Spike Lee recently commented, correctly, that in the multiple movies discussing WWII virtually none (and definitely none that come to mind for me) include even a background scene that includes a single African American.
"Clint Eastwood made two films about Iwo Jima that ran for more than four hours total, and there was not one Negro actor on the screen”
This is a fact, as is the reality that many Black men fought at Iwo Jima, along with over in Europe and the Pacific throughout all of WWII. Oh, let me correct myself. There were a couple of movies documenting the attack on Pearl Harbor that had one Black man, a cook and Naval hero. But those movies just had him.
Amazingly, if you were to go by movies that involve WWII, you would find few that ever acknowledge African Americans in any war in America. Yet we have been in every conflict and war that America has ever had including the American Revolution. And there were many in WWII – just ask any bomber crew that was escorted by the Tuskegee Airmen (the only fighter escort to my knowledge to have never lost a single Bomber).
So when Spike Lee brings up this fact, that other Black figures mentioned when the movies came out, what kind of response do you expect? How will everyone react to the honest facts of the sacrifices African Americans made alongside White?
Spike Lee courts controversy by criticizing Clint Eastwood – title of article in LA Times
“Last time I looked there weren't any blacks in the flag-raising picture. I believe that was due to a policy called segregation which Spike Lee apparently has never heard of…” – comment by John Reece
“Hey Spike, why don't you do a movie about white people?” – comment by techie
“Hey spike, how come "boyz In the Hood" didn't have a single white or hispanic character. there are white people living is south central LA, and hispanics are the majority now, but i didn't see you whine about that. Racists come in all skin colors and you are one, spike lee, and that comes from me, a black man !” – comment by nick
“Undoubtedly, Lee will soon be demanding that one of the flag raisers be portrayed as a black man. Never mind that it was actually five white guys and a Pima Indian.
Maybe we should start complaining about Lee under-representing whites in his movies if he is so concerned about proper proportions.” – E. Burke comment
“Spike Lee launched a bitter attack on Clint Eastwood yesterday, condemning his failure to include a single African-American soldier in his films about the Battle of Iwo Jima.” – Times Online article’s first line
“Eastwood's film is historically acurate, 70,000 US Soldiers landed on Iwo Jima 900 were black, and in all black units. My Father served on the USS Indiana in WWII and told me the only black sailors on board served in the officers mess. Better than being a snipe where my father served.” – comment by Peter Stella
and of course the reaction by Clint Eastwood himself.
“Asked twice by The Times to respond to Lee’s criticism, Eastwood stared out into the audience as the compere refused to accept a question that did not relate to L’Échange. Later, his spokeswoman also declined to comment.”
So in every version of this story I see a couple of common threads. One is that Spike is after money and publicity. It’s true that he is presenting his movie about the all black army unit in Italy right now. Of course this will affect the movies ability to make money. But it’s also true that in the past many African Americans have made comment about the portrayal of Blacks in EVERY conflict America has ever engaged in. The news just wasn’t covered, but in this case they had too since it relates to a film that is in Cannes now, and the world media is coverung his comments too.
Another common thought is racism. Either Clint Eastwood, Spike Lee, or both are racist for what they did and said. Such are the comments of others. I in fact believe neither is racist, though the issue is racial. There were 900 African Americans in the battle at Iwo Jima. That may not be many compared to the total, but it is enough to portray at least one or two somewhere in the background of a battle scene to pay some tribute to the lives lost in WWII by men who could not ride in the front seat of a bus back home.
Acknowledgement does not have to have a starring role, but it does have involvement. That’s not racist, just racial and true.
Of course there are those that want to lump any film made by a Black director into the themes attributed to Spike Lee. It’s part of the expression of anger I see in the comments and reporting. It comes off as ?‘How dare you point out that the media and America in general, have completely ignored African Americans defending the nation. Don’t you know that you aren’t supposed to exist – you have seen Friends, Will & Grace, Cheers, Dallas, and so on. Just be quiet and leave things alone, and we’ll let you have the Moesha, Sanford & Son, Cosby Show. Now be quiet.’
How about this. Black Americans have actively helped to build this nation at every turn. From the early plantations, buildings, and roads built by slaves, to every war and conflict, thru segregations and up to today African Americans have been involved with the growth of America. In fact I believe that it can be said that without Blacks America would not exist as it does today, if at all. So a little acknowledgement seems like a small thing to receive. Especially for those that fought for the freedoms they knew they would not receive but hoped their children might.
But according to the need to make these comments an attack, or by the comments seeking to find justification it saeems that acknolwedgement is too much. America just can’t accept Blacks history in America. Not the true full history anyway.
Kind of makes you wonder about Senator Obama’s chances doesn’t it. Makes you wonder about a lot of things, I hope. And once you are done thinking, what will you do next?
No comments:
Post a Comment