Blacking Up: Hip-Hop

Posted on January 27, 2010 at 3:59 pm

“Where do you draw the line between influence and appropriation?” “When is it admiration and when is it mockery?”

Blacking Up: Hip-Hop’s Remix of Race and Identity is a thought-provoking film by documentarian Robert Clift is a sympathetic look at the tensions that surround white identification with hip-hop. Popularly referred to by derogatory terms such as “wannabe” or “wigger,” the white person who identifies with hip-hop often invokes heated responses. For some, it is an example of cultural progress — a movement toward a color-blind America. For others, it is just another case of cultural theft and mockery — a repetition of a racist past. From this perspective, the appropriation of this mode of expression is inauthentic and disrespectful, another in a centuries-long series of takings. And yes, Vanilla Ice is interviewed, along with cultural commentators like Amiri Baraka and Paul Mooney and performers like Chuck D and Power.

For me, the most poignant moment in the film when a girl says she is not trying to be black — she is just trying to be cool. There is nothing more essentially American than the blending of cultures — except perhaps the struggle over the blending or appropriation of cultures. This film perfectly captures and illuminates the central issues of identity and the way it is shaped and shapes the arts, with arrestingly provocative insights into race and American culture and the path from fringe to center. It is very important viewing for teenagers, their teachers, and their parents. (NOTE: Some very strong language including the n-word and other epithets)

Blacking Up: Hip-Hop's Remix of Race and Identity

Related Tags:

Documentary Television

Another Word Goes Mainstream?

Posted on November 18, 2009 at 8:00 am

In my concern for the continuing coarsening of language, I last wrote about whether the term “pimp” had become acceptable for children after it was used in the PG film “G-Force.”
The New York Times writes about another word that has crossed into the mainstream and has become a go-to insult on television and in movies.

On many nights this fall, it has been possible to tune in to broadcast network television during prime time and hear a character call someone else a “douche.”

In just the last several weeks, it has happened on CBS’s “The New Adventures of Old Christine” and the CW’s “The Vampire Diaries,” which are broadcast at 8 p.m., during what used to be known as the family hour. It has been heard this fall on Fox’s new series “The Cleveland Show,” which begins at 8:30, and on ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy.” On NBC, its use has spanned the old and the new, blurted out on the freshman comedy “Community” and the seasoned drama “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.”

In total, the word has surfaced at least 76 times already this year on 26 prime-time network series, according to research by the Parents Television Council, which compiled the statistics at the request of The New York Times. That is up from 30 uses on 15 shows in all of 2007 and just six instances on four programs in 2005….And while the word “douche” is neither obscene nor profane — although this usage is certainly offensive to many people — it seems to represent the latest of broadcast television’s continuing efforts to expand the boundaries of taste, in part to stem the tide of defections by its audience to largely unregulated cable television….”As a writer, you’re always reaching for a more potent way to call somebody a jerk,” Dan Harmon, the creator of “Community,” said about the word “douche.” “This is a word that has evolved in the last couple of years — a thing that sounds like a thing you can’t say.”

Unquestionably, the language on television has become more vulgar. And the argument that this is acceptable because it can be limited to a particular time slot has become less supportable. When television programs like “Law and Order” and “CSI” (and their variations and spin-offs) seem to be on 24/7 and raunchy sit-coms like “Two and a Half Men” run in syndication in the early evening. I find this word particularly ugly and misogynistic and am sorry to see it become mainstream.

Three Movies Examine Our Struggle to Understand God

Posted on September 29, 2009 at 2:59 pm

Three new and very different movies have one thing in common — they all ask their characters and their audiences to think about the nature of God and faith. This week we have a perky romantic comedy with Ricky Gervais and Jennifer Garner called “The Invention of Lying.” As the title suggests, it is about a world in which everyone tells the literal, concrete truth all the time. And then one man figures out that he can lie, and that since no one else is aware that lies even exist, he can pretty much get away with everything. Since no one lies, everyone is completely gullible. So much is clear from the trailers. But Entertainment Weekly reports that there is a more controversial element to the film and that one of the “lies” the Gervais character comes up with is the idea of God.
Gervais, who also co-wrote and directed the film, has responded to concerns from bloggers.

1. No one has seen the film.

2. Even if the film suggests there is no God, it is a fictional world. One of my favourite films is ‘It’s a wonderful life’ and at no time am I offended by the suggestion in this wonderful work of fiction that there is a God.

3. If the film was not set in a fictional world and suggested there is no God then that’s fine too, as it is anyone’s right not to believe in God.

4. By suggesting there is no God you are not singling out Christianity.

5. Not believing in God cannot be blasphemous. Blasphemy is acknowledging a God to insult or offend etc.

6. Even if it was blasphemous, which it isn’t, then that’s OK too due to a little god I like called “freedom of speech.” That said, I am not trying to offend anyone. That would be a waste of such a privilege.

7. I am an atheist, but this is not atheist propaganda. When creating an imaginary world you have to make certain decisions. We decided also that there would be no surrealist art, no racism, no flattery, no fiction, no metaphor, and no supernatural. However, we decided that apart from that one “lying gene”, humans evolved with everything else as we have it today. Joy, hope, ambition, ruthlessness, greed, lust, anger, jealousy, sadness, and grief. It’s just a film. If any of the themes in it offend you or bore you, or just don’t make sense to you, you should put everything right when you make a film.

I really hope everyone enjoys the film and keeps an open mind. I believe in peace on Earth, and good will to all men. I do as I would be done by, and believe that forgiveness is one of the greatest virtues. I just don’t believe I will be rewarded for it in heaven. That’s all.

