General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo, have been thinking about the movie, "Gone With the Wind"
TCM shows the old, classic movies. Yes, old movies are racist, among other issues. No real depictions of Black folks, Asians, Latinos, Native Americans, just characterizations. Sexist, homophobic, racially intensive plots are not uncommon. So, I am sure many of you can add to the list of ugly portrayals that exist in movies. I still watch, enjoy, I critique and do not want any censorship. Historical context is so necessary to fully understand where we have come, how we can learn and move forward. Our history is whole stinking mess but do not censure our ability to view it. Lets focus on the present, make life better for all, equality, justice. Movies are a snapshot in time, historical documents, educational, even if they are abhorrent. BTW, just saw Gunga Din, now that one is so wrong in so many ways, OMG. But, I recommend it.
JCMach1
(27,555 posts)Label it like other things...
Response to Miigwech (Original post)
morillon This message was self-deleted by its author.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)They are not getting properly educated without a lesson about the hell of slavery.
Response to Miigwech (Reply #3)
morillon This message was self-deleted by its author.
wcmagumba
(2,882 posts)Two of my favorites, one a musical/comedy and the other all out comedy, Finian's Rainbow (1968) and Blazing Saddles (1974). Both are decidedly anti-racist but contain racist language, stereotypes and even black face. All of this was used to make a point against racism, but still it is there. Finian's Rainbow was originally played on Broadway in 1947 (pretty daring) and was Fred Astaire's last major movie musical. I love that movie even though it got mixed reviews (watched it again yesterday). Blazing Saddles was amazing too, along with the slapstick, vulgarities and racist humor it certainly made its point. Probably neither film could be made today, but like you say, they are a snapshot of a point in time. Just wondering how movies such as these fit in with those other historical films that are unapologetically racist due to the time or actual intent of the producers.
Raine
(30,540 posts)their point is anti-racist but they use racist's language and stereotypes in making the point. One network has been showing them lately but I don't think they could include that language in any new show made now.
UTUSN
(70,671 posts)OnlinePoker
(5,719 posts)They've defunded or removed many right wing posters, but leave those two racist screeds available.
Hekate
(90,617 posts)Last edited Mon Jun 15, 2020, 05:17 PM - Edit history (1)
...college prof. She is at pains to closely analyze racial subtexts and to place them in historical context. Sometimes I can feel her anger -- most other times not -- but she is not pretending to be dispassionate and above it all.
As far as African American singers and dancers, sometimes the only visual record we have of them is in what remains of "race" movies and as entertainers in white movies. These few things are quite remarkable, and should be seen.
Goodheart
(5,318 posts)Unless its intent was to promote and propagate racism. I don't think that's the point of the movie. It's not the main theme.
Disclaimers are warranted, however.
Response to Goodheart (Reply #9)
morillon This message was self-deleted by its author.
Doreen
(11,686 posts)I realize some of these older movies have some very racial content in them and that tends to fall in the era they were made. I must admit I was wondering if I should like to watch Blazing Saddles. I have always thought that Blazing Saddles used the racist content to show how stupid the people who are racist really are.
treestar
(82,383 posts)In a society that never learns it once existed?
Also people of color could not claim white privilege. No one would know it ever existed if it were all censored away.
Not learning history is said to cause it to repeat, I have often heard.
jimfields33
(15,759 posts)won an Oscar for the role in Gone with the wind. Hattie McDaniels. How can everyone seem to forget that in the discussion. The First African American Woman wins an Oscar!
ArcticE
(30 posts)I think banning the film was a mistake on HBO's part. I wrote HBO and told them I thought they should have invited Angela Davis, Cornell West and Michelle Obama/Barack Obama introduce the film and give some historical perspective. At intermission (the film is almost 4 hours long) have one of the other panelists continue the discussion, providing additional context and discussion of parts of the film that have racist overtones. Once again have the 3rd panelist add additional context to the film and provide viewers with a link to a forum where additional education and resources could be found (perhaps even a MODERATED discussion forum) as well as links to groups that support minority actors and film makers. Please let me know if you think this is a good or bad idea.
On a separate note I feel similarly about many of the statues being torn down. I believe an outdoor "graveyard walking museum" of sorts where all of these old statues could be placed and people could choose to walk through to view them and read or listen to speakers discuss the history of black subjugation (if that is the proper word) in the United States. I have not thought this out extensively and I am sure there would/could be reasons why this is not a good idea. I would love to hear others opinions as to why this would be a good OR bad idea.
msongs
(67,381 posts)LisaM
(27,800 posts)A few weeks ago I was watching one with a scene in a night club with people on the dance floor and it occurred to me how little difference it would have made if the club was integrated and the dancers were of all different races. It would just look normal.
I riffed on that a little when I was falling asleep last night, thinking how much richer the history of baseball would have been if it had been integrated. We would have seen some of the finest players ever at their peak. We might have a Satchel Paige award instead of a Cy Young award. And that would seem normal, too.
I don't know exactly where I am going with this, but I guess I just wish people didn't fight so hard to keep other people out.
hunter
(38,309 posts)Private broadcasters and streaming services can choose to show GWTW or not -- it's their house, it's their bandwidth.
Choosing not to show GWTW isn't any kind of censorship or book burning.
One of the weird consequences of this GWTW controversy is that many people went out and bought their own copies of GWTW.
I suspect I'll be seeing these disks in thrift stores a year or two from now, but I won't be buying one.
The toxic legacy of the Civil War is all around us. I don't need GWTW to remember it by.