"Lake of Fire"
More than fifteen years in the making, Tony
Kaye's "Lake of Fire" is one of those
documentary films that only a tiny slice of the
population will ever see but will nonetheless
exert a tug on public opinion in subtle and
overt ways. As I understand it, the film will
have a very limited showing in the United
States.
I'm not sure that even if I have the chance I
have the stomach to watch the two-and-one-half
hour film which is being hailed by many critics
as "even-handed" on the curious grounds that it
shows some extremely wrong-thinking people
seeking to justify the killing of abortionists
as well as a woman said to have died from a
self-induced abortion, on the one hand, and, on
the other hand, two graphic, step-by-step
abortions.
Is that bizarre, or what? No sane pro-lifer will
argue that killing an abortionist is consistent
with what the Movement has stood for going on
forty years. And, of course, the mother's life
is equally important to pro-lifers as her
baby's.
By contrast, the brutal dismemberment of unborn
babies, accompanied by the sounds of women in
dire physical and emotional agony, is at the
very core of the "pro-choice" position. Dress it
up anyway they want, misery is the stock in
which abortionists and their apologists trade.
I first learned of "Lake of Fire" when I
stumbled across an article in the October 3
New York Times, titled "Abortion
as a Front Line in the Culture Wars." Although
telling, Manohla Dragis' analysis did not grab
me the same way that other reviews subsequently
did. Except for one paragraph--
"After the first operation, a
second-trimester abortion, the doctor sorts
through a tray of fetal parts, including a
perfect-looking tiny hand and a foot, to make
sure that nothing has been left inside the
patient, which might lead to poisoning or even
death. The doctor then holds up the severed
fetal head. One eerily bulging eye looks as if
it's staring into the camera and somehow at us."
It's not exactly a secret that first takes tend
to be much more vivid. That's why (by today) a
piece appearing on ABCNews.com was largely a
tiresome back-and-forth that lacked the power of
its predecessors.
Except for one statement, which was indicative
of a theme common to all reviews, and which so
mesmerizes audiences that pro-abortionists fear
that the effect of "Lake of Fire" is pro-life.
"Some
of the most disturbing parts in the documentary
are actually the sounds--from the humming and
sucking sounds of the machine in the procedure
room to the squeals and moans of the women on
the table."
Writing at Salon.com,
Andrew O'Hehir
observes,
"For much too long, the
pro-choice movement has relied on comforting
euphemisms suggesting that early abortions
result in nothing more than unrecognizable globs
of goo. That was always sophistry; when you see
tiny severed legs, arms and other body parts in
that tray, it seems like something worse than
that."
(Interestingly, Tony Kaye, who
says "I
didn't know much in the beginning... and at the
end I was just as confused,"
tells AFP,
"It's about as shocking as any motion picture
can ever get. It's illegal to film someone being
killed.")
Let me conclude with this long quote that ends a
piece written by
Kenneth R. Morefield.
"Perhaps it is this suspicion of abstraction that
leads Kaye to tighten the focus in the last
thirty minutes of the film and follow one woman
as she is driven to her appointment, fills out
forms, speaks with the medical personnel, and
has an abortion performed. Throughout the
stressful day, as she speaks of her past history
of abuse and current reasons for terminating her
pregnancy, she maintains a melancholy but level
tone. The glibness of so many of the advocates
from early in the film is totally absent when
she speaks, and in the post-procedure recovery
room she says she is tired but relieved -- and
anxious to get on with the rest of her life.
"Then, in mid-monologue, perhaps
unexpectedly (perhaps not), she puts her head
into her hands…and begins to cry
uncontrollably."
