That's cool
 

You misread me Senusret. The purpose of seeking to assemble, was to maybe reach a positive outcome over the use of letters that were infringed upon, secondly for a "committee" to assemble to allow for discussion about how the subject matter may be altered if and when referencing true greek organizations and stepping. Lastly, you never know, maybe if there would have been an assembly with some representatives prior to the creation of this movie, it may have allowed for a better show of support, response to and outcome for this wackumentary, all of which is the opposite of what happened. Not to alter the holistic production, or to halt the artistic creativity associated with this movie, though, I don't see any art in this jokah.

I didn't misread you. Your "secondly" part of your message is exactly what I meant.

7thSon, I hear you with the committee although I don't know if I agree with it - but my point for posting is to ask the question of how is the portrayal of stereotypes here any different from what the AA man wrote or produced Boys N the Hood did? I wonder if he formed a committee to determine whether his movie would garner the support or disapproval of the portrayed population - in that case, the AA population at large. Movie directors and producers probably are often portraying whatever is in their minds w/out forming any kinds of groups or anything else to determine how it will be received by the affected population. This is just another example of that.

How is Boyz N the Hood any different on that front?

SC

LOL. I know Soror. But we both know how expensive an endeavor that can be. Guess they found another, less expensive solution.

SC

SummerC...
 

SummerChild,

The difference to me is, the subject matter in and of itself. The contrast between the making of a movie about steppin', as opposed to one about the 'hood/ gang bangin' and all of that, makes me pose the question, who would that be sacred to anyway, if only to the people who were into that lifestyle? But to make a movie that involves an action or event that is sacred to many, many who traversed the terrain to become Bruhs or Sorors, should in my opinion, be treated a little more tenuously. What is the cost for depicting the sacred nature of an action that comes as a result of a sacred journey? The cost is the demystification of the action/event and to me, the possible de-mystification of the journey. Do we have to allow everything to become demystified in our culture and commercialized? Na.

I agree with you about the creative mindsets that make movie magic, with no true concern about the affects of the pre-affected population. But to what cost is there, during the making of a movie that depicts and details Doughboy and Tre' growing up in the hood? You have to decide that yourself. For me, there was nothing sacred lost when that movie was made. No one was trying to keep the secrets of bangin', mystified. The nation was already keeping record of the African American lives that were lost, decade to decade, year to year. But, there was a cost to making that movie. As a matter of fact, one cost that was immediate was when real lives were lost when fights and crap broke out at the movie theaters nationwide. An additional cost was, when those actions by some of us AAs, actually confirmed some of the stereotypes that existed about us, prior to that movie.

7thSon

7thSon, I guess in order to get my point one would have to identify with the people in the Boyz N the Hood movie as AAs, not merely as gangbangers. As an AA, I felt that those stereotypes would pervade the minds of our nation as to what generally goes on in our neighborhoods, which is not the case in many instances. In the same way, the nation as a whole will generally be deceived as to what stepping is really all about. My analogy was to make the point that I don't know how realistic it is to expect movie makers to consult with populations that may be affected by however the movie maker is portraying a group. For example, although you don't identify with the gangbangers, probably the portrayal of AA men as gangbangers has shaped the way in which others view you. Not that I care about that, but my point is just that no one asked *you* before they went making that movie...although it probably had an affect on the way that you are viewed so why should we expect these AA men to ask us now that this movie may affect the way that BGLOs and stepping is viewed?

The probably *should* ask but even if they did, do we expect them to change the story if the reaction is negative? Shoot, they didn't even change the story in the face of a threat of a lawsuit. Stubborn, stubborn.

SC

On your campuses, to whom do you promote step shows? How about your organizations in general?

I have always gotten the impression that information on the D9 was on a sort of "need to know" basis, and was never really exposed to it, though I was very involved on my campus. The first time I learned about stepping was at a presidents retreat attended by NPC, IFC, and NPHC groups.

Maybe I misinterpreted the messages that I got about intake, and generalized them to the point where I didn't want to ask anything about BGLO's, but my point is, if your groups are worried about the impact of this movie, combat it by educating more people about your orgs.

Interesting. The last trailer I saw of the film, no one was wearing any letters at all... just blank hoodies.

*Wait, just saw it again. There appears to be something on the shirts in the first clips. I can't make it out. :rolleyes:

True, but they did make some changes. I would like to see more of us speak out just as passionately regarding these other films too. Whether a film is glorifying violence or minimizing the significance of our institutions, when it is creating a false and dangerous image of us to us we shouldn't stand quietly by and allow it to happen.

Lord...

The campus and community.

I saw the trailer on Tues. when I went to see Dreamgirls. It was much longer than what is shown on TV and did show the letters.

Now it is possible they changed the movie, but not the trailer.

That's great. My guess would be that most of those people are smart enough to realize that the step show may be a big event, but it hardly defines your sorority/fraternity.

I think that if you promote your orgs, and have been doing so all along, then nobody is going to change their whole opinion based on one movie. Don't get me wrong, I certainly understand why some orgs would choose to boycott, but one movie shouldn't undo years of history in anyone's mind.

Many people are attracted to the things that seem entertaining. Just like other GLOers who identify with Greek Week and fraternity parties but not service and scholarship. I believe this is just more salient for BGLOs due to the history of media misrepresentation that blacks have had in this country, as well as what BGLOs were founded to represent.

My understanding is that the formal boycott is really about the unauthorized use of letters and not about people's perceptions of us. I understood the informal boycott to be about people's perceptions of us based on the movie.

Understandable. Even as a member of a GLO on a mixed campus, I knew more about step shows than about any other activities done by the Black Greek Council, and I would guess that they knew even less about us. I would agree, though, that it was worse for the BGLO's, because I suspect they really did a lot more service than most of the IFC and PHC chapters.

I guess my earlier point is that, for better or for worse, there is a certain shroud of secrecy surrounding the D9. Is that intentional, or is that just the impression I get from the closed nature of intake?

FWIW, step shows have alway impressed me with the amount of dedication, teamwork, and tradition that goes into stepping, and I hope some of that will come across in the movie.

While matters regarding membership intake are not discussed in a general forum such as GC, other aspects of BGLO life, such as community service, has never been a secret. Why? Because that is the basis for our organizations.

AKA owes DST naught.