were aware of his behavior but remained silent. The themes of complicity, silence, and moral responsibility
can be connected to Emile Zola's "J'accuse," an open letter accusing the French government of anti-Semitism and wrongful
imprisonment of Alfred Dreyfus. Both works emphasize the moral duty to speak out against injustice, revealing a shared ethos of
exposing uncomfortable truths for the greater good.
6. History is full of people from all walks of life who produced great art, won great victories, built successful companies, and so on,
but were horrible in their private lives. Does it matter how horrible they were?

a. If not, why not?

Yes, it does matter how horrible they were in their private lives. Any professional achievements should not excuse or overshadow
morally reprehensible behavior. Separate aspects of a person's life can coexist, but serious wrongdoing should be acknowledged
and condemned.

b. If so, what sorts of horribleness can be overlooked, and what sorts cannot?

Certain personal flaws, such as minor character flaws, should be separated from professional achievements and can be overlooked
while Actions such as sexual assault, harassment, or abuse should not be overlooked, regardless of professional success. Behaviors,
especially those that harm others, cannot be excused or ignored.

7. How should the public respond when an artist’s private horribleness becomes known?

The public should acknowledge the wrongdoing, hold the artist accountable for their actions, and reconsider supporting their work.
It's important to prioritize the well-being of victims and promote a culture that condemns abusive behavior.

8. Does it matter if the artist is dead? What about his or her victims? Why or why not?

In my personal opinion, it does matter if the artist is dead. While the artist may no longer be able to face legal consequences. The
artist's actions and their impact on victims do matter, regardless of whether the artist is dead or not. The harm caused to victims is
significant, and acknowledging and addressing it is crucial for accountability and justice. The artist's death doesn't erase the
consequences of their actions, and acknowledging the harm is really important for the healing and justice of the victims as to also
be aware of such terrible actions and prevent such thing in society.