The Help

[KSig RC]

This review from AV Club was kind of my big fear for the movie - well, other than overexposure of Emma Stone ... it seems like a preponderance of "Civil Rights" movies follow the "white [girl] acts as conduit as black folks rise up against cardboard cut-outs of injustice!" trope.

I guess I shouldn't expect subtlety from Hollywood, but would the overall story really change if the "Anonymous" author was black?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

This review from AV Club was kind of my big fear for the movie - well, other than overexposure of Emma Stone ... it seems like a preponderance of "Civil Rights" movies follow the "white [girl] acts as conduit as black folks rise up against cardboard cut-outs of injustice!" trope.

It never ends.

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I guess I shouldn't expect subtlety from Hollywood, but would the overall story really change if the "Anonymous" author was black?

Yes. There either wouldn't have been a book published in the first place or the author would've been mysteriously killed by angry white folks.

Generally speaking, white folks like stories of white folk saviors more than white folks like stories of the Joe Louis Clarks and Jaime Escalantes.

See, for the first ever, I was trying to avoid the obvious and just enjoy the movie. I admit that reading GCers say that they have become more interested in reading about the era made me say "hmmmm...to have the privilege to now be interested in an era that is such a huge part of history and present-day dynamics."

[Still BLUTANG]

definitely plan on seeing it, but unfortunately not until NEXT week. I will avoid this thread like the plague until then.

BTW, there's great ticket discounts at AMC, Regal, and Cinemark theaters.

[CrimsonTide4]

Saw it this morning. The theater was packed for a weekday morning release. I laughed and I cried. This was a great book to movie translation. I read the book when it was first released and didn't recall anything of critical importance missing.

[LXA SE285]

Originally Posted by CrimsonTide4

I read the book when it was first released and didn't recall anything of critical importance missing.

Just curious, as someone who hasn't read the book: How did you—and others—feel about the author's use of dialect?

[CrimsonTide4]

Originally Posted by LXA SE285

Just curious, as someone who hasn't read the book: How did you—and others—feel about the author's use of dialect?

Dialect doesn't bother me. I don't see it as "Negro dialect" but others might. Zora Neale Hurston used dialect too. *shrug* Bigger fish to fry in the grand scheme of things.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Yes. There either wouldn't have been a book published in the first place or the author would've been mysteriously killed by angry white folks.

Right - but we'll suspend disbelief about cars that turn into gigantic killer robots ...

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Right - but we'll suspend disbelief about cars that turn into gigantic killer robots ...

Transformers are real. It's those cheesy Gobots that are fake.

Soundwave: "Eject...eject...eject!"

[rhoyaltempest]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

It never ends.








Yes. There either wouldn't have been a book published in the first place or the author would've been mysteriously killed by angry white folks.

Generally speaking, white folks like stories of white folk saviors more than white folks like stories of the Joe Louis Clarks and Jaime Escalantes.

See, for the first ever, I was trying to avoid the obvious and just enjoy the movie. I admit that reading GCers say that they have become more interested in reading about the era made me say "hmmmm...to have the privilege to now be interested in an era that is such a huge part of history and present-day dynamics."

I'm happy for that too but it's still sad that it always takes a movie for people (all races) to be interested in that era. The racial history in America is a huge part of American history and yet people still think MLK day for example, is a day for African Americans. Slavery, Jim Crow, the Minstrel era, Civil Rights, etc...it's all American history and all of us should know more about it, plain and simple.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by rhoyaltempest

I'm happy for that too but it's still sad that it always takes a movie for people (all races) to be interested in that era. The racial history in America is a huge part of American history and yet people still think MLK day for example, is a day for African Americans. Slavery, Jim Crow, the Minstrel era, Civil Rights, etc...it's all American history and all of us should know more about it, plain and simple.

I didn't say I was happy for that.

I said "...to have the privilege to now be interested in an era...." That means it is a sign of privilege (the same type of privilege that allows some people to pretend that movies like this could only be entertainment) to be oblivious about something that has been such a big part of people's lives. That isn't a good thing and it doesn't make me happy. I consider it pathetic.

ETA: For those who don't know, "sad," "pathetic," or "a sign of privilege," in this instance is not about taking offense with someone. It is about overarching dynamics that span across individuals; and what is embedded in these dynamics. Newsflash: Topics pertaining to race and ethnicity do not require taking offense with someone.

[LaneSig]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I didn't say I was happy for that.

I said "...to have the privilege to now be interested in an era...." That means it is a sign of privilege to be oblivious about something that has been such a big part of people's lives. That isn't a good thing and it doesn't make me happy. I consider it pathetic.

But the problem is, just because it was a "big part of people's lives" doesn't mean it was a big part of someone else's life experiences; even it was such a huge event in other's experiences.

Truly not being sarcastic, but people are raised by other people who may not emphasize certain aspects of history or other experiences. I honestly don't remember much being taught about the Civil Rights movement or the effects of Jim Crow laws when I was growing up. I think I went to the only high school in the U.S. that never read "To Kill a Mockingbird" - which, like it or not, gets some people interested in learning about Jim Crow laws and leads to learning about the Civil Rights movement.

Most people don't learn about:

- the discrimination that the Irish faced when they first moved to the U.S.

- the discrimination and anti-Chinese laws that existed in the late 1800s/early 1900s

- the Japanese experience in internment camps in WWII

-the early pre-Stonewall protests in the LGBT community to change discriminatory laws aimed at them

-how the U.S. government led a coup that ousted the Hawaiian monarchy and annexed what was a foreign country and the discrimination that the people of that country had to face in their own land afterwards

Before the argument starts: yes, I know that traditionally the African-American experience in the U.S. has been more discriminatory and had more laws against them (with the exception of the anti-Chinese laws).

My point (and I do have one) is that you seem to be taking offense with someone who is saying that they never really thought about something before and now they are. It wasn't in their experience in the past. Shouldn't it be a good thing that they are now thinking and want to learn? Look over my list. How much do you know about those experiences? And, yes, the people who had those experiences feel just as strongly about them that other people do about theirs.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by LaneSig

But the problem is, just because it was a "big part of people's lives" doesn't mean it was a big part of someone else's life experiences; even it was such a huge event in other's experiences.

I am not talking about life experiences.

Originally Posted by LaneSig

Truly not being sarcastic, but people are raised by other people who may not emphasize certain aspects of history or other experiences. I honestly don't remember much being taught about the Civil Rights movement or the effects of Jim Crow laws when I was growing up.

I consider that pathetic.

Originally Posted by LaneSig

My point (and I do have one) is that you seem to be taking offense with someone....

No.

[LaneSig]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I am not talking about life experiences.



I consider that pathetic.



No.

Point, can I introduce you to Dr. Phil? She seems to not have seen you.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by LaneSig

Sorry about that. I thought you would be interested learning about the experiences of other people instead of ignoring them. Because of, you know, how pathetic it is to ignore what other people's experiences and opinions are. Enjoy your day.

You assumed that you were in the position to teach something. The irony of that in THIS thread is amusingly overwhelming. Save the lessons for when you are the most knowledgeable person in the room.

[LaneSig]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

You assumed that you were in the position to teach something. The irony of that in THIS thread is amusingly overwhelming. Save the lessons for when you are the most knowledgeable person in the room.

I've never assumed anything in life except that water is wet. I would never claim to be the most knowledgeable on anything. My point was that the original poster is now interested in an aspect of history that she had never learned about and that is a good thing.