Is having a CGI robot speaking ebonics a take on Black culture and, even in the most innocent of ways, making fun of African Americans?
This is the growing question from the film. Many fans that have seen the movie (which I have not) believe that it does, others do not. But what I have read leads me to believe that this is another instance of Hollywood sticking to what it knows best – stereotypes in bad taste.
“Skids and Mudflap, twin robots disguised as compact Chevys, constantly brawl and bicker in rap-inspired street slang. They're forced to acknowledge that they can't read. One has a gold tooth.”
So the robots are deep into hip hop. Which could mean anyone, since fans of hip hop reach from Beverly Hills to Japan to the Bronx. But how often have you seen a character in a movie that speaks “rap inspired street slang” that isn’t Black? How many movies can you recall ever having a character with a gold tooth (or teeth) that were anything but African American? Add to this the connection the major media makes between rap and violence (which is a natural conclusion), and African Americans (which is not).
So is this a caricature of African Americans? Sounds like it. In fact some are relating these characters to another CGI major movie character that inflamed millions. Jar Jar Binks. They are being called Jar Jar Bots.
How do some defend these characters?
“They don't really have any positive effect on the film," she [Tasha Robinson, associate entertainment editor at The Onion] said. "They only exist to talk in bad ebonics, beat each other up and talk about how stupid each other is.”
Sounds like most rap music videos. And who is the lead minstrels in those music videos?
This disturbs me since any association some might make to African Americans is to 2 cowards, that are illiterate, eternally distracted by the useless, and are worthless. Would you like to be referred to in an association like that? I sure don’t.
“If these characters weren't animated and instead played by real black actors, "then you might have to admit that it's racist," Robinson said. "But stick it into a robot's mouth, and it's just a robot, it's OK."
Perhaps the best way to consider if this is making fun of African Americans in a negative way is if we substitute what the characters are portraying. Let’s say that instead of rap, they went with country music. Instead of street slang they speak with a Southern drawl. And instead of the gold tooth we have a confederate flag.
So in effect we have two illiterate, cowardly (since they avoid all fights), dumb, Southern brawlers. What might be identified as the Southern inbred hillbilly redneck stereotype – like Ricky Bobby. Still sound like a fun character, something that you and your friends can laugh at? Would you laugh if you were in the deep South? Would you still like it if foreigners heard your accent and compared you to these characters?
Yes it’s a movie. And movies often use a stereotype to convey thoughts that are in the societal mindset. But the negative stereotypes really don’t need to be reinforced. Especially on an international level. And saying that it’s just a movie, is akin to saying a Nazi flag is just a decoration.
You may disagree, but for me it is just one more reason not to see this film.
22 comments:
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
Ryan Says:
June 25th, 2009 at 10:35 am e
So if they spoke white or redneck then it would be racist toward whites?
It’s just a character and that’s how they are. Maybe they didn’t want the blacks getting made because they didn’t have any in the movie at all but they actually do put black robots in there and you get mad?
Can’t please everyone.
Wow, I seem to have hit a nerve. Which makes me feel even more sure that this is a negative stereotype. In order of the comments:
Ryan,
Yes that would be racist, or at least equally as insensitive and stereotypical. IF the negative imagery is bad for any group you interject, then it is bad for all of them.
I don’t care if African Americans were in the film are not. The overwhelming majority of movies, television shows and most media don’t have African Americans. I don’t like it but I don’t lose my mind over it.
But I do care when a caricature of African Americans is chosen over an actual character. Maybe you don’t see it, but I do hate the permissive and continuous portrayal of African Americans as dumb, violent, and often criminals.
And noting in the media is just whatever. Everything has a meaning when it is produced for and influences millions of people. The American flag is not just a flag. The General Lee is not just a car. Tiger Woods is not just a golfer. And President Obama is not just another President.
You may not see all the extra meanings in these things, but they are there if you stop to look at them. Some things carry positive subliminal meanings, some negative. And they all draw a reaction from the viewer, even if it is subliminal. Which is where the negative stereotypes come up.
And no one enjoys being made the object of an international negative stereotype. Especially when their is no reason to be.
