An Open Letter from Dylan Farrow- Page 3

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 1:10pm

Lighting a torch and trying to form a lynch mob makes her look mentally unstable.

Or like an abused child who has come into adulthood, livid that her abuser is being praised for his lifetime of work, when all she can see is the man who molested her. In her eyes, his lifetime achievement is making her own life hell. I am sure she has trouble separating the man from the art.

The story could very well be false. We'll never know. I think it's obvious that it's her truth. Being made to feel helpless and insignificant, as a child, has long, lasting effects. She could have recently found the strength to voice this through therapy.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 1:49pm

^^^^^^^^

Both to JG and Michael Bennett

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 1:53pm

No matter what happened, the fact remains that Woody Allen is a major filmmaker, a director and screenwriter who has perhaps given the world perhaps more important roles for women than any other, certainly than any other major director working today.

It's one thing to be so revolted with the man as a man that one doesn't want to see his work anymore. Fine, that's a personal preference.

It's quite another to disparage others who don't feel the same way, who haven't reached the same judgments about Woody as a person, and or who can separate the issues of the man versus his work, including those who create with him, continue to admire and enjoy his work, and even those who remain a loyal friend to him.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:07pm

Again, it's very different for the victim. Anyone who shows support for him, especially those she knows personally, feels like a slap in the face. It feels like people not believing her all over again. You really can't tell a victim how to feel or how she can choose to respond.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:12pm

"In her eyes, his lifetime achievement is making her own life hell."

But that's not just the mindset of an abused child. Many people go through that feeling.

I'm sure her pain is very real. But why does she get a public platform to exorcise her demons? My issue is more about what passes for public discourse. I'm not saying that she should hide what was done to her. I am saying that in bringing this into the public square that she should speak directly to the source and not bother with the secondary.

And part of my feeling also is that I'm so tired of famous people emotionally masturbating in public. She has access to money, go hire someone to help you and stop weighing down the public square with accusations that Diane Keaton should have done something.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:17pm

Admittedly, I have never been a Woody Allen fan. His films have just never resonated with me. I don't care about personally boycotting or separating a man from art. That's not my argument. I do, however, absolutely recognize the language of a victim of abuse (whether it actually happened or there is a psychosis involved.) I just can't imagine what it must be like to have been called a liar as a child in the court of public opinion. The abuse began in the home, it continued in the media and now, all of these years later, it continues as he is praised over and over. It's very personal and she chose to take it public, but with its history and his fame, I am not sure she felt she had another option.

And again, it's all speculation, but it would appear, at the very least, she believes it happened.

Updated On: 2/2/14 at 02:17 PM

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:18pm

But why does she get a public platform to exorcise her demons?

Because her abuser is famous and is getting huge lifetime achievement awards.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:24pm

And again, I point to the Daily Beast Op-Ed piece as perhaps prompting her statement.

When you believe the records is incorrect, setting is straight sometimes overtakes all of us (present company included).

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:30pm

" But why does she get a public platform to exorcise her demons?"

Allen has been doing exactly that for years, in a barely disguised fictional form. More on that in a bit.

'I think what weakens Dylan's letter is her casting blame on all the people Woody has worked with. Her letter would be much stronger if she had just stuck to her story."

Yes, Gothampc, the letter would have been far more effective had she left off the naming and shaming of those other than Allen. To my mind, that lends even more credence to her story. The letter wasn't calculated, it was heartfelt.

Allen makes it difficult to separate him from his art because he so often injects so much of himself into it. One of my biggest issues with him is his tendency to use his films as a forum to get back at others, as the excerpt that tazber posted about Blue Jasmine illustrates. Allen did something similar in Central Park West, his one act play from '95's Death Defying Acts. From Jeremy Gerard's review in Variety:

"What’s so unsavory about “Central Park West” is Allen’s apparently unchecked compulsion to settle private scores in public, exploiting real people he once loved. “Central Park West” is almost wholly devoid of human feeling."

The play was cringeworthy in its timing and parallels to Allen's life at the time. Very ugly.

I also agree with YWIW that The Daily Beast article, combined with Allen's lifetime award, was quite possibly the catalyst that caused Dylan to come forward now.



Updated On: 2/2/14 at 02:30 PM

[Addison D.]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:42pm

If one is going to give Ms. Farrow the benefit of the doubt that she sincerely believes in the truth of her accusations, then one must allow her the right to speak whenever and however and wherever she chooses to do so.

Among the most toxic and debilitating results of childhood sexual abuse is the shame and guilt felt by the victims--not only about their participation in the event(s) but also about their inability to speak about their experience. If a victim of abuse finds their voice, using it can be healing.

