Discovering Coonskin

by Racialicious Special Correspondent Latoya Peterson

Coonskin shirt

On the Cartoon Brew blog, it has been reported that clothing company Supreme is creating a line of tee shirts based on the 1975 film Coonskin.

Now, as an ’80s baby I had no idea what Coonskin was. So I did a bit of searching.


From the Wiki:

Production history

During the production of Heavy Traffic, filmmaker Ralph Bakshi met and developed an instant friendship with producer Albert S. Ruddy during a screening of The Godfather. Bakshi sold Ruddy on making a film based on the Uncle Remus storybooks,[7] which would also contain elements satirizing exploitation films with African American casts.[2] When Steve Krantz, the producer of both Heavy Traffic and Bakshi’s debut feature, Fritz the Cat, learned that Bakshi would work with Ruddy, Krantz locked Bakshi out of the studio. After two weeks, Krantz asked Bakshi back to finish the picture, quickly realizing no one could come close to the job.[7] In 1973, production of Coonskin began under the working title Harlem Nights,[1][4] with Paramount Pictures originally attached to distribute the film.[1][7] The title was eventually changed to Coonskin No More…[5] and finally to Coonskin. Bakshi hired several black animators to work on Coonskin and another feature, Hey Good Lookin’. At the time, there were no black animators working at the Walt Disney Company.[1]

Coonskin uses a variety of racist caricatures from blackface minstrelsy and darky iconography, including stereotypes featured in Hollywood films and cartoons, presented in a manner that was intended to satirize the racism of the material and images rather than reinforce it.[3] In the book That’s Blaxploitation! Roots of the Baadasssss ‘Tuded X by an All-Whyte Jury), Darius James writes that “Bakshi pukes the iconagraphic bile of a racist culture back in its stupid, bloated face, wipes his chin and smiles Dirty Harry style. […] He subverts the context of Hollywood’s entire catalogue of racist black iconography through a series of swift cross-edits of original and appropriated footage.”[3] The film also features a number of equally exaggerated portrayals of white Southerners, Italians and homosexuals, also presented in a satirical context.[3] According to Bakshi, although producer Albert S. Ruddy was “fine” with the satire, it seemed that no one really knew what Bakshi was up to as he worked on the film. “Every one thought the picture was going to be anti-black. I intended it to be anti-idiot.”[6]

In his review for The Hollywood Reporter, Arthur Knight wrote “Coonskin is not anti-black. Nor is it anti-Jewish, anti-Italian, or anti-American, all of whom fall prey to Bakshi’s wicked caricaturist’s pen as intensely as any of the blacks in his movie. What Bakshi is against, as this film makes abundantly clear, is the cheats, the rip-off artists, the hypocrites, the phonies, the con men and the organized criminals of this world, regardless of race, color, or creed.”[8] The film is most critical in its portrayal of the Mafia. According to Bakshi, “I was incensed at all the hero worship of those guys in The Godfather; Pacino and Caan did such a great job of making you like them. […] One thing that stunned me about The Godfather movie: here’s a mother who gives birth to children, and her husband essentially gets all her sons killed. In Coonskin, she gets her revenge, but also gets shot. She turns into a butterfly and gets crushed. […] These guys don’t give you any room.”[2]

Obviously, this is something I had to see to understand. Luckily, there is a little miracle that goes by the name of YouTube.

A search for Coonskin quickly reveals that 9 out of 10 segments of the movie are available for viewing.

Unfortunately, the first fifteen minutes has been lost to time.

I watched the film last week and had so many reactions to the subject matter, I am going to do a full post on analyzing the references and images in the movie, to be published next week.

Until then, I need to ask - has anyone else watched this movie? (Feel free to go watch it now.) If so, what were your impressions?

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Oh Really Supreme? | Parlour Magazine on 24 Mar 2008 at 8:23 pm

    […] Cartoon Brew via Racialicious ] Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and […]

Comments

  1. bradski wrote:

    I haven’t watched the movie but I wonder if pictures on clothing make sense. While all of the images in the context of the film elaborate on Bakshi’s theme, a snippet, as displayed on the shirt, just seems stereotypical.

    Recently, the Rev. Wright’s full speech became available on the Internet. Words that seemed anti-American to some are revealed to be Wright paraphrasing a white former member of the Carter administration. (Notice how little is being revealed about this in the media. It’s sexier to have a racist black man to slice and dice.)

  2. Gregory A. Butler wrote:

    Yes, I have seen Coonskin (not in the original theatrical release - I would have been only 7 at the time it came out - but on cable).

    And, no matter what any of Bashki’s apologists might say, it’s a racist film.

