Racial Disney-fication


There's an aspect of this movie and others like it, such as the made-for-TV remake (also by Disney) of the musical Annie that I personally find somewhat troubling. I wonder if anyone else feels so as well. What I'm talking about is the anachronistic way in which race relations are offhandedly portrayed in these films. The black people in these films seem fully integrated in the town in which the movie takes place, River City (which Meredith Willson supposedly based on Mason City). Black and white children are shown playing together in the streets. All of the black people in the movie wear the same kinds of clothes as the white people and exist alongside them without issue. In the scene in the cafe, two of the patrons are a white man and a black woman sitting at the same table. The movie takes place in 1912. While it would have been nice if this kind of environment was actual, it probably wasn't. Most blacks at the time were not at the same class level as whites, and had to worry about things like the KKK. Racially motivated lynching was not uncommon, nor was segregation. I feel that the way blacks are portrayed in this film whitewashes the truth about this country's history, and perhaps even trivializes their struggles at the time by erroneously portraying an environment in which those struggles didn't exist. I'm more annoyed by this than angry about it, but I do find it offensive.

reply

I absolutely agree and noticed it right away. Historically it is totally incorrect but Disney is worried more about being politically correct.

reply

What's all the excitement about anyway! The Music Man is a musical comedy, nothing more. I doubt if Disney Studios intended it as a historic documentary of early 1900's small town USA. You can see that sort of thing on The History Channel.

reply

Iowa was a union state in the civil war, and it is directly north of Missouri, a slave state. it's very possible that escaped and freed slaves retreated north, so it's not unrealistic to have black people in 1912 Iowa.

Don't look into the Death Star, or you will die.

reply

TxMike, you make a good point. Why stir up things that our country would like to move away from... No, not forget, just move past. I agree that certian ethnic minorities have struggled to gain equality in the past, and their struggle should not be forgotten, but it should also not be dwelled upon. We need to teach our children that everyone is equal in God's eyes, not just the whites or Robert Preston's of the world. (But the original will always be first in my heart)

reply

[deleted]

While I'm delighted to see more diversity on TV than ever before, I don't think it works when inserted unrealistically into a period film. Yes, "The Music Man" is a fantasy, and it does require a big suspension of disbelief, the same one that other musicals ask for: that we buy it when the characters spontaneously burst into song. We'd never expect a group of teens in real life to start dancing expertly to music of mysterious origin in a library or at a town meeting (or even for a large number of teenagers to BE at those places <wink>), but in the context of a musical, those synchronized antics don't elicit a "yeah, right" response.

But the film is generally NOT asking us to suspend our disbelief when it comes to something else: the time period. They've been careful not to include anachronistic costumes, props, vernacular, music, etc. Therefore, when none of the 1912 characters finds it unusual that there is a black salesman in the train car, a black boy on the uniformed baseball team, or multiracial pairs on the dance floor, the film has thrown the otherwise believable period accuracy out of balance.

The integrational optimism the movie presents, and then some, would fit wonderfully if it were a contemporary (or exuberantly stylized, like 1997's "Cinderella") reworking of "The Music Man." (Actually, that might be kind of neat to see... "You've got Trouble with a captial T and that rhymes with P and that stands for PlayStation™...")

reply

If we follow this logic, no non-white actor or actress would ever get a meaningful part in any period play or film, unless the subject matter was linked to racism, slavery or whatever. Many theatre and other performing arts companies have chosen to simply ignore race and ethnicity when casting unless it adversely affects the content of the text. It's called "color-blind casting". I recall a member of of our community theatre group who (25 years ago) worried about a planned production "A Raisin in the Sun". She said the cast of the play would want to be involved in other productions which would be a problem. "After all," she said, "how many plays are there with roles for butlers and maids?" What about roles as doctors. lawyers, cops or robbers? It never even entered her mind that blacks could play roles that weren't servants, because she had never seen a play or film where they did. This is what "color-blind casting" helps to overcome.

"The Music Man" is a light-hearted fiction, not a Ken Burns documentary. If you can't suspend your disbelief enough to accept a few black actors milling about with the townsfolk, you're not paying attention to the play. Since the author intended this play to be a fond look back at his boyhood home town, let's imagine that there are black people living in Iowa in 1912 (there were, of course) and that the stubborn, but basically good-hearted population of River City doesn't throw sheets over there heads every time a black person walks down the street. Is that too much to believe in River City? There don't seem to be many nasty people in this town (how realistic is that?), so maybe some of the white citizens are even friendly with the black ones. And wouldn't these black River "citiziens" be just as excited about the Wells Fargo wagon or as concerned about that pool hall as any other member of the community? So why is this a problem? Maybe you should just take note ("Say, one member of the barbershop quartet is Chinese. How about that?") and get back to enjoying the show.

Let's suppose that near River City there's an all-black college, founded by abolitionists, and the teachers and students wander over to the town now and then to spend their money in the local businesses. Some may even live there, not next door to Mayor Shinn perhaps, but in the town. Isn't that at least as plausible as the idea that there shouldn't be any blacks on the street because they all - 100% of them - would be stashed away in rich white peoples' kitchens and pantries? Wait a minute. How many Greeks or Italians were there in Iowa in 1912? Let's be sure we don't have too many Greek or Italian-looking actors in this play.