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
J Says:
June 25th, 2009 at 11:45 am e
OMG this is so stupid! i am hispanic/american and 3 of my girl cousins have gold teeth!! gold teeth dont just belong to black people. black people arent the only ones to talk slang etc… why are you even assuming that those twin bots are black or black related or w.e.?!? youre the one making the assumption!!! How do you know they werent inspired by Paul Wall… he has a gold grill… or how bout eminem? he doesnt have a gold grill or gold teeth but he still raps and talks slang but he’s a white boy and so is Paul Wall… african americans are never satisfied… when you get left out of stuff you complain and when you are included you complain! youre never happy… just like the new disney princess who is black… its like geez there is FINALLY a black princess in a disney movie but wait… whatya know… there is still controversy about why it took so long and this and that… its just like waaa waaaa!!!! GET OVER IT!!!!!!
J,
Yes many people have gold teeth. Today it is a fashion statement. Not long ago it was a symbol of poverty and also wealth - depending on the time frame and location. But in the media, especially movies, it often is used to depict a more backwards character - often black or poor.
I did not assume that the characters are Black. I posed a question based on information others are providing. When the Wall Street Journal and NY Times critics are noting what theyhe felt was an obvious slight I generally assume that some slight may exist. I then reviewed that potential outlook.
Let me clarify something. To be ignored is never a nice thing. To be ignored when you comprise some 15% of a population is worse. In fact all people of color are ignored regularly by all forms of media even though we are 1/3 the nation combined. Doesn’t that strike you as odd? That television and movies willfully wipeout minorities from even the background of the majority of movies and television shows on a regular basis?
Beyond that, being included in the media as the violent, often criminal, often least intelligent characters of no importance is insulting. It makes a statement here and internationally that people of color are useless and bad. A lie that has been said for decades if not centuries. The media can do better. I’d rather not be seen than portrayed as a rap-soaked, violent, moron.
Yes, White rappers exist. But hip hop is defined by the media as being African American. Don’t be upset with me, the major media has created that image. Along with hip hop being violent, uneducated, drug filled, and mysoginistic. Which I dislike as well.
And as for the Disney controversy, go to my post about the Disney controversy to see my thoughts there.
Lastly, I am sure that Dr. Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Malcolm X, Sidney Poitier, and many others were told to just let it go. Imagine if they had followed your thought and did just that. Do you really think that I’d even have a blog today? Or that movies and film would have as many people of color as we do now?
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
Alexa Says:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:29 pm e
So first of all, none of the robots could read, only the robots that have been there for thousands of years could read. If you saw the movie you woud know that. Yes maybe they are black, well I’m black and I was not offended by them at all. Actaully, they are two of my new faves, they were so funny. What about the first one? Jazz was black, no one said anything about him, he raps and acted very black. If you actually watch the movie, they don’t seem as “racist” why is it that everytime a character seems black, it’s racist? And people wonder why there is never any black cartoon characters in movies, because they will also seem racist to people. Get over it
Alexa,
I stated clearly that I have not seen the film. I stated clearly that the opinion about these characters is mixed. But while some are saying “it’s just a movie” the people that professionally review movies are saying that this is an insult.
Another point. So the movie is saying that if you look in the internet today, and you search about African Americans, the only thing you will find is that we are illiterate, violent, and obsessed with the superficial. That the best we have offered the world, and the only thing worth copying by visitors from another world, is rap and hip hop? That doesn’t sound insulting to you?
As for your point on Jazz, which is a good observation, let me clarify. No one complains about a character that is worthwile in a film and not insulting to a group they represent. Jazz was not stupid, violent without cause, or superficial. He was a character that had depth and played a role in the film. Why complain.
The Jar Jar Bots, by comparison, do nothing, are stupid, violent, and cowardly from all reports. They have no use in the film other to make a laugh at the expense of who they represent. They are buffoons and minstrels. Which is a great reason to complain.
By the way, what other Autobots (from either movie) are hyper-violent, stupid, illiterate, superficial, and consumed by any other genre besides hip hop? I am aware of none, thus a statement is being made, don’t you think?
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
Shawn Says:
June 25th, 2009 at 2:42 pm e
This is so stupid! Movies stereotype fat people all the time, Thats ok? Movies stereotype people that live in trailer parks all the time, showing them as long haired toothless white people, thats ok? look at King of the Hill that show stereotypes all kinds of people. People need to get over it.
Shawn,
As I have stated before and in the post, I do not support negative stereotypes of anyone. I do not believe they are necessary.
Good or bad, a charcter can be portrayed of any race or group and not be a stereotype. But when they are, and it is negative with no context, the writers, director, and actors have been lazy, lessened the film or television show, and insulted the audience. You may not agree, and that is your Right.
