Why didn't Mr. Simon stand up for himself??
Why didn't he clarify himself before the principle?
shareHe felt it was unnecessary and that this kinda crap shouldn't have any place in his work, true or not.
share
MovieChat Forums > That's What I Am (2011) Discussion > Why didn't Mr. Simon stand up for himsel...
He felt that it was more important to stand up for his principles. To deny he was a homosexual would have been caving in to the prejudices of ignorance and intolerance. The Principal clearly understood and respected his decision.
shareBecause the author wanted to make a point about homosexuality. So he wrote this crappy film script.
shareOf course it would have been easy for him to simply deny it.
But the easy way is not always the right way. Both Mr Simon and the Principal hoped that just being a great teacher would be enough - sadly it wasn't.
Prejudice comes in all sorts of forms.
"They who... give up... liberty to obtain... safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Exactly. His belief was that it didn't matter if he was gay or straight. If you are good at your job, it shouldn't matter if you are gay or straight, black or white, Christian or Jew.
shareThe idea of the teacher refusing to affirm or deny the rumor of homosexuality is based on the premise that the question itself has no legitimacy. This was reflected in another film called The Contender (2000) starring Joan Allen, Gary Oldman and Jeff Bridges: A vice-presidential candidate (Joan Allen) is being vetted and she seems to be a great choice for the job until a damaging story about her sexual exploits in college becomes public. She refuses to deny or confirm the rumor based on principle, i.e.: the story has no bearing on her ability to be vice-president and that by denying it she would be lending credibility to the people who raised it as an issue to begin with. In "That's What I Am", both the principal and the teacher feel that their reputations as educators should speak for themselves. The principal, however, having two college-aged kids, is more vulnerable and has no choice but to cave, whereas the teacher, with no dependants, refuses to bow to the pressure and dignify the question with a response. Therefore, he resigns.
shareI appreciate the way you clarified the issues, and brought in THE CONTENDER, which I hadn't thought about, but you're right about the similarities. Both good, thoughtful movies. I missed noticing about the principal's kids (watching late at night and tired). Anyway, I quite enjoyed this movie overall. I tend to think the effortless ways the black and white kids interacted, and some aspects of related issues were probably unrealistic for the time, no matter where the story was taking place, but I can understand why the writer/director did that (and such historical glossing is not so unusual these days).
Actually, I'd be interested to hear input from anyone with more knowledge and expertise about the issue of how much integration there was in public schools in various geographical areas at the time, and how peacefully or not things went in that regard. I notice in some movies made in the '50s and early '60s, set partly in public schools, the student population is shown including both black and white (and probably other ethnic heritage) kids, and it's not made an issue. I can't remember now titles of the movies, or who starred, but I remember noticing that aspect when seeing them, probably on TCM. I know how things were at the schools I attended in Dallas, TX, from early-mid '60s on, and the changes we went through. We had some drama in the area of integration, though much less than in some other areas, even of the same city, and nothing like the horrors that went on in some other places (much of the deep south, Arkansas, Boston, etc.), about which we hear so much. Anyway, I wonder how realistic the portrayal of that aspect of the kids' lives in this movie was.
Multiplex: 100+ shows a day, NONE worth watching. John Sayles' latest: NO distribution. SAD.
The world is full of morons and when we have to start justifying ourselves to Tea Party type morons then we are all lost.
shareI guess you haven't ever watched the news when the non-"Tea Party type morons" start demanding answers to unnecessary questions or demanding that people are fired for thinking or believing differently than they do. Liberals do it just as much. You are clearly not as tolerant as you'd like everyone to believe.
Just some food for thought,
Peace, Y'all!
Loralee :)
He did stand up for himself. He did so by not cowering to the Freel's and showing his students that having dignity, tolerance and compassion is the way you become a great person.
"Do you even remember what you came here to find?"