No, Danny Glover should not be considered for the role of George Wallace and Tom Hanks won't ever get the lead role in "Raisin". But Robert Guillaume did play the Phantom of the Opera. So if it's just a matter of actors playing everyday people in a musical comedy, I think it's an issue we should be able to get past.

reply

I agee, in the real world things were different in 1912. But this is a fantasy. A real feel good movie. Disney's Music Man depicts a truly perfect place to live, where people of all colors live in harmony and share the same ideals, and where the town folks burst into song at a moments notice. While we don't want to forget, we don't need to be reminded constantly of the harsh realities of life either. We live it. We do not need to see it in every media event. Life would become unbearable. We have the Drama and Documentary's for that purpose. Musicals are a wonderful way to escape a diseased reality. Relax and enjoy them. They are our treasure and pleasure. In my opinion Disney is right on target by adding diversity. Good for them.

reply

There were a lot of changes that Disney made, all geared toward a "kinder, gentler" River City. Note Winthrop's referenced interactions with Professor Hill. In the original, he got a multi-purpose pocketknife from Harold so that he could learn to whittle and spit ("I got the spittin' down real good!"). In Disney's version, they went fishing together (I'm not sure where, perhaps the foot bridge) and he had a jar of worms. Actually, I'm surprised they included that, since that showed a lack of concern for the welfare of the fish (or worms). Also, there was extensive use of telephones in the "Wells-Fargo" number, which I can't help but wonder if it was funded by AT&T or someone similar.

The thing is, they kept so much identical (so much so that it often looked and sounded like mere mimickry) that when things here and there were changed, it had a jolting effect. (Especially when Ferris turned into Prince Charming and danced with the librarian. Is that the "focus on the romantic relationship" they were referring to? If so, it seems more like a wide-zoom to me.)

I think it's somewhat pointless to argue about historical accuracy vs. modern-day equality in acting roles, when so much of it was distractingly and arbitrarily changed. (Was I the only one annoyed by the Bruckheimeresque soft-focus children-echo-laughing scene where Broderick handed out the instruments in slow motion while the sun seemed to supernova behind him?)

reply

I must reply: WHO CARES!!! Why can't we just enjoy the show and not worry about who is sitting with who and what it was really like back then, etc. THIS IS A WORK OF FICTION!!! Maybe if we all just forgot about the color or creed or what the other person has that we don't, we might actually start to get along without all the strife that is rampant in our society. JUST LEAVE IT BE AND ENJOY THE SHOW!!! You might just have a happier life.

reply

I agree; I found this jarring as well.

I understand the good intentions, but you can't go back and rewrite history. American society of the time was NOT integrated, and the idea that a black woman could go into the same ice cream shop as whites at the time is just absurd.

I understand the desire to provide "equal opportunity" in productions, but here it just stuck out like a sore thumb....not to mention the fact that this sort of treatment "whitewashes" (so to speak) the racist history of this country. Iowa was a pretty progressive state, but it wasn't THAT progressive. We shouldn't forget that history; those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

Now, in the proposed remake/movie version of GUYS AND DOLLS, I can see having, say, a black Sky Masterson (Taye Diggs???) and/or black Sarah Brown; but here it just doesn't fit and it's dishonest to boot.

reply

With all due respect, the movie is about a con man and the issues he has to deal with. Why are some of you reeling about the "color-blind casting" thing? This shows that some of you can't look past color yourselves and just watch an enjoyable movie. You're not suppose to notice things like that, and if you do, that says more about you than the movie.

Although some of the points about what people of color had to go through in this country are very good and well-stated, keep in mind:

A: this is fiction, not fact

B. it doesn't need to be historically accurate (as far as race is concerned because race/racism is not what the movie is about.)

Get a damn life, people!

reply

Dollface-5 wrote: Get a damn life, people!

Well, I wouldn't say that. The other day I read a 250-post thread on this subject at google.groups, in rec.arts.theatre.musicals, and the disagreements that arose were ugly and moronic. This thread is like something from another world, and I think everyone here, on both sides of the issue, has presented an intelligent and polite argument. Must be some kind of record...

Anyway, I think I'm in the pro-colorblind casting camp. It depends on the story and the role, and I think it works in this production. As someone else here pointed out, history is complex enough that the idea of blacks and whites getting along in a small Iowa town (at least in the small ways presented in the movie) isn't too impossible. It is true that this could be misleading to viewers who don't know much about the country's racial history (e.g. young kids), but chances are they'll find out about that from other sources.

reply

Don't Worry about it Disney made up for daring to have black actors appear in The Music Man by having absolutely noe black people at all on the Continent of Africa in their animated remake of Tarzan.

"It's a diferent kind of flying,altogetther.
JJ Johnson

reply

I have to agree with a previous poster on this one. I know it's not exactly historically accurate to portray black River Citizians on equal footing with those in the town who are white, but it employs the "color-blind casting" tactic which theatre directors often use. If we had to cast shows like this with complete racial accuracy, then we'd only see minority performers appear in "Showboat", "West Side Story", and "Flower Drum Song". There should be more opportunities out there than that! And there weren't even any minority actors in leading roles, unlike the previous productions of "Cinderella" (which I will admit did go a bit overboard with Cindy's step-family and the royal family) and "Annie". Speaking as a minority who's appeared in a very color-blindly cast "Music Man" (featuring a Hispanic Marian, a white Winthrop, and a black Mrs. Paroo), I am very grateful to have had the opportunity to appear in that musical without the director wondering if there really would have been an integrated River City. While I won't cry racism, because you seem to be an intellectual, reasonable person, I will ask you to think about the chances provided to minority actors and actresses when a director is more concerned with talent than complete, 100% historical accuracy.

reply

I saw Denzel Washington play Richard III in New York. Now I know Richard III wasn't black but it sure was a great performance.

reply