Wesley Gibson said...
Speaking to a very close white friend of mine and describing the movie he had this to say: "To be fair, white people make those kind of movies too, we just know to put Freddy Prince Jr. in them and the expect the audience to be full of giggles and braces."- That disturbs me. As black adults in an overtly hostile world, I think we need to be aware that there is pressure both internal and external to comport ourselves in a way ever flattering to an ever watching eye. We feel the need to prove that we are a certain way, to use simplistic terms, Tom or Coon. That is to say complicit in the greater societies view of how we should be or subversive to it. By doing either, by playing that game at all, we lose. As individuals in an ever competitive environment, we cannot afford to fight an eternal battle between two competing false identities. In the end, we should be far less concerned with manipulating the way people see us and far more concerned with exploring who we are. That exploration of self, even the collective self, is the privilege, right and calling of any Human Being. That right has been taken from us, and worse still we continue to be complicit in that robbery.
37 comments:
Funny thing, is that these are the same corny Negros calling rap "coonery".
Black Men!! What I saw in that preview was 6 beautiful Black people showing another facet of Black life that has yet to be explored in Cinema. Black Love!! I saw the good the bad the ugly but I also saw the benefits of financial independence. I saw friendship that has withstood the test of time. I saw propaganda for the emegence of the black family did you not get the message? Sure domestic violence was involved but domestic violence happens, alot. Talk to me Denmark. I thought we we were gonna stick it out playa. I think ya boy check needs to check himself. It aint over till it's over Nigga!
I echo the sentiments of Inside Man. The movie was great. Wesley is trippin. In general we were portrayed positively, thats always good. Dont make the standard so high as the strip away any room for plain ol' entertainment value. Geez.
Additionally, stop hatin Wesley. Name another film written, directed and starred in by a Black man, that has a TALENTED all back cast, where there were no drugs or violence, and where every character was educated, that also made it to number 1 nationwide.
Wesley, GTFOOH!
this movie was some of the realest shet i've seen in months!
It showed so many different types of black people in an honest light.
I loved it!
what exactly was coonery about it?
I felt like for once, black women were depicted as sexy but not all whores, smart and educated but still loving and submissive.
What was wrong with the movie?
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I've like all of Perry's movies thus far.
Wesley,
You won't save our people by yourself. You can only move the ball from the 45 yard line down to the 36. Somebody else is going to have to score the touchdown sometime in the future.
Big J
Allow me to clarify. Watching that movie and identifying with the characters brought me to the following moral epiphany: "I like good people-they are good, I do not like bad people-they are bad." My objection to the movie isn't really related to the fact that its a minstrel show, I have been known to enjoy a Chris Tucker film on occasion. Rather, I object to TPWDIGM because it is in fact a cartoon of a minstrel show. It's almost as if Tyler Perry saw Amos and Andy and thought "slow down fellas, this is all too complicated."
The world of TPWDIGM is one populated with clear villains and clear victims. Morally upright heavy-set wife meets villainous skinny husband meets treacherous attractive homewrecker. Loud abrasive career woman meets demoralized husband meets ghetto baby momma foil. Etc. The word Obtuse doesn't begin to describe these pairings. Life is complicated, relationships are complicated, black people are complicated (at least i thought so). Simply writing six stereotypes into a dinner scene cannot stand for the sum of black relationships. I reject that. And of course, the worst part, he actually seems to think that he's teaching us something, which is even more insulting. Lets see what I've learned:
1. People who are mean to chunky angels are mean people.
2. Women who are abrasive simply are looking for a man to take control and put them in their place. They'll even cook dinner after!
3. Career women with angelic husbands are driven at the expense of family and don't know how good they got it till its gone.
4. Janet Jackson has made huge strides as an actress [Kudos].
5. Colorado Keystone Cops are closet chubby chasers.
Teach me Tyler. Clear cut morality is earned only through suffering, quiet suffering.
Teach me Tyler. We are innocent, saintly, oppressed.
