Hollywood pats itself on the back
CVK
Is it just me or did last night’s Oscars feel like a loooooong session of Hollywood congratulating itself for being oh-so-open-minded about race? First came George Clooney’s speech about how yes, Hollywood may be out of touch, but maybe that’s a good thing. Because Hollywood was talking loudly about AIDS when others were just “whispering” about it, and Hollywood gave Hattie McDaniel an Oscar in 1939 when across the country, black people still had to sit in the back of the theater.
Uhhhh… yes, McDaniel was the first African-American to win an Oscar, but have we forgotten what role it was that she won the award for? For playing Scarlett O’Hara’s Mammy in “Gone With the Wind”!!! This is a role that cemented the black woman in America’s imagination as the sexless, overweight, cheerful but stern caretaker with no needs of her own. Just to show you how deeply engrained this character is - let’s look at this weekend’s top-grossing movie: “Madea’s Family Reunion”–in which Tyler Perry cross-dresses as Madea–who’s basically your classic, sassy mammy character. Ah yes, Hollywood has done well, indeed.
As the evening went on, the theme seemed pretty clear. First, Three 6 Mafia wins best song for “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp” from the movie “Hustle & Flow.” (See? We even give Oscars to rappers! See how open-minded we are?) And then of course, came the big upset of the night - “Crash” beat out “Brokeback Mountain” for Best Picture.
Now, if you’ve read MMW for any amount of time, or if you listen to Addicted to Race, you’ll know that Jen and I are not fans of this movie (see here and here). It was full of unlikely intersections where characters literally “crash” into one another, full of ridiculously unrealistic dialogue. It reinforced the popular notion that racism is loud and melodramatic — consisting of saying bad things about other races, denying the fact that racism can often be as subtle as making assumptions that a certain person possesses certain characteristics simply because of his/her race. And for a movie that was supposed to be all about showing the humanity of each character, exploring the complexity (good and bad) of each ethnic group, it seemed remarkably blase about portraying Asians as bad drivers who can’t speak English and oh, who also run human trafficking rings.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again here. I’m deeply disappointed that Asian-American media watchdog groups never uttered a word about the awful representations of Asians in this movie. It was a huge missed opportunity. Think about it, what affects more people? Some dumb radio shockjock in NJ who makes lame anti-Asian jokes? Or a “serious” film that Oprah gushed over (and we all know how powerful her influence is), which everyone thinks is a must-see and an eye-opening look at race relations?
The window of opportunity for activism around this movie is long gone. Now it’s heralded as Best Picture of the year, people all across America are going to flock to see this movie, absorb every line uttered, and be blind to the many racist notions the movie itself upholds.
UPDATE: Check out this great commentary from the blog reappropriate.
Mixed Media Watch - tracking media representations of mixed people on 12 Apr 2006 at 6:39 pm
[…] Obviously the very existence of this blog proves that I believe in the power of media images–both positive and negative. But even I wonder if the Asian-American activist groups sometimes misdirect their efforts. As Oliver points out, it’s a bit strange that people are more enthused about protesting this sneaker than they are about opposing the HR 4437 immigration bill. And even within the realm of media representations–why are we picking the easy battles (sneakers and racist shock jocks) over what in my mind are more important ones, like the depictions of Asians in Crash? Is it that we can only see racism when it involves ching chong accents and racial slurs but don’t notice it when it’s even slightly more subtle? […]