As for getting over it, check my reply to J
And I do not think that King of the Hill is using stereotypes to insult people. They are making a commentary, much in the way that Carrol O’Connor used Archie Bunker to make a point about racism in All In The Family. Which is quality and substance, a rarity on television and movies these days.
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
invisiblemoose Says:
June 25th, 2009 at 10:05 pm e
Hi there. I found this article after a friend-of-a-friend linked me to it.As someone who has seen the movie. As a non-POC and a non-American, one of the first things I noticed when I got a good look at the appearance and demeanour of the Mudflap and Skids was that this was the worst racial stereotype I have seen out of mainstream media in decades.
I could accept that these were two infighting illiterate idiotic brothers that talk trash weren’t stereotypes (or at least not such blatant stereotypes)… but to give them such blatantly obvious facial characteristics (or so I thought–others seem to believe it’s just a goofy face) was taking things way too far.
The way Bay portrays African-Americans (almost exclusively for comedy relief) was never fantastic, but this is a huge low to sink to.
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
bjp Says:
June 25th, 2009 at 10:38 pm e
Michael, your grace when answering these verbally abusive replies is amazing.
It saddens me that the objectors mostly come across like children, screaming “I know you are, but what am I?”
I wish people were more thoughtful about what they condone. The impression given by the respondents is that of pointless defensiveness, since you insulted no one, and quite persuasively suggested that this was something the reader could afford to take a look at and consider.
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
Alex Says:
June 26th, 2009 at 2:05 pm e
In terms of Bay’s portrayal of African-Americans, and his intentions, you must step back from the initial anger obviously sparked by these characters. The basis for the two robots’ characters was simply to portray young, immature robots…one of the actors hired to voice them is the white man famous for voicing SpongeBob Squarepants…he is obviously going to make the character similar to the one he’s been made famous playing. Spongebob is in no way a stereotypical African American character. He’s a yellow sponge.
These are robots, voiced by numerous actors of various ethnic backgrounds, all of which have names and personalities just as varied. If anything, Ironhide and Prime are the most violent of Autobots. Skids and Mudflap are simply playful and childlike. Jazz was a strong, intelligent character.
The real African-American characters developed on Bay’s direction are those of the likes of Tyrese Gibson’s character, Sgt. Epps, and Cuba Gooding, Jr.’s character in Pearl Harbor. Michael Clarke Duncan was in Armaggeddon. All of these characters are strong, intelligent, highly respected individuals of great significance to their fellow Americans in each of their respective roles. Bay is FAR from racist. One must consider the possibility that not all that much thought was put into the nature of the characters by the actors themselves, and what came out was simply an artistic expression of what they chose to bring to the characters.
In the context of the in-universe explanation, the Autobots are very humanlike. However, their temperaments were developed off-world, and therefore they were named thus. Their English-speaking, as well as their understanding of human culture, was developed in a massive download of the internet into their own “minds.” Based upon their Cybertronian temperaments/forms/names, they chose their human-friendly personalities based on predispositions and their own preferences in the context of human culture.
Alex,
I cannot comment on the intention that Michael Bay had when he made this movie. But I can comment that the writers admit that the on-screen versions of the Jar Jar Bots is not what they wrote in the script. I can say that they are extremes that serve no purpose in the movie - other than to be laughed at, not with.
As for the voice actors, I cannot say what they were thinking. As far as is known, they were voicing the characters long before the final visuals were done. So while there may have been a silliness in the reading, the visualization makes another commentary all it’s own - which is on the director.
Also, you are the first person that has spoken about these Jar Jar Bots, in a review or commentary that I am aware of, to call them childish. It is resoundingly seen that they are purposive and directed in an adult manner - unintelligence is not childish, it’s just dumb.
Yes, Michael Bay has had movies with African Americans playing minor/support roles that are far more respectful. And he did film Bad Boys and it’s sequel. But that is not the issue. I am only speaking of this film and this film’s characters - not Michael Bay’s life view of African Americans. And I have not called Bay a racist.
In context of the Transformers universe, as depicted on film, we come to the conclusion that I posed earlier.
“So the movie is saying that if you look in the internet today, and you search about African Americans, the only thing you will find is that we are illiterate, violent, and obsessed with the superficial. That the best we have offered the world, and the only thing worth copying by visitors from another world, is rap and hip hop?”
That conclusion is what the NY Times, The Wall Street Journal, and numerous other critics have come to as well (though not in my wording). When the consensus is so strong it can only mean either we have all missed the point by miles, or that we are dead on the mark. Which is the answer I leave to my readers.