I have a different take, which I will discuss in my upcoming review.
Perhaps an even more unexpected place for a discussion of God and faith than a comedy is in Michael Moore’s latest documentary, “Capitalism: A Love Story.” Moore is well-known for his attacks on the Bush administration (“Farenheit 911”), insurance companies (“Sicko”), and our treatment of guns and violence (“Bowling for Columbine”). In this new film, he takes on the financial crisis. His argument turns out to be based not as much in economics as in his own Catholic faith. He even interviews the priest who performed his wedding ceremony to help make his point that the current system is not just bad policy; it is not WWJD. The media often creates the impression that faith-based politics are right-wing and it is provocative and refreshing to see a different point of view.
And then there is a movie that is going to be difficult to put in any category, because it is the new film from the Coen brothers, who are masters of genre — both evoking and transcending them. According to the New York Times, their new film “A Serious Man” “is both a Job-like parable of Jewish angst in a 1960s Midwestern suburb and a bleakly antic meditation on divine intent, the certainty of uncertainty and the mysteries of Jefferson Airplane lyrics.
The film’s central character is a scientist who seeks the advice of three rabbis to help him find meaning and purpose. That makes this film unusual in two respects — the portrayal of Jewish theology and the portrayal of clergy as a place to go for guidance.
And I am glad to see movies providing some guidance as well, by engaging us in very different ways about issues so profound and pervasive that it is only through a variety of approaches we can begin to understand what we believe.

WordGirl Interviewed by Jim Lehrer

Posted on August 4, 2009 at 1:53 pm

Thanks to Siva Vaidhyanathan for sharing this delightful interview with the newest PBS superhero, WordGirl, who keeps the world safe from bad guys and poor word choices! Here’s to vivid and grammatically correct speech, and to PBS and WorldGirl.

Interview: Ellen Besen on Visual Literacy

Posted on July 6, 2009 at 3:58 pm

The average American child watches two to three hours of TV a day, according to the American Association of Pediatrics. And that doesn’t include the time they spend playing video games, sitting in front of the computer, and watching movies. Yet, few children are taught how to decode the messages that come wrapped in visual media. Ellen Besen, an acclaimed animator, author, and teacher who’s worked with students from pre-school to college level says that visual literacy is a skill that every child should be taught. “Because of technology our kids have near-constant access to visual media, yet we’ve done very little to teach them how to really understand what they’re seeing,” says Besen. She is the author of Animation Unleashed: 100 Principles Every Animator, Comic Book Writers, Filmmakers, Video Artist, and Game Developer Should Know and she answered my questions about what parents should know about visual literacy.

How do you define visual literacy?

It’s the ability to watch visual media with awareness of exactly what is being communicated (including less obvious messages and intents) and how that communication is being achieved.
How do you turn children from passive viewers to active, engaged viewers of television and film?

The first step involves introducing the idea that media can be questioned instead of just being accepted carte blanche. By its very nature, media seems authoritative — if something is on TV, for example, it must not only be true but also important. Left unquestioned, media can become established in a child’s mind as the ultimate authority. So you need to sit down with your children and watch things with them and discuss what you are watching. This way you maintain (or re-establish) the role as the main authority in your child’s life. Media may then raise interesting questions but the final answers to those questions come from you.

What can preschoolers learn about visual media? Elementary school kids? Middle and high schoolers?

Recognition that everything we see in media was put there by choice is key to developing visual and media literacy. This recognition leads to three big questions which can be adapted for children of different ages:

What choices did the creators make? Why did they make those choices? What else could they have chosen to do?

Again I must emphasis here that for kids of all ages, you need to watch the shows and movies they watch, preferably with them — you can’t be a credible authority (especially with older kids)unless you know the material! This allows you to see how your children react to specific elements — both positively and negatively — which will open doors for conversation with them. It also helps you observe your children’s overall reaction to media. What kind of watchers are they? Some kids get taken right in and once there, are hard to peel away. Other kids treat TV as a background element to which they give some of their attention while also carrying on with other activities. These different styles of watching offer clues to what your child might need to understand about media.

Since preschool programming is already quite regulated, efforts with very young children can mostly be focused on laying the foundation for visual literacy. Watch a favorite show with them and ask what they like best about it and what they like least. What would they change, if they could — show more of a favorite character, perhaps, or add a new character? Put the stories in a new setting or have more stories in a favorite one? This encourages active watching and helps create the groundwork for critical thinking by stimulating the child’s ability to form an opinion. Older preschoolers can also begin to consider the difference between real and not real — at this age, it might only be the broadest of distinctions: live action actors — real, animated characters — not real, for example.

With elementary school kids and preteens, you can try a more sophisticated version of the same exercises. Here along with encouraging active watching towards forming an opinion about the content, you can also begin to foster an awareness of the various elements through which different media communicate. Have them watch for changes in camera angles or the use of camera moves. Once they’ve identified that the angles often change, you can have them think about why they change: has the camera just cut closer to showcase a tiny detail which would otherwise be hard to see, such as something a character is taking out of her pocket? Has the camera started to move way back from the scene because the show is over and we are now saying good bye?

At this age, the “real/not real” discussion can also become more sophisticated. And it definitely becomes more important. Kids can watch TV ads aimed at them and look for false information — camera angles which make a toy look bigger than it really is; favorite cereals which look more brightly colored and more appetizing on TV than the real thing because the food has been doctored. They can also watch action sequences or fight sequences and begin to understand that the actors are not actually fighting.

Related Tags:

Books Interview Parenting