OK, I'll bite.
Woody Allen has been the subject of some explosive public outrage on all our social networking "news" feeds.
As we all know, the facts behind anything can be skewed to formulate an idea, or even hypothesized to the same effect. While everyone will engage in the former, Allen stays unethically mute, allowing the gaps in his silence to be filled with backlashing chatter.
The provocation behind the vicious attack on New York's most famous clarinetist, yes, is quite dirty, and it gets messier as the details are brought to light.
Did Woody Allen molest his step-daughter Dylan/Malone? And if so, why have the allegations been put to bed only to resurface without valid claim?
For both of Allen's children, Dylan and Ronan, the two have remained steadfast in the accusations against their father. Ronan expressed this in 140 characters or less.
Missed the Woody Allen tribute - did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?
— Ronan Farrow (@RonanFarrow) January 13, 2014
Yet, Dylan's inconsistencies, the trial's "inconclusive" verdict and the overall "rapey" vibe that suddenly everyone believes in are based on light testimony and differing points-of-view. Obviously.
A heavy piece of fact seems to have broken off of a much larger and buried truth. However, on April 20, 1993, a sworn statement was entered into evidence by family doctor, Dr. John M. Leventhal.
"[Dr. Leventhal] swears Dylan's statements at the hospital contradicted each other as well as the story she told on the videotape," claims Allen friend Robert B. Weide, in a report for The Daily Beast.
Citing Leventhal, Weide recants that the doctor said, "Those were not minor inconsistencies. She told us initially that she hadn't been touched in the vaginal area, and she then told us that she had, then she told us that she hadn't."
Leventhal, later in his sworn statement, also recounted: "Even before the claim of abuse was made last August, the view of Mr. Allen as an evil and awful and terrible man permeated the household. The view that he had molested Soon-Yi and was a potential molester of Dylan permeated the household...it's quite possible--as a matter of fact, we think it's medically probable--that [Dylan] stuck to that story over time because of the intense relationship she had with her mother."
So, the account from Dylan O'Sullivan Farrow may be questionable, and the medical evidence may have been levied against Allen only to, ultimately and fairly, fall into his favor.
To provide more accounts of fact, Weide also notes: "Every time I stumble upon this topic on the Internet, it seems the people who are most outraged are also the most ignorant of the facts.
Here, then, are the Top 10 misconceptions, followed by my response in italics:
#1: Soon-Yi was Woody's daughter. False.
#2: Soon-Yi was Woody's step-daughter. False.
#3: Soon-Yi was Woody and Mia's adopted daughter. False. Soon-Yi was the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and André Previn. Her full name was Soon-Yi Farrow Previn.
#4: Woody and Mia were married. False.
#5: Woody and Mia lived together. False. Woody lived in his apartment on Fifth Ave. Mia and her kids lived on Central Park West. In fact, Woody never once stayed over night at Mia's apartment in 12 years.
#6: Woody and Mia had a common law marriage. False. New York State does not recognize common law marriage. Even in states that do, a couple has to co-habitate for a certain number of years.
#7: Soon-Yi viewed Woody as a father figure. False. Soon-Yi saw Woody as her mother's boyfriend. Her father figure was her adoptive father, André Previn.
#8: Soon-Yi was underage when she and Woody started having relations. False. She was either 19 or 21. (Her year of birth in Korea is undocumented, but it's believed to be either 1970 or '72.)
#9: Soon-Yi was borderline retarded. Ha! She's smart as a whip, has a degree from Columbia University and speaks more languages than you.
#10: Woody was grooming Soon-Yi from an early age to be his child bride. Oh, come on! According to court documents and Mia's own memoir, until 1990 (when Soon-Yi was 18 or 20), Woody 'had little to do with any of the Previn children, [but] had the least to do with Soon-Yi', so Mia encouraged him to spend more time with her. Woody started taking her to basketball games, and the rest is tabloid history. So, he hardly 'had his eye on her' from the time she was a child."
Thus, the war waged on the Allen name may prove to be more opaque than the surface had let on. And yet it still finds its way through the cracks in the floor and onto the web.
Now a viral, trending topic, hopefully, facts and opinion can be married conclusively--not used incorrectly to bring him down.
The facts are in for your opinion. Soon, we hope Allen can put the case to bed and continue to give us some Jasmine and Hall with out nighttime tea.
Because while the public obsesses over guilt, I ask, what is to come of this?
Are we to put Allen in jail (I don't see a judge putting an old man in prison, let alone a celebrity of his status when stars have avoided jail time much more easily in the past) or do we merely want his head on the proverbial pike?
Sounds to me like some haven't even thought of the endgame to this madness.
