Difference between revisions of "329--Week 12 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→b Inaccurate/issues:) |
(→a Right:) |
||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
The young racist brother makes mention of the Klan, saying that they don't have to do any of the secret identity, robe-wearing, secret handshake, oath making, etc. stuff with their council meeting. But he is essentially comparing the intentions of each to one another. By the 1950s the Klan had lost significant support form its height of 3 million in the 1930s. It would not have been acceptable for a man like Mr. Thompson to join the Klan in 1956, however the violent actions these men take at the end of the film (while only the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement) might as well be acts of Klans men. Its hard to believe people were able to get away with this kind of thing when blacks were within their constitutional rights to do everything they were doing in protest. The gradually rising concerns of Mrs. Thompson, as a moderate, open-minded woman for her time, was believable. By looking at two fictional characters who played their roles within the civil rights movement along side countless other unnamed people, we can see how the full conversion of a privileged white person to the cause was a process that took a combination of time, initial open-mindedness, and motivation to actually participate. Mrs. Thompson, who is good-hearted but totally clueless at the beginning, becomes involved in the movement only because of the subtle clueing-in by her respected maid Odessa. I thought his was highly believable. The non-violent technique of Odessa's son when he was being beaten by the white boys is suggestive of the future SNCC protest techniques. The impact it had on the white boy beating the pacifist black boy showed how the technique was, to a degree, effective-- they could not claim defense or any other bull**** justification. However, in the case of evoking the aged stereotype of the "lazy negro" throughout the film by white folks about the blacks who were slaving over their dinners, cleaning their homes and doing it all on sore, bleeding feet from their "long walk," no one seemed to see the hypocrisy in their own statement. --Jackie Reed | The young racist brother makes mention of the Klan, saying that they don't have to do any of the secret identity, robe-wearing, secret handshake, oath making, etc. stuff with their council meeting. But he is essentially comparing the intentions of each to one another. By the 1950s the Klan had lost significant support form its height of 3 million in the 1930s. It would not have been acceptable for a man like Mr. Thompson to join the Klan in 1956, however the violent actions these men take at the end of the film (while only the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement) might as well be acts of Klans men. Its hard to believe people were able to get away with this kind of thing when blacks were within their constitutional rights to do everything they were doing in protest. The gradually rising concerns of Mrs. Thompson, as a moderate, open-minded woman for her time, was believable. By looking at two fictional characters who played their roles within the civil rights movement along side countless other unnamed people, we can see how the full conversion of a privileged white person to the cause was a process that took a combination of time, initial open-mindedness, and motivation to actually participate. Mrs. Thompson, who is good-hearted but totally clueless at the beginning, becomes involved in the movement only because of the subtle clueing-in by her respected maid Odessa. I thought his was highly believable. The non-violent technique of Odessa's son when he was being beaten by the white boys is suggestive of the future SNCC protest techniques. The impact it had on the white boy beating the pacifist black boy showed how the technique was, to a degree, effective-- they could not claim defense or any other bull**** justification. However, in the case of evoking the aged stereotype of the "lazy negro" throughout the film by white folks about the blacks who were slaving over their dinners, cleaning their homes and doing it all on sore, bleeding feet from their "long walk," no one seemed to see the hypocrisy in their own statement. --Jackie Reed | ||
| + | |||
| + | I also found the scene where Mrs. Thompson stands up to her husband very compelling. She had the benefit of a college education but of course, as a woman of the era, didn't put it to use, and if she did all she could do was secretary work. The very suggestion of this to her husband though was extremely undermining to his role as the man of the house in the 1950s. The performance of it too, however, was wonderful. She mixed him a drink like a good little wife to show that she was willing to keep the norm to some extent, but she also did it to calm him before hand. Her nervousness at standing up to her husband like this, and of course in fear of causing a rift as it did, and her nerves showed. Likewise, Odessa displays two very contrasting personalities. At work and when confronted by a-hole cops, she is quiet and submissive, but at home she has as much word in her house as her husband, if not more. It is hard to watch her have to swallow her pride each day in order to keep her job or keep out of trouble. This was an excellent way to subtly express the urgent desire of southern blacks to change their world into one where they could live without fear in their public lives. --Jackie Reed | ||
== b Inaccurate/issues: == | == b Inaccurate/issues: == | ||
