Sadashivan – Representation
Thank You for Smoking Blog
All is Fair in Truth and Lies
The real addiction in the film Thank You for Smoking is very definitely to rhetoric, or the art of persuasion. The film is about an unethical tobacco lobbyist on a personal mission to have cigarettes strategically placed or advertised in films, an unsympathetic congressman who is attempting to have legislation passed placing a poison symbol on all packs of cigarettes, and a reporter for a Washington DC daily who will go to any lengths necessary to get her hands on a story. The tobacco lobbyist, Nick, believes in “lies vs. lies,” whereas the journalist, Heather, believes in ”truth vs. lies.” In my opinion Nick is the villain of the film. As a tobacco lobbyist he is partially responsible for cigarette portrayal in popular media, which has to have some part in influencing future smokers.
Heather, while doing some unethical things in the film, was still out for the greater good of the community. As a journalist, she is responsible for obtaining the facts and presenting a fair and unbiased view of a story to the public, doing a public service in a way. She clearly cannot be the villain of the film. Nick on the other hand, does not care who is smoking as long as he is winning his war on persuading congress to go soft on cigarettes. If his family is doing alright, then what’s the harm in peddling cigarettes? To further his role as a villain, Nick even refers to himself as a member of the MOD, or ‘Merchants of Death.’
In my own life, I had to watch my Grandmother suffer a slow and painful last few years of her life. She was one of the many the victims of cigarettes. I loved her very much and it was painful to see her so miserable because of what cigarettes had done to her. She could barely walk across the room, because she could not get enough air. She spent most of her time sitting down, looking out of the window with a cigarette in one hand and an oxygen mask in the other. It is a wonder that anyone who could live with themselves after knowing that the product that they are representing does this to people, they should very definitely be considered a villain.
A question that this film raises is “is it alright to work for an unethical cause in order to take care of your family?” In my opinion the only clear answer to the question is no. Nick could have easily found a different cause to lobby for, maybe for conservation groups or something to that effect. He chose to be a tobacco lobbyist, something that helps ruin lives all over the world. He deserves to be a villain, and so do all of the members of his ‘Merchants of Death.’ Heather, and for the most part, journalists in general should be considered heroes. They bear the task of telling the masses what is happening in the world. They serve a much more noble profession. Clearly it is better to believe in “truth vs. lies” than “lies vs. lies.”
1 comment:
Aaron,
You have written a clear and organized essay. I like your title and how you start off by showing that the film is about rhetoric, explaining that the politicians are out to promote their legislations, the journalists are trying to get their story out to the public, and the lobbyists are trying to present their company's best face to the consumers and the policymakers.
I understand that your personal experience may influence you against Nick. But can Nick be accused of betraying everyone else just to pay the mortgage and look after his family, when Heather betrays Nick and uses sexual favors as a way to get her story published?
Believing that truth doesn't exist and that everything is just lies vs. lies can lead to people becoming "spin doctors." But believing in "truth vs. lies" also has its dangers. Do you see how that operates in the case of Senator Finisterre, who clearly believes in the dangers of smoking and is confident that truth is on his side?
Post a Comment