I want to thank datenshiblue of the blog http://datenshiblue.livejournal.com/239904.html .
My post on this subject has been shared with many people due to datenshiblue's efforts, which were unsolicited and unknown to me until I saw some of the responses and links in my raw data.
It's a great feeling to know that anyone appreciates the work I do enough to spread the word to new readers. It really makes me glad that I do this.
Comment as found at Wanderings of a restless spirit
Transformers second movie, just out.
http://www.1800blogger.com/2009/06/25/transformers-2-controversy-or-not/
Is having a CGI robot speaking ebonics a take on Black culture and, even in the most innocent of ways, making fun of African Americans?
As someone once told me, the answer is in the question.
The article is a POC [Person of Color] perspective (posted by http://www.blackentertainmentblog.com/), well worth reading.
And in regards to the quote, which is carefully framed, I think ignorant could be substituted for 'innocent' without taking it over the top.
Comment as found at Talking about the hard stuff
eriktrips on June 26th, 2009 01:53 am
"innocence" is not even an option here, and I think the writer knows this--there simply is no innocent way for white culture to "have fun" with racist stereotypes. the question already implies culpability while demonstrating one way in which that culpability is routinely disavowed in everyday discourse.
"good clean fun" can't be drawn by a racist culture from racism. it is always going to be much more complicated than that.
Comment as found at Talking about the hard stuff
penguingod on June 26th, 2009 04:34 pm
He's [Michael Bay] the producer. He's also responsible for Pearl Harbor, the first new Transformers flick, and The Island. Pearl Harbor was particularly awful; the one black character is treated like shit throughout, but wait! When things get tough, he comes to the rescue, all "I'll save you massa, uh, I mean sir!" Then you've got a jive-talkin' robot, which just happens to be the only one that dies. I think he did the Bad Boys franchise, but I don't recall for certain, and I'm too lazy to look it up.
He's not a bigot, he just really, really doesn't get it. At all.
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
Alex Says:
June 26th, 2009 at 5:05 pm e
I would say that AMERICANS are obsessed with violence and the superficial, quite realistically. I am quite firm in my belief that the “Twins”–a childish form of nomenclature in itself–are intended to be very young characters intended to widen the appeal of the film to children in spite of its adult themes. The illiteracy reference in the film has nothing to do with the twins in particular–it has to do with the fact that they, as well as many of the Transformers, were created after the devastation of their homeworld of Cybertron and therefore do not have a need for written language as their civilization has been in ruins for millennia. In conclusion, I fully respect your views and the emotions elicited in you by this controversial, high-energy film. However, I must stress my undying belief that by maintaining the initial assumption by many that these characters are portrayed as “African-American,” you are giving creedence to the very (destructive, ignorant) stereotypes you are–and rightly so–trying to defeat. There is nothing that led me to consider their personas as such with the exception of the hip-hop element. Almost all of the Autobots behave in such a way–Iron Hide calls an enemy a “Punkass Decepticon,” and many other characters use such overtly human dialect. I must say I applaud your wish to fight the overdominant culture that exists within our media-driven society and the horrific implications that it continously makes. That said, this is one instance where things may have been taken in the wrong light.
Alex,
Are Americans superficial and lovers of violence? Well to a degree I suppose we are when it comes to our movies and entertainment. But that is not an intrinsic bad thing. And considering our movies make as much, if not more, overseas I would believe the rest of the world is to a similar degree.
But on the point of the Transformers 2 movie, how do you claim that “twins” is a directly childish title? I know of many twins that are older or the same age as myself, and in no way does the term, referring to a status they were born with, infer a lack of growth or development.
As for the lack of a written language and illiteracy, I find it odd how a highly advanced alien race (that can travel interstellar space) fails to need the ability to read. In addition, if they cannot read, how did they learn from the internet? That is a computer and written language, alien to them, that they had to read to learn about us.
I would say that since they had to read the language to learn about our cultures, and chose this one specifically, they chose to accept certain aspects that the MOVIE claims is representative of African Americans. I do not agree that a scan of the internet would lend itself to such a conclusion, and thus it was the director’s interpretation of what would be found that we are seeing. Which is insulting.
I do not feel that it is an assumption when even those that do not find this portrayal insulting agree that the characters are African American. A view that neither the writers or director has denied. Thus to highlight this negative stereotype, and to vociferously berate it is not giving it credence or power but giving the fact of its opposite strength.