    Bashki probably started out with good intentions (then again, that’s the material they paved the road to hell with…) but it ended up being very racist and stereotypical.

    Just look at the pic on that sweatshirt - a tiny Black man enmeshed between the huge breasts of a tall blonde White woman (because everybody knows - the Black menz just lovez the White womenz!!!).

    Sorry, much as I like Bashki’s body of work overall (and he was a groundbreaker in animation) I just cannot get behind Coonskin.

  3. Nick wrote:

    Carmen: the last clip is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU9F1X5-y0g

  4. Alston wrote:

    Wait, everyone thought that the picture was going to be anti-black, and they let it get produced anyway?

  5. Lauren O wrote:

    I watched about two minutes on YouTube, and then felt nauseated and horrified and turned it off. You’ll have to tell me if it’s racist or satirical, because I can not watch that.

  6. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    Nick -

    I’m not missing the last 10 minutes - I missed the first ten. I came in with kids in a church with a man preaching.

    Lauren O -

    Yeah, I need to edit the piece. Not Safe For Work and tough to swallow. Next week’s analysis will contain a lot of info, but I do recommend you watch it all the way through.

  7. TierList E wrote:

    I . . .think I randomly saw some of that movie on cable once. An oldish cartoon that had every stereotype on the whole planet, throwing out the n-bomb and a lot of gratuitous T and A . . and P. . .?

    I was like eh, around 16-17 or so. It was so blatantly offensive I didn’t get mad I just watched in awe that I could find this on tv. I didn’t see the whole thing (came in in the middle of it and actually eventually turned it because of my immature reaction to nudity/sex).

    It was crazy, and I had the same mixed feelings about everything that hopes to satiricize race. But one thing always stuck out for me since then (assuming this is the same movie):

    Why in the world did that black chick had pink nipples? If I recall she wasn’t too far off of my color, if not a bit darker. That always spiffed me.

  8. Winn wrote:

    I’ve seen Coonskin a couple of times. I too am a fan of Bakshi’s overall body of work, but he is really clueless when it comes to Coonskin, and it’s pretty much indefensible, despite the participation of Barry White, Philip Michael Thomas, and the original Magical Negro himself, Scatman Crothers. Bakshi is intending to satirize not only racism, but also homophobia, the Mafia, and antiSemitism, and uses African folklore and darky iconography transposed to an urban setting to do so. However, he falls prey to the mistakes many with good intentions make when they attempt to tell stories that are not their own. Bakshi ends up reinforcing many of the stereotypes he sought to dismantle, and there are many more layers to the imagery and tropes he presents than even he realizes. Interestingly, Bakshi once described Coonskin as “about blacks and for whites”, and unfortunately, I think that sums it up in ways Bakshi never intended.

  9. Vik wrote:

    Wow I was wondering if anyone else knew that this film existed! We have the VHS available at the store that I work at. Just looking at the box made me cringe.

  10. Ratrace wrote:

    I watched this back in 1990 with a straight from the projects young black friend. I was a liberal and a fine arts major and I naively thought I knew a thing or two. My friend was considerably younger, he was only 17 and a high school dropout. A hard life with a dead father, a mother in prison, and growing up amongst the harshest of enviornments in Jackson Ward, Richmond, Va had made him older than his real age by about a decade. He showed me this video, then called “Streetfight” (this is the first time I’ve heard it called “Coonskin”). I was blown away. I think it was real. It may not be relevant today, but it was when ti was made and even in 1990 it resonated with a certain harsh truth.
    I watched it again with several white friends. They were all appalled at the “racism”. I think they were more uncomfortable with the laying bare of the racial types and images that we see but ignore on a daily basis. To those of you who feel uncomfortable watching this, I suggest you bear through it all the same. There is a message. Actually, there are several messgaes. And pay particular attention to the song that Scatman Crothers sings in the opening credits.

  11. Ratrace wrote:

    BTW, this movie is available for download on mininova. As for the scene depicted on the shirt, it comes with a warning. After trying throughout the movie to get with Miss America, who keeps teasing our Black protagonist with empty promises, he finally manages to have sex with her, and after all that “the bitch gave me the clap.” Sounds about right for most minorities.

  12. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    Ratrace -

    Yeah, it’s a serious film. I was appalled, elated, challenged, disgusted - I finished watching it and I still don’t know how I feel about it.

    I really do want people to watch it, even though it may be odd or painful. Next post will take apart some images and perspectives and use a lot of the interviews with Baskshi to explain points.