Teach me Tyler. We shall overcome.
The funny part is, I'm a fan of Tyler's minstrelsy in general. Madea, for all the schucking and jiving, is a funny series. The man is simply at home as a comedian when he puts on that dress. I just find it intellectually insulting when he takes off the pumps and picks up a lesson plan.
Shades of gray, black people, shades of gray...
Eve's Bayou was raw. Learn about it.
Wesley, get a grip for real. Eve's Bayou which portrayed an incestuous relationship between a black father and daughter is better. Oh and sprinkle in the other daughters efforts to kill her dad. I think I already said GTFOOH.
Wesley,
Tyler Perry does not make complicated movies, but maybe that's a good thing? Maybe black people are so confused right now that we need some clear-cut morality? I damn sure think we do.
Eve's Bayou was a great movie.
Denmark what do you have to say?
Denmark what do you have to say?
Denmark what do you have to say?
"Wesley, get a grip for real. Eve's Bayou which portrayed an incestuous relationship between a black father and daughter is better. Oh and sprinkle in the other daughters efforts to kill her dad. I think I already said GTFOOH."
Sighing oh so heavily. To make this interesting I'll approach it from an angle that does not bore me.
The career of Stepin Fetchit and the genesis of the Coon vs. the Tom.
We'll skip the history lesson that would make me sound oh so thourogh and just start at the conclusion. Tom's were generally portrayed as morally upstanding, hard-working negroes praised for their loyalty and goodness (Beecher Stowe's UTC). Coons, on the other hand, have their roots in a particularly weird type of social defiance. The "Coon" undermined his white oppressors by denying his labor and cooperation through an act of defiance that included the appearance of being lazy and stupid. Essential to the "coon" persona was talking in what to white ears is gibberish but which to black folk can be understood and contains barbed insults to "The Man." The frustrating part of the coon identity for black people is how wholeheartedly whites embraced this image as central to the essence of blacks for years to come. Essentially, by attempting to escape white oppression by a means other than open and notorious agitation, some blacks cemented the idea of the stupid, lazy, shiftless negro in the minds of whites. An effective strategy in the short term (allowed them to escape work), but having completely unforseable long term implications.
Done. Now fast forward to the nonce.
Now we's gots aur freeeDuhm. However, black identity being forged in the fulcrum of yesteryears oppression, the coon identity still persists as the dominant perception of blacks by whites. The difference now is that our work, at least to some extent, has become more of an investment in our future. The coon label is now therefore much more disadvantageous. Intrinsically knowing this, Bill "lord of pudding pop sweaters" and much later Tyler "turtleneck" Perry and yes, you too rejsq seek to create and support media that portrays the black man as hard working, morally upstanding, loyal and good. Great. Awesome. Oops one problem.
When exactly, does the black man get to be a human being instead of a character actor in this great American drama with its white studio audience?
Must we fight the eternal battle between Tom and Coon. Have we earned the right to make art that is complicated and true and reflects our reality? Or should we censor the cursing in our rap, the nigga's in our speech, the very complicated nature of our lives in order to put on yours and Tyler's and whoever else's New Millennium Minstrel Show? Riddle me that.
Wesley, for once, I agree with some of what you have said.
However don't you think there is a place for uncomplicated art..... light entertainment value... isn't that what this movie is?
Accra, Of course. I'm actually on the side that art doesn't have to be political.
In terms of recent black film: The Madeas were actually funny, Money Talks is my movie, Friday, Soul Plane (underrated), Undercover Brother (severely underrated), etc. But this movie struck me differently because it seemed more heavy handed than the already heavy handed Madea. Like he was really trying to either tell us something about ourselves or present an image of us to other people. Plus it was two hours and, you know, I can't receive that.
Tabernacle
"When exactly, does the black man get to be a human being instead of a character actor in this great American drama with its white studio audience?"
Man. Awesome.
Hell of a point.
Movies like TPWDIGM present a homogonized version of the black experience, watered down, provincial and layered in stereotype. 8 actors portraying the same character 8 different ways is not diversity.
Underestimating the intellectual capacity of the black audience is a mistake.
Mediocrity is a habit. Artists should not dumb down their work to make it easily digestible for a intellectually lazy audience.
(Notice the same people on the fence about rap, just love some Tyler Perry. Tell me that aint funny.)
What's up Inside Man?
I like that name.
Too true!
Unlike you Wesley, I dont think in terms of coons and toms. I generally try to analyze things from a place that is far less 1800's and far more nuanced. But to each his own, I guess. I would nevertheless encourage you to do the following:
1) Remove the cloak that is slavery. You are not a slave, and no one thinks you are. Only slaves walk around evaluating whether certain occurrences (like movies) suggest or disprove their freedom. Perhaps most importantly, only slaves delineated themselves along such lines as coons and toms or field niggas and house niggas.
2) Call your mother and tell her that you love her but that she has done you a disservice. Tell her that it is not your job to save the Black race. Tell her that she has strapped you with such a sense of obligation you are now unable to see things positively and in their true context. Tell her that she has placed such a heavy burden on you, you now subconsciously believe that the good in (or by) Black men is ALWAYS inadequate. Tell her that, strangely, you are now, most comfortable with portrayals of Black men who are intellectually and/or morally impotent, imbeciles, or simply dressed up like women. Anything else you paradoxically deem preachy and unrealistic.
3) Resist the need to be a hater. Try not to belittle the accomplishments of Black people by shouting from the sidelines that something or someone else was better or more enjoyable. Because indeed, Tyler Perry's number 1 spot, couldn’t really have been the result of a movie that was about nothing more than coon or toms.
DV, hush!
You killin me these days.
Everything aint rap, and it doesnt have to be. Just because Tyler Perry wasnt an ex drug dealer doesnt mean that he is any less business savvy, entrepreneurial or self sufficient than a Jay Z or 50 cent whom you often praise.
Tyler Perry writes, directs and executive produces his films. Just like these rappers. He has diversified (from stage to film) and he hires other Black folk. The man even used his home as the main location in one of the movies.
Get the fuck outta here with that bullshit!
So because his movies arent dark and bleak, he's selling us short? He's intellectually lazy? Why are you hating on him? Why cant he simply have identified a profitable niche?
If the goal is empowerment and self actualization, then EVERYONE who demonstrated this is at least deserving of acknowledgment. Its a bunch of bullshit to stand for the proposition, or the suggestion thereof, that these qualities are only present in the likes of T.I. and 50 cent.
Rjesq:
By way of response. First, thank you. I can never get enough encouragement and I always genuinely appreciate it. On to the dissection.
Paragraph 1:
Sentence 1: Inaccurate (my slavery is not in the form of a cloak, its a monogrammed bathrobe. Hef.)
Sentence 2 + 3: Straw Man (Slavery)
Sentence 4: False / Logically Incoherent. The concept of coon vs. Tom seems to logically only exist during the reconstruction i.e. after slavery. By contrast, I'm not sure I ever mentioned house nigga v. field nigga (Slavery Straw Man).
Paragraph 2:
Sentence 1 - 3: Ad hominem attack
Sentence 4-5: Begging the question (assuming a premise you should instead prove)
Paragraph 3: argumentum ad populum (something is true because many people believe it)
Side Note: Of all that I'm most intellectually interested in 3 the argumentum ad populum. The establishment of this concept as a valid defense against criticism in the black mind might have been puffy's greatest triumph as a mogul. It simultaneously seems to imply that we are all artists (flattery--sidelines implies that one could or has attempted to compete and not merely to consume) and that our disdain is economic (related to success) rather than critical. It really successfully transforms an intellectual disagreement into an emotional episode (jealousy). Big ups to Diddy, he's conditioned a whole generation to short circuit the critical mind. Thats some Jedi isht.
The difference, my dear Robyn, in T.P. and T.I. is poetry.
Maximum abbreviation with minimum loss of meaning.
I am not attacking Tyler Perry, I am simply acknowledging the obvious: his films are not art. They have about as much meaning as a 90 minute situation comedy.
That's no crime. But it is what it is.
You are right, his films are not dark, but don't assume they are not political. They are extremely political.
The studios release what, 4 "black" films a year? 2 of those are stomp movies and the other is a "Waist Deep".
That leaves black people with 1 "Regular Negro" movie a year.
Portraying all 8 "Regular Negro" characters as apolitical, one-dimensional, conformists - is extremely political.
Nah. Rap aint everything. But it's something. Other than the fact nobody got shot, share with me the redemptive value of ... or as my increasingly bewildered cousin Big J says - "moral message" this film brings to us.
Wesley. Nothing you said compelled a response. I note however, when confronted, you resorted to empty labels eerily reminiscent of the LSAT exam. Oh, and did I understand you correctly, its Puffy's fault your a hater?
DV, I'ma get to you next.
The notion that 'poetry' separates the TP's from the TI's is played. Has been for months now.
Did you see the movie DV? Do you have a basis to deem it intellectually lazy? Shit, everyone aint as smart as me, that dont mean their stupid. And who the hell are you to say that its not art? One man's mess is another man's Jackson Pollack.
I'm actually surprised that you take issue with the movie as it is, in the end, a proponent of marriage and family in the Black community. Isnt it you who argues that nothing in our community will improve until the family unit is repaired. Isnt it you who tells Black men that they need to 'make it work' with black women. Wasnt it you that said those men who run around with check lists are about as manly as ballet slippers?
Well the movie was a variation on the check list theme. It demonstrated the perils associated with looking for that 20% that your mate doesnt posses, and shows that one can lose sight of the 80% they have in hand. What did you say? Walking away from a Ferarri b/c the AC makes noise?? If that message doesnt further the notion that Black men and women need to learn how to connnect, and is not, in fact, morally redeeming, I dont know what is/does.
Okay, fine. I generally have a policy of not responding in kind if I think the challenge is without merit but I felt like being cheeky. Here is a fuller explanation of my response to all that. What exactly is the point that you've made?
If I understand correctly, you've made up this concept of a cloak of slavery (can i get that retail) and then added to it an equally dubious assignment that slaves "walk around evaluating whether certain occurrences suggest or disprove their freedom" none of which even remotely addresses any actual point that I made. Then you make a factually innacurate statement about the genesis of the tom vs. coon concept. I mean what exactly do i say by way of response? I am not a SLAVE! I ain't gon valuate my feedom. I honestly think you read that one sentence i wrote in slave diction that mentioned the word freedom and then formulated an ridiculous premise.
Then you piggy back on the "mom told me to save black people" and imply that my desire to do so somehow clouds my judgement vis a vis evaluating this work. Again none of that even moderately addresses anything and it amounts to nothing more than an attack against my credibility at best or a personal attack at worst which consequently doesn't amount to a hill of beans on this crazy blog. The only point you actually made was this
"Tell her that she has placed such a heavy burden on you, you now subconsciously believe that the good in (or by) Black men is ALWAYS inadequate."
Which, given the unequivical nature of the statement isn't even remotely in the ballpark of anything i've said. As a matter of fact it directly contradicts my love for Eve's Bayou mentioned earlier. How does one even respond to that? By saying uh uh no I ain't subconciously biased!
You last paragraph basically stands for the assumption that because the movie is popular, i.e. number 1, it must be good hence the ad populem point.
"Because indeed, Tyler Perry's number 1 spot, couldn’t really have been the result of a movie that was about nothing more than coon or toms."
But you fail to even present an argument as to why this is true. In fact your only argument in this section seems to be that my motivation for disliking it is personal jealousy (the hater point). Then you imply that we shouldn't criticize black people who are getting that guap (although thats prolly directly contradicted by your later views on rap). Again, what premise do i argue. Do i say "I ain't jealous!!"
So yes, instead of responding to that tirade I elected to point out in as few words as possible that you didn't actually say anything and go off on a tangent on what I think is a far more interesting topic. Diddy and his effect on quelling criticism of art in the black community.
Really, make an actual point and I'll be happy to trade barbs. But your argument was like chinese food, tasted good while i was eating it but left me curiously hungry.
Come harder?
Tabernacle
You challenge me to make a point. I challenge you to pick a lane (hat tip, Jasai). You hate on WDIGM b/c it was dumbed down and unrealistic, and in the same breath praise Soul Plane as underrated. and say, what was it, Money Talks is your film.
Nuff said.
(Keeping with your preference for minimal response when presented with minimal ideas).
Blaow. Good point. I'll hit up why I perceive is the difference in a few.
Does it make me less of a radical intellectual that I don't see all the various and sundry deep inner motivations and workings that have been presented regarding TPWDIGM? Have you ever seen a movie, television show, play, or commercial or heard a song, poem or speech that didn't have some things you could really agree with and somethings that you felt were out of place or off the mark? Did Tyler present one thing in that movie that is not actually a facet of someone's reality? Did you go there looking for all that Tom and Coon stuff, or did it really jump off the screen and bite you on the ass as hard as you make it seem? Is DV now blaming the white folks (yeah you are gonna keep hearing about that one bro.) for the movie that Tyler made? What exactly is a regular negro, and where pray tell can one be found? What movie is not a "homogonized version..., watered down, provincial and layered in stereotype, considering that the medium always takes 120 minutes or less to present whatever issue is being addresed? How much depth can you possibly expect in 120 minutes?
I uaually like to add something to the conversation but this conversation left me with many more questions than comments. I will say to Wesley, I understand the compulsion to view things with a zero sum mentality. In the past I have blasted people, events, and ideas that deviated even slightly from my perception of how things really should be done. I've learned that I won't find that level of perfection from anyone, myself included. Perhaps that level of perfection of is not necessary to achieve the mission. Don't give up on it.
Excellent post Ex.
I'll get back to you after this conference call.
But please incorporate into your understanding that critiquing a film and "blasting" people are two different things.
When I pull a Big J and say something like "Tyler Perry degrades himself and other black people" ... that will be crossing the line.
Now it's just a critique of packaged conformity masquerading as film.
Back in the Biz...
Before I respond to your questions exodus (and they are very thought provoking thank you), I'll just tidy up a matter I left outstanding with Rjesq.
Essentially Rj, I see a vast divide between comedy and drama. The intention of Soul Plane is satire (however coonish) whereas the intention of TPWDIGM is to teach us about relationships. While both are bad movies, I'd argue that soul plane as satire is a better bad movie than TPWDIGM because as a superficial cartoonish drama its essentially valueless.
Exodus said...
"Did Tyler present one thing in that movie that is not actually a facet of someone's reality? Did you go there looking for all that Tom and Coon stuff, or did it really jump off the screen and bite you on the ass as hard as you make it seem?"
Both fair points and interesting questions. To be honest, I don't know, I can't really speak to my subconsious. It could be, that like the plantation negroes cited by DV, Ah see nooses everyware. Here is what I'll say by way of response.
First, the Tom and Coon thing didn't actually occur to me until we started arguing on the site. It was more of a framework for the presentation of my argument than anything that actually struck me about the film. To be 100% honest, I didn't necessarily believe it as anything other than a relatively clever analogy (patting self on the back), but the more I defended and explained the idea, the more I began to believe that it had at least anecdotal merit.