Put in another way, the portrayal of Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man empowered the thought that even those with mental disabilities are capable human beings. The portrayals of Gary Sinise and Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump also showed the strengths of people ordinarily considered weak or deficient – and often made buffoons in movies.
It is easy to create a caricature of any group of people, to relegate them to insignificance. And to do so, in promotion of baseless stereotypes, is lazy and wrong. Bay did not need to create a pair of buffoons to draw the youth to a film based on a Saturday morning cartoon series. He did so to emphasize an idea held by the media and promoted for decades that is a blatant lie.
Look at it from this point. If there was nothing wrong about these Jar Jar Bots, then there would not be a controversy. There would not be a need to defend their actions and portrayal. They just would be part of a review of the movie, and no one would care. But many people do care, and some feel a need to defend these characters. That means they cannot stand by themselves as depicted on the screen. Which to me means they were not just flawed but derogatory.
But I respect that you do not agree with the view I and many people have. Such is the Right of all Americans, which I believe in deeply. Even when I find such views blatantly wrong.
Comment as found at 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
Dracosaber Says:
July 6th, 2009 at 12:16 am e
Maybe some of you haven’t realized, but the whole point of the bots was to be funny, right? No matter who they portrayed, someone would be insulted. Isn’t there an actual black actor in both films who plays the part of an intelligent soldier? They’re robots people, and if it’s so bad, than why is it that when you look around there are some black people that act that exact same way, and are proud of it. A good number do, and it’s of their choosing. America is unfortunately characterized as making fun of negative stereotypes, and it would not be fun/funny if we no longer could. Let’s call them racist jokes, they are still hilarious. Sure they offend some people that are being targeted, but most of those that understand them as jokes are not bothered. White people and Hispanics are constantly being stereotyped in movies, along with fat people and “ugly” people. Same with other groups. Yet no one makes such a big commotion because they’re not black steroetypes. Those who are offended really should just forget about it. I’m completely against discrimination and racism, but if we began taking away all these stereotypes from movies and television, humor would lose a major part of its creative arsenal. Besides, movies don’t have to show black people as such for everyone to think that that is all they are like–black people do it to themselves with their own rap videos and films. Showing a couple of robots in that manner is only giving uniqueness to the robot race, just like humanity. Portraying any group is going to have negative effects, because the groups will usually be stereotyped, but that shouldn’t bother anyone. Above, some of you were saying that Jazz was black as well, but he was a completely different case because he was important and “smart”, with an actual role. Doesn’t that portray black people in a good way? Doesn’t that give them a good image? Now this movie shouldn’t be condoned for a negative stereotype? And really, a gold tooth is that big of a deal. Last time I checked, black people were hardly the only ones with gold teeth. And if black people are characterized constantly with the styles shown in rap music videos and such, it is their own fault, is it not? They are the ones portraying themselves as such, and show themselves as being proud of it. Now movies can’t do it? That is a joke. And besides all that, it is the audience itself that has claimed that the “Twins” are portraying black people, so it is offensive. Everyday I see Hispanics, Asians, some White people, and others of different races act that very same way, and it is the fault of an image and style portrayed as “cool” by the mainstream media and black people themselves. If they want such an image to be destroyed, they have to first stop promoting it themselves. And like some have pointed out, the illiteracy aspect is completely another matter, having nothing to do with just them. Sorry if this offends someone, but if everyone complains about something this silly, they should start being less ignorant.
Dracosaber,
As has been discussed in prior comments, a joke is not just a joke – especially when it is playing on negative stereotypes and prejudices. Thus while some may just find the Jar Jar Bots as an amusement, the message they provide is contextually an insult and denigration of African Americans. Much in the way that blackface is seen.
As for Jazz, as stated before there is no controversy or complaint with a character that is relevant, respectful, and honest in their portrayal. The Jar Jar Bots are none of these things.
But I note that you are using this movie and the Jar Jar Bots to defend a view of African Americans that is hardly accurate. You may know some people that act in the manner depicted, but that does not justify them. It does not mean that this is a fair or honest depiction. Nor is a racist (whatever the racial group – or ethnic and so on) joke funny. Ever.
Would you say that depictions of Whites as Nazi’s and racists is a fair portrayal? That Whites are just rednecks and inbred? That they are violent, barbaric, uncultured savages that abuse the land and peoples they encounter?
Each of those things can be said of Whites over time. Each of them has been part of portrayals in various movies. But such portrayals are rarely a joke, or merely meant as an insult. They are part of a bigger message – often to highlight the fact that all Whites are in fact not that. Or that such views are wrong. Even though it is a sad fact that there are people that live up to these negative stereotypes.