  13. Tasha wrote:

    Latoya
    It’s been 15 years and i still don’t know how i feel about it. Winn has some good points but i still wonder if the responsibility lies with the viewer as opposed to the maker. Dave Chapelle battled with this issue of the message being overlooked in favor of ignorance on his show, he decided to stop the show in the end. Coonskin/Streetfight is brutal, but i wonder if a reminder… a good long look straight in the eye of the subtext behind American history/culture is that freezing splash of water needed every once in a while.

  14. nezua wrote:

    whoa. i’ll have to download this and see. i’m not optimistic about using imagery like that. just the pic makes me cringe. but i’ll try.

  15. ebogjonson wrote:

    I’d be careful about writing Coonskin off as mere racist drivel. It’s one of those weird artifacts that is so completely over the top that it kind of wraps around full circle and loops back at you genuinely stranger and more complex than it left.

    A little reception theory is helpful in thinking through potentially toxic cultural artifacts like this. Depending on where you sit on the spectrum of age, gender and race, your experience of the film is different, and I think the differences between those various positionalities are relevant when trying to take a measure of the movie. For example, like a lot of guys my age and color, I was introduced to Coonskin in my teens in the context of video store connoisseurship. The fact that it was completely f’d up was actually the start of the conversation, not the end, and its aspects as a scarce, forbidden artifact with a high film nerd index mitigated the ways it which it also (potentially) constituted a kind of assault on me and my friends. In much the same way that certain black middle class folks like to collect porcelain mammies, my crew collected things like Coonskin. It’s invariably the kind of thing that the weird older black nerd kid down the block (23 and still living with mom!) turned you on to along with (in my case) menthol cigarettes, Led Zeppelin and british comedy on the local PBS affiliate.

    All that said, though, Coonskin is basically a kind of racially tuned porn, and people have legitimate concerns/issues about prOn that I respect if not necessarily share. Additionally, these Coonskin shirts are a curious test case for what happens when this kind of meme goes viral. The shirts present a kind of “pot-for-me,but-none-for-thee” problem for me, in that I’d feel totally comfortable owning and wearing that around as a collectible, this on the basis of certain pretenses/fictions I have about myself: that I can explain the context if I need to, that I operate in a tight-knit and highly culturally literate social space where irony and product fetishism usually trumps offense. But if I walked into a room full of strange white folks and there was some dude wearing that shirt, I might feel the need to keep my back to the wall for a bit until I’d gotten a sense of what the deal was. My attraction to Coonskin involves an admittedly adolescent desire to trangress against a certain black petty bourgeois prudery and propriety. But I think for white kids who gravitate towards Coonskin there is a vaguel related but radically different desire to transgress against “political correctness,” i.e., they basically wear the shirt to eff with “me,” and you know we can’t have any of that.

  16. Ratrace wrote:

    I think Latoya’s got it about right. It is a very difficult to watch movie but it can be extremely eye-opening. If nothing else, it tells you where you stand in regard to racist imagery in the media.

  17. King Geedorah wrote:

    Are the majority of you all serious? I agree with Ratrace’s homie who is from a slum (cause I’m from one, too). Even as an anti-racist activist, I readily admit that Coonskin has to be in my top 10 of all time. Straight up.

    I’m not asking whether or not the images are offensive/accurate, but rather are the RELATIONSHIPS PORTRAYED poetically reflective of the real world? Are there (white controlled) differences and strata in the black community? Do different subjugated groups get fucked over and stop short of total freedom when the US makes a few concessions? Come. On. Now.

  18. Daniel wrote:

    Starting the movie right now. So far the live action sequence is pretty interesting.

    You know, I think that even much of the old black face cinema from the 40s/50s is something we can learn from, and it shouldn’t simply be condemned and destroyed outright.

    It’s still a significant part of our cultural history and we should be able to view it and digest it ourselves, however deplorable that part of our history is in retrospect.

    We should have enough confidence in our own intellects to know that we’re not going to turn into horrible people simply by confronting and examining something horrible from our past. I for one like to form my own opinions on this stuff from personal experience.

  19. Gregory A. Butler wrote:

    Ratrace and King Geedorah,

    Just because somebody who lives in a public housing project likes a cultural product does NOT mean that product is not racist.

    There is a LOT of self hatred among Black Americans, and I’m sure the PJs have their share (or perhaps more than their share) of self hating negroes.

    I still hold to my previous position - Coonskin was an attempt by a liberal White director to make a film that tried to satarize anti Black stereotypes.

    Ralph Bashki did NOT succeed - and ended up upholding and supporting the very stereotypes he was trying to defy.

    Now you can talk all about ‘irony’ and ‘poetically reflective narratