Keskustelujen arkisto

Quote from user: Lars Jensen"Song of the South" is racist? In which scene do the filmmakers try to convince the audience that blacks are inferior to whites?!? (Which blacks aren't, of course.)
The entire film depicts the white and black characters as existing in a relationship that mimics that of slavery, this is depicted as an unambiguously good thing--the natural order of things. No, it's not malevolent racism, but it's certainly deeply patriarchal. You don't need to burn crosses to be racist.

As for the other issue, I notice you conveniently leave out the part where I note that "I'm against censorship on principle, of course." It's not a principle if you make exceptions willy-nilly, is it? And in any case, it's a pretty wild logical leap from "I wouldn't want my children watching it" to "I don't think anyone should be allowed to watch it.

Quote from user: MorequackPerhaps your expressed desire to engage me in sexual activity is warranted, and I'm flattered, but nevertheless it is unrelated to the fact of the matter. The pendulum always swings both ways; racism's counterpart is not reverse racism, it is political correctness taken to the nth degree where it festers this day. The two are complementary and equal opportunity ills. Get well soon.
Give me a break. I say I didn't like a movie because it's racist. You fly into a rage and accuse me of therefore being like a Nazi--because that was the main problem with the Nazis, right? They expressed mild displeasure with things they found offensive? Only one of us is being irrational here.

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr322/CAC_003/facepalm1.jpg
ANYWAY... um... who likes Splash Mountain...?

I sure do. I think it's great.

Quote from user: Kneon[url]ANYWAY... um... who likes Splash Mountain...?
Why the facepalm? You link to a critical article on "Song of the South", and we comment on that article. What's wrong with that?!

Quote from user: Lars JensenQuote from user: Kneon[url]ANYWAY... um... who likes Splash Mountain...?
Why the facepalm? You link to a critical article on "Song of the South", and we comment on that article. What's wrong with that?!
It got a little more carried away than I expected. ;)

I am probably going to step on somebodies feet, but......
How did we, the bad bad white people, obtain the good good black slaves?
They where sold to us by a black chief from a rival tribe/country in Africa.
And where do you find slavery today?
Well, in Africa and some Arabic states.
So please stop this nonsense about the good old cartoons and comics being politically uncorrect. Of course
they could be, if done today, but honestly.....? The comics and cartoons depicting f.ex. Elmar Fudge as a stupid
white man hunting rabbits is ok, but a black man loving playing dice is not? What about the hill-billy in The Simpsons?
There is a lot of incest and a bundle of children implied, but hey, that´s just fun, because he´s white?
I love them all: the "nigger" who loves to gamble, the hunter who´s too stupid to get the rabbit or Daffy Duck (who´s black)
and the hill-billy/red-neck from The Simpsons. They are all just cartoons. If you don't like them then read a book instead.
If you see it happening in real life, then react. But please don't mix old cartoons/comics up with real life as it is today!
English is not my native language, but I do hope you can see what I am trying to say.

PS.
I am living in 2010 and I am aware of that. Why are you not?

Quote from user: MorequackIn fact many slaves were treated very well and were quite happy with their employment, whereas some were not.
Slavery was not "employment." It doesn't matter if Slaveowner A treated his slaves like royalty; Slaveowner B could still be Simon Legree, and if you were his slave, you were stuck working for a ruthless, violent tyrant, with no recourse to defend yourself.

Need I mention that even slaves who were well-taken-care-of were barred from most types of public leisure and entertainment? And equality under the law was just a dream.

Returning to SONG OF THE SOUTH??when I was a kid, my parents took me to see it, and discussed with me what lay at the root of little Johnny's mother and grandma being such strict, unappealing authority figures.
My mom, to me: "David, do you know the real reason why Johnny's family doesn't trust Uncle Remus to take good care of Johnny? Because they're prejudiced against blacks, and we'll tell you what that means."
Later in the film: "See, Uncle Remus has decided to leave the farm because he doesn't like the way he's been treated by Johnny's family. Just a few years earlier, Uncle Remus was probably a slave, and if he didn't like his treatment then, he couldn't even leave. How does that make you feel?"

I know how it made me feel! In the bigger picture, it doesn't matter if a few slaves led halfway decent lives (...even if I'm glad that some human beings were spared needless suffering). Slavery, by its very nature, was/is indefensible.

A few more words about SONG OF THE SOUTH: the movie is what I'd call well-meaning??but still fairly naive and dated. As I noted above, it presents elements that can be seen as anti-racist, and asks us to sympathize with Uncle Remus when he is treated badly. But it also commits the "crime" of making Remus' character arc the only remotely realistic one, and portraying other black sharecroppers as leading an idyllic life, replete with some stereotypes. In that way, the film is very much a product of its time.

GeoX, we're not arguing whether slavery was wrong or not. Off coarse it was wrong!
But the South was depending on it, as a means of production apparatus - to make the plantation business rentable.

Then came the Civil war - the North won and the slavery was abolished, physically - but it keeps pupping up, as a state of mind, in America! And this seems to be the cross you bear.

What seems to be wrong, is the fact that people got hanged, burned or drowned up till 1966 (maybe later) in the Bible belt and you - kind'a - overcompensate by lecturing us, that this is wrong. We know, but we're beyond that state; Uncle Tom or Remus is an equal, a kin, an old Man, who has the ability to let this young boy learn from his wisdom - a fable, nothing else!

What makes this movie controversial is not the story, but the fact that it brings up bad conscience, I guess...

P.s.: VoBo said it much better, but I had to get it out - and, edited - David!