You emphasize the fact that music videos and other aspects of American culture focus on the negatives of Black culture. I ask you this, is that because Black culture is only this or is it that the major media chooses to project this image?
Rap and hip hop were not always violent or in promotion of drugs. In fact for the first 15 years it existed (and the music industry demanded that it was merely a fad) there was no violence and huge amounts of diversity. It was not until the music industry, and the major media, found and promoted gangsta rap that have what is seen today. Which in itself is a caricature – one that is virtually single-mindedly promoted so as to be the norm as all other forms have been rejected.
And that says nothing of the portrayal that the news media promotes. Considering that African Americans, and all people of color in this nation, only make up 1/3 the population why is it that virtually every image of poverty excludes Whites? Because the all encompassing truth is that there are more Whites impoverished than people of color in this nation.
I say that, not to get off subject but to emphasize something you were trying to deflect from. The Jar Jar Bots may reflect some aspects of Black culture, or American culture, but that is not the definition of either. The fact is that they are not the norm, but the media promoted view of the norm. They are an aberration as they have been depicted. One that promotes a negativity in this nation and internationally that does nothing but hurt people. And considering the context in which they are displayed, add nothing to the movie in which they are found. Thus they are a sum total negative without any benefit, disguised as a joke to hide the minstrel nature of their roles.
Put another way, similar to an example that I have made before, what if the Jar Jar Bots were neo-Nazi’s instead. No gold tooth, but a swastika. Listening to – whatever those deluded and defective types listen to. But they were still violent and illiterate. Would that be funny? Does it even sound funny?
You can do this with any group you chose. Fat, disabled, mentally challenged, Asian, Hispanic, Russian, British, Hindu, Arabs, whatever you choose. Any group substituted for the Jar Jar Bots ceases to be funny. Especially if you pick an extreme form of the group, and a less than positive symbol of them. And they will not represent the vast majority of the group chosen.
Which means that there is no joke here, but an insult.
Comment as found at Black and White Blog, where I am a Co-author.
Ezra the Dog Says:
July 5th, 2009 at 5:17 pm e
I’m afraid that that sterotype (the southern hillbilly) has been used extensively in a lot of films (deliverance comes to mind), and I’ve never seen anyone petition or bitch about them. I am from the deep south, and have never lost any sleep over that film or any of the others. I mean, come on, it’s used quite a bit, not only on the side, like in transformers, but as the entire basis of the movie (and in a much more disturbing way, I might add). Yeah, it’s stupid that a sterotype was used in transformers, but it’s nothing to shit your pants about. That’s just my take, though. It could be that I’m not understanding the level of offense taken. That being said, I do think this is a response to your counter. I’m not saying sterotypes are a good thing (i mean, they’re absurd and hyperbolic to the point of comedy, not to mention entirely stale and cliche), only that they aren’t exclusive (in the media) to african americans. Also, I’m not defending the movie — it sucked ass — just pointing out a potential double-standard.
Ezra,
Thank you for responding.
I agree that negative stereotypes are not solely the domain of African Americans or people of color. If I made it seem as such I correct myself now. But I am focused on the nature in which the media consistently does foucs such attention to people of color. Perhaps the fact that I am Black and Puerto Rican makes me overly sensitive. If so I make no apology for such.
I’m glad you pointed out Deliverance. I’ve used that in several responses I have made on my own blog (Black Entertainment USA). It does depict a negative stereotype of Whites. But this was far from whimsical. And the characters were used to drive a message within the whole movie - that this is not a norm nor accepted. All the other White characters in the movie were counter to this stereotype and showing how wrong such a view (which sadly does exist as all stereotypes do in small numbers) is.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen does not use this tactic. It exemplifies the Jar Jar Bots as the media tends to depict African Americans. It is unnecessary and does not advance any aspect of the movie. From what I have read and been told they could have been eliminated from the movie without affecting any part of the plot (the little that there was).
And I want to emphasize something else. If we do not challenge such depictions, against any group, we de facto reinforce their existence. To not call out the Jar Jar Bots as minstrels is to say that minstrels are a positive reality. In a similar way, for Dr. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X to not challenge socially accepted views of their time would directly not change what we have today. Like Sidney Portier as well.
Again I am not saying that you are defending this movie or these characters, nor am I supporting a double-standard. I feel this way about any group so wrongly depicted, I am just highly vocal to a group that I am directly affected by.
Post a Comment