Race/non-WASP ethnicity in classic films

I think you've said this all very well, dmnemaine.

The stereotypes exist, and they certainly were milked back in the day.
All the same, the film IN ITSELF doesn't suffer from the performances.

I suppose what I mean is, (simply going further on your point)
there are several stereotypes of minorities. Someone who's got more education than I have probably knows about racial stereotypes that I've never even noticed. And yet, I can still see some of the common ones. For instance, blacks were often played down as the low-class off-in-the-background happy-go-lucky minstrels - sort of like how we see them in this film. The thing you've got to think about though is, there is nothing inherently wrong with this display of talent.

So for example - another crude stereotype is that blacks are ignorant workhorses, unable to think and reason, and only good with physical tasks. Even with that harmful stereotype existing, things like the NFL or NBA, where many black athletes show their physical prowess, are not offensive to the race as a whole. Rather, they're very flattering and impressive. Not only do athletes make an entertaining performance with their skills, but they are also deserving of our respect through their talent and clear intelligence.

So to me, films like these, IN THEMSELVES, work the same way. Just like when I'm watching an NBA game, impressed by the talent of the players and appreciative that they've chosen to display their skills in this fashion, I watch this movie and I really respect the African American actors/singers/dancers. Their wonderful musical performances are not in themselves demeaning; to me, they're flattering! I am grateful to all the actors that worked in the movie for giving such a memorable performance.

Of course I keep emphasizing the term 'IN ITSELF,' because AS A WHOLE, the minstrel-performance obviously presents a problem. If blacks can ONLY be minstrels or workhorses, (as they may have been long-term in Hollywood) that's a cruel sentiment that they are somehow inferior. Watching the film AS ITS OWN ARTISTIC WORK, however, provides an opportunity to see a lot of talent, and to appreciate it for artistic reasons.

I have a theory (simply a personal theory) that, if this film did not contain that certain musical sequence, it would have a higher IMDB rating. Not saying I know this for sure; it's only a theory. I enjoyed this movie more than I enjoyed Night at the Opera, and I can't help but wonder whether that one scene has lowered the rating. That, in my opinion, would be sad. It's like you say, some people seem to let certain performances ruin an entire film, and this is indeed one 'extreme' as you mentioned. You put it very well; movies from another time period can make us think about problems-back-then without robbing from the positive experience. Hope this was a good read :-)

This was a musical comedy. People generally grin while singing in a musical unless they are singing a sad song. It's not supposed to be representative of what people do "all the time".

I just watched it again and the only "work" I saw anyone do during the sequence, was an old woman baking a cake. And the bit about excessive grinning seems to be an exaggeration as well (unless you count any smiling face as such - in which case the crooning white boy was probably the greatest offender). I'm not saying it went against any stereotype, but one would hardly expect a brief upbeat musical number to do so, anyway.



"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

dmnemaine, your posts make sense to me.

We all have oft-repeated types of posts that annoy us on a site like this -- for example:

- this is the most overrated film/show/actor ever
- is he gay/is there a gay subtext?
- this old movie is boring (from a younger poster)
- you kids only watch things with explosions (from an older poster)

etc.

One of my candidates for a most annoying category of post is the "stop judging old movies by modern PC standards" one. And I am an old woman who mostly watches films made in the 1930s-60s.

Here's my problem with those posts (well,besides the fact that they make all of us old folks look bad -- talk about stereotypes!); I don't remember ever seeing a post in which someone actually judges an old film by modern standards. That is to say, I don't see people posting something like "this writer/producer/director should have known better - nobody else was doing this at the time."

I see people posting that something they saw in an old film was racist (or sexist, or just less likely to be seen now, like characters smoking non-stop). They noticed something, they are mentioning how it stood out to them. That's their honest reaction.

Sometimes it is clear that they know why it was considered OK when the film was made, sometimes it's clear that they don't, sometimes I can't tell. In any case, I see no reason to insult them for just mentioning it. It just doesn't get under my skin the way it seems to for some old-film lovers. 

I think that how things that many of us find offensive now (and, in some cases, found offensive 40 years ago) were common 80 years ago, how times have changed, how the Code was involved, etc. are interesting things to discuss.

And, maybe it's the teacher in me, but I thrill to the idea that there are people younger than I am out there, who think that bigotry looks bizarre, that stereotypes stand out as odd. That's to their credit, and to the credit of us old folks who raised them.