thus the process becomes a mirror of our social incapacity

At the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard trial, the truth of the trial won, but the reality is more complex than that of our fans.

After six weeks of processdisseminated by the media YouTube and highly spectacular on instant launch social channels such as from Tokas well as about thirteen hours of deliberations in the chambers, the verdict which assigns to self-compensation – $ 15 million, compared to $ 50 million Johnny Depp per have been defamed of his ex-wife Amber Heard (who had accused him of domestic violence) and therefore have lost reputation and job opportunities.

Procedural truthin itself an approximation, but the closest to the plane of reality according to the logic of human justice, has finally been established and closes (for the time being) not only a long and complicated judicial process but also a relational dynamics of rare misery that in the judicial case in question it found its terminal branch.

Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard: A Spectacular Process That Polarized His “Audience”

The verdict has arrived: Amber Heard has defamed her ex-husband and will have to compensate him.

Beyond the moral implications of history, which we are not interested in or responsible for exploring, the process between the two ex-spouses has taken on the function of a thermometer of a disability that is increasingly ingrained in our society.: to stop in the gray areas and hold a non-polarized thought.

He supporters who have risen in defense of one or the other pay the price of one excess of ideologyMany of those who defended Depp and attacked Heard often did so not out of personal sympathy or affection for the public figure, but because the actress, with her lies, would. invalidated all work done by activists on the wave of MeToocausing a serious reaction to the cause.

The argument for supporting one side or the other has often been rooted in an ideological, not an emotional, level.. Our emotionality, and therefore our most irrational component, has been absorbed by ideological thought which, as such, is pseudo-rational and only offers us apparent guarantees of a control of reality which, on the other hand, seems to us to be escapes more and more. precisely because the real is not easily interpreted and, above all, it is not fully interpreted, definitively.

Depp and Heard: symbols before people

Amber Heard and Johnny Depp were married in 2015. Their marriage lasted 15 months, but left behind a long legacy of legal battles.

In Depp and Heard many saw symbolic potential even before human material; yet they saw man and woman more than the person with a psychic structure not attributable to gender, as if being (anatomically) man and woman were necessarily translated into a disposition to perpetrate evil and suffer it, without contemplating the possibility that the roles, in pairs (which must be understood not only in a sentimental sense), are never granite, but susceptible of exchanges, reversals, unexpected reversals, reflections and identifications that make it impossible to establish the boundary between subject. and object.

It is true that there are many who have emphasized this in one toxic relationship there are no victims or aggressors: often even those who are objectively victims, because they suffer the oppression of others, are unconsciously satisfied with their condition, as this assures them narcissistic advantages, or in any case suffers an addiction to which are an active part, albeit in apparent passivity. It is equally true that many have pointed out that a beatifying iconography of Depp cannot be supported.

Despite this, the almost exultant relief with which the news of his victory at the trial was received tells us not only that we still need to feed our mythologies, because they reassure us in the face of what we do not understand, but also and above all this ambiguity. fears inside and outside of us. And that even our noblest struggles, the one against gender violence, first of all – they are unable to be completely relieved of our need to shield ourselves from the contradictions, the stickiness that every relationship, as such, painfully entails.

Guilty and innocent are categories that can only exist as approximations, within a procedural closure; we can hardly believe it, if we consider ourselves adults, outside of it. The Depp-Heard case has shown us, perhaps, the degree of childhood in which our society indulges, thanks to the media and the mass of loneliness that clings to it,in the search for categories to which they will oppose, in a binary vision to which nothing more than an impossible tranquility is demanded.

Leave a Comment