"I worry that we are approaching a time when that which is shocking is squeezed out by the Stalinism of political correctness"
About this Quote
Eszterhas is selling a fear that’s as old as the culture wars and as durable as a good logline: the renegade artist versus the humorless commissar. The sentence is built to provoke. “Shocking” isn’t just a genre preference here; it’s shorthand for transgression, for the messy, rule-breaking energy that makes certain kinds of writing feel alive. By claiming it’s being “squeezed out,” he frames creativity as an endangered resource, quietly strangled by social pressure rather than openly banned.
The loaded move is the metaphor: “the Stalinism of political correctness.” Stalinism evokes purges, surveillance, and ideological conformity enforced with real terror. Collapsing contemporary norms of speech into that history is an intentional escalation, a rhetorical dare. It turns criticism into persecution and casts the speaker as a dissident. That’s not accidental; it’s a way to preempt counterargument. If people object to your “shocking” material, they’re not disagreeing with you, they’re participating in an authoritarian project.
Context matters: Eszterhas made his name in Hollywood on erotic thrillers and taboo-baiting scripts, writing within an industry that’s simultaneously market-driven and morality-policed. His anxiety speaks less to government censorship than to gatekeepers: studios, advertisers, audiences, and the shifting etiquette of what gets rewarded or punished. The subtext is transactional: shock sells, until it doesn’t. By invoking “political correctness,” he mourns not only lost freedom but a changing cultural appetite, where the old provocations read less like bravery and more like laziness.
The loaded move is the metaphor: “the Stalinism of political correctness.” Stalinism evokes purges, surveillance, and ideological conformity enforced with real terror. Collapsing contemporary norms of speech into that history is an intentional escalation, a rhetorical dare. It turns criticism into persecution and casts the speaker as a dissident. That’s not accidental; it’s a way to preempt counterargument. If people object to your “shocking” material, they’re not disagreeing with you, they’re participating in an authoritarian project.
Context matters: Eszterhas made his name in Hollywood on erotic thrillers and taboo-baiting scripts, writing within an industry that’s simultaneously market-driven and morality-policed. His anxiety speaks less to government censorship than to gatekeepers: studios, advertisers, audiences, and the shifting etiquette of what gets rewarded or punished. The subtext is transactional: shock sells, until it doesn’t. By invoking “political correctness,” he mourns not only lost freedom but a changing cultural appetite, where the old provocations read less like bravery and more like laziness.
Quote Details
| Topic | Freedom |
|---|
More Quotes by Joe
Add to List