To begin with, I had a reaction to the film. I won't go so far as to say that "Tyler presented no facets of black reality in that movie". What I'll say is that presenting simplistic facets of reality is what stereotypes do. I'm writing more as a fan of black people and black art than as a creature of pure punditry. The main thing that struck me about the film was that TP seemed to be writing towards a principal rather than a character. The movie, like a cartoon, had no real conflicts. There was a super villain, a hero, a damsel in distress all pure and flawless in their respective roles. Given the level of complexity of their interactions, we could have taken them off that icy hill, put them in spandex (cept Jill Scott) and handed them the ability to fly, make things float with their minds, or start pyrokinetic fires. The black X-men. You might call that a children's movie. (Sidenote: I might call it awesome.) But what makes cartoons entertainment for children? Is it the fact that adults simply cannot abide by super powers and special effects or is it that we know we live in a world without perfect good and perfect evil and we appreciate the complicated interactions that mirror our complicated lives? This is actually a race-less point. When you add race to the equation, I think the situation becomes even more dire.
Speaking to a very close white friend of mine and describing the movie he had this to say:
"To be fair, white people make those kind of movies too, we just know to put Freddy Prince Jr. in them and the expect the audience to be full of giggles and braces."
That disturbs me. As black adults in an overtly hostile world, I think we need to be aware that there is pressure both internal and external to comport ourselves in a way ever flattering to an ever watching eye. We feel the need to prove that we are a certain way, to use simplistic terms, Tom or Coon. That is to say complicit in the greater societies view of how we should be or subversive to it. By doing either, by playing that game at all, we lose. As individuals in an ever competitive environment, we cannot afford to fight an eternal battle between two competing false identities. In the end, we should be far less concerned with manipulating the way people see us and far more concerned with exploring who we are. That exploration of self, even the collective self, is the privilege, right and calling of any Human Being. That right has been taken from us, and worse still we continue to be complicit in that robbery.
"I'm writing more as a fan of black people and black art than as a creature of pure punditry."
Wesley ... you a bad dude.
I feel you on that one man.
"we should be far less concerned with manipulating the way people see us and far more concerned with exploring who we are"
Now you talkin ...
If "we should be far less concerned with manipulating the way people see us and far more concerned with exploring who we are" then why are the fixation on coonin' and tom'n? If this is your point, that we dont disagree
ALL the fixation. my bad.
The need or desire to censor our art such that it displays some community sanctioned viewpoint is to me clear evidence that either we feel the need to present a certain image to a hostile outside world, or that we've internalized their thoughts about us to a degree that it restricts our intellectual freedom.
By way of evidence, many of the responses to my critique of TP generally concern the fact that he is presenting positive images. The question is to whom? Why do we care? (please don't say to black children--not the movies demographic although I'd feel better about it if it was animated).
Essentially, my point is that our need to present a good image is restrictive of our artistic freedom (and by correlation our minds). Its telling that the best and most honest treatment of a black subject (read best black movie) in recent memory is Hustle and Flow, a veiled autobiography of the struggles of a white writer. Our main criticism of that movie, although its the most accurate depiction of black life in the south that I've ever seen, is that its about a pimp. Imagine if a black man wrote Nabokov's Lolita...
"Essentially, my point is that our need to present a good image is restrictive of our artistic freedom (and by correlation our minds)."
Exactly!! It always made me intuitively uncomofortable when people try to stop us from expressing the depth of our humanity even and especially if the so-call reasoning is collective self-help aka 'black mass personal responsibility'.
The debate over what an artist is will remain to be complex, debated, rethought and continually remolded and reworked, but regardless of the definition/s you embrace....some people reflexivly try to refuse us entry into that supposedly sacred realm, it's not sacred, it's human and squelching the ability to be an artist however you see that, means squelching the ability to be fully human.
When that occurs, the artist and human are stunted and create that which is not inherently bad, but only serves to fill a vacuum in my mind.
I can only imagine what all TP's vast resources could create if he didn't buy into the belief that he had to teach us the ABC's after he made us laugh because of this myth of 'lack of personal responsibility'. And if someone else was doing the more involved and fully human work then Tyler would be free to fill that 'simple entertainment' vacuum, but instead it's the other way around.
Post a Comment