Difference between revisions of "329--Week 6 Questions/Comments"

From McClurken Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Deprecated: Optional parameter $attribs declared before required parameter $contents is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Xml.php on line 131
(2 Film's relationship to current scholarship or to primary sources from the time)
(3 Movie as primary source about makers/time/setting/genre)
Line 73: Line 73:
  
 
I was watching TCM a few weeks ago and they did a 15 minute feature on Hattie McDaniel, the actress who played Mamie. Before and after ''Gone With The Wind'' McDaniel was type cast into motherly, domestic roles hundreds of times. McDaniel was respected in Hollywood (for what it was/is worth) and won an academy award for best supporting actress for her role as Mamie. Her roles as a domestic caretaker often caricatured blacks by being boisterous and plainspoken. Those portrayals helped make black characters appear lovable and benign, while simultaneously implying that they were subservient and not to be taken seriously. McDaniel and other black actresses were criticized for taking roles which allegedly validated or at least perpetuated the servile status of blacks. McDaniel said “I’d rather play a maid for $700 a week than be one for $7”. I think this movie is as strong a primary source as it is a secondary source, for it reveals the complexity of race relations in this country in the late 1930s. On one hand, blacks had acting jobs, so that is progress from the era of blackface. On the other hand, those acting roles depicted blacks as servants with no desire to advance. McDaniel’s own comment conveys a certain contentment with being a stock character, which sent the message that she was content with being a second class citizen. What did it say to blacks at the time that one of their most beloved actresses was not willing to rock the boat? – Jason Ward
 
I was watching TCM a few weeks ago and they did a 15 minute feature on Hattie McDaniel, the actress who played Mamie. Before and after ''Gone With The Wind'' McDaniel was type cast into motherly, domestic roles hundreds of times. McDaniel was respected in Hollywood (for what it was/is worth) and won an academy award for best supporting actress for her role as Mamie. Her roles as a domestic caretaker often caricatured blacks by being boisterous and plainspoken. Those portrayals helped make black characters appear lovable and benign, while simultaneously implying that they were subservient and not to be taken seriously. McDaniel and other black actresses were criticized for taking roles which allegedly validated or at least perpetuated the servile status of blacks. McDaniel said “I’d rather play a maid for $700 a week than be one for $7”. I think this movie is as strong a primary source as it is a secondary source, for it reveals the complexity of race relations in this country in the late 1930s. On one hand, blacks had acting jobs, so that is progress from the era of blackface. On the other hand, those acting roles depicted blacks as servants with no desire to advance. McDaniel’s own comment conveys a certain contentment with being a stock character, which sent the message that she was content with being a second class citizen. What did it say to blacks at the time that one of their most beloved actresses was not willing to rock the boat? – Jason Ward
 +
 
 +
        Definitely have to agree with Jason here. I was thinking about the movie Hollywood Shuffle (1987) and it deals with the tension  between Blacks actors either playing a stereotyped Black role or making no money at all. It is a sign on what time this film was created in that most actors had no choice and their wasn't really much room for being morally virtouos in choosing roles.--[[User:Shauser|Shauser]] 17:13, 1 October 2008 (MDT)
 +
  
 
I can't take this movie as a primary source at all. No one apparrently ever does work in the south. Every slave is apparintly seen as a "sambo" never tired, never worrying about punishment. They have absolutly no quarrels with being slaves at any point and seem to love their masters. The things I did notice to be kinda right were the southern mens attitude toward war. GWTW depicts the importance of military school to southern men. but none of the men seem to even go to school and life always comes off as a party down in the south. The problem with the movie is that  its writen with a romatic (Art form not love) veiw on life. This does depicts the movie from the eyes of a sotherner. --Matt DeMarr
 
I can't take this movie as a primary source at all. No one apparrently ever does work in the south. Every slave is apparintly seen as a "sambo" never tired, never worrying about punishment. They have absolutly no quarrels with being slaves at any point and seem to love their masters. The things I did notice to be kinda right were the southern mens attitude toward war. GWTW depicts the importance of military school to southern men. but none of the men seem to even go to school and life always comes off as a party down in the south. The problem with the movie is that  its writen with a romatic (Art form not love) veiw on life. This does depicts the movie from the eyes of a sotherner. --Matt DeMarr

Revision as of 23:13, 1 October 2008