In addition--and this part is just my opinion--people do a great service by keeping the topic of childhood sexual abuse alive in the public forum. People need to know that it happens in their world, in their community, to people they know. The frequency with which abuse takes place is shocking, tragic, unnecessary and made possible in part by people's willingness/desire NOT to know about it.

If it should transpire that Ms. Farrow has been "coached" or "brainwashed" into these accusations, the person/persons responsible for such behavior are beneath contempt.

[DAME]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:43pm

Nicely put Addison.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:46pm

Ditto.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 2:47pm

"To my mind, that lends even more credence to her story. The letter wasn't calculated, it was heartfelt."

So you don't believe that Mia Farrow had any influence in the writing of the letter? Mia holds no grudges against Diane Keaton and wouldn't poison Dylan's mind against Keaton?

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 3:00pm

"So you don't believe that Mia Farrow had any influence in the writing of the letter? Mia holds no grudges against Diane Keaton and wouldn't poison Dylan's mind against Keaton?"

Dylan is an almost 30 year old woman, not a child who acts at her mother's bidding. What many seem to be losing perspective of (especially in The Daily Beast article) is that this is NOT about Mia. It's about Dylan. The accusations of abuse were Dylan's, not Mia's. Direct answer to your question. No. I don't think Mia was the force behind the letter.

I don't know if Mia holds a grudge against Keaton. Arguably, I can see why Mia might poison Dylan's mind against Allen, but why Keaton? That doesn't make sense to me. What would be the point?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 3:11pm

I don't know if anyone is holding a grudge against Diane Keaton. Like others have said, Farrow probably mentioned her because she just accepted that award on Allen's behalf. I like the idea of shaming all the women who have worked with Allen, though, like Goth suggests. Someone should ask Mariel Heminginway if she thought her role as the high school student object of Allen's desire in Manhattan was coincidence or prophecy.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 3:13pm

"Dylan is an almost 30 year old woman, not a child who acts at her mother's bidding."

Dylan could be the Little Edie of that family.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 3:21pm

YWIW-I think we're on the same page as far as monetary contributions to the art in question. Yes, i can admire it, but when it comes down to it, I won't buy it.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 3:23pm

"Dylan could be the Little Edie of that family."

Oookay.

Looks like Allen has decided to respond:

" Allen's attorney Elkan Abramowitz sent Mother Jones the following statement on Sunday afternoon:

'It is tragic that after 20 years a story engineered by a vengeful lover resurfaces after it was fully vetted and rejected by independent authorities. The one to blame for Dylan's distress is neither Dylan nor Woody Allen.' "

This is going to get even uglier than it is already. So sad. Such screwed up people.

Mother Jones

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 3:32pm

They make a statement to Mother Jones? Really?? Really????

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 3:37pm

Jerseygirl, you're absolutely right, it is very different for the victim. That's why I didn't intend anything I wrote as a criticism - or a failure to understand the feelings of - Dylan Farrow. I maintain that it's unfortunate that she has publicly disparaged Woody's admirers, colleagues, friends and supporters, but I never meant to imply that I couldn't understand or appreciate her feelings or mindset.

[Kad]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 3:37pm

That is quite possibly the worst response Allen's side could have given.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 4:08pm

Well, that's truly disgusting.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 4:11pm

Incredibly stupid to claim that Dylan's accusations were "fully vetted and rejected by independent authorities"

Justice Elliott Wilk of State Supreme Court of Manhattan, who presided over the custody battle for Dylan, Moses and Satchel, from a NY Times article:

Justice Wilk, however, questioned the manner in which the Yale-New Haven team carried out its investigation of the allegations, as well as conclusions by two psychotherapists who treated Dylan that she had not been abused. "I am less certain, however, than is the Yale-New Haven team, that the evidence proves conclusively that there was no sexual abuse," Justice Wilk wrote.

The justice said he believed the conclusions of the psychotherapists had been "colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen." He added that the unwillingness of members of the Yale-New Haven team to testify at the trial, except through a deposition by the team leader, and the destruction of the team's notes had "compromised my ability to scrutinize their findings and resulted in a report which was sanitized and, therefore, less credible."

Allen just opened up a whole can of worms. Really stupid for him to come out firing at Mia as opposed to showing the slightest of concern for Dylan.


NY Times 93 article on their custody case Updated On: 2/2/14 at 04:11 PM

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 4:51pm

Someone gave him really bad PR Advice. All this does is open up the issues with the earlier case for scrutiny. My understanding is one of the reasons it was not pursued was because they feared for Dylan's mental health. Fully vetted my behind.

IMO, he sounds more like Polanski in this quote,implying that everyone should just "Oh get over it already".

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 2/2/14 at 5:41pm

I, personally, have no problem separating the facts of the bad people have done from the good they have done.

I have found it easier to separate Life from Art now that Allen has stopped casting himself as the lover of women 30 and 40 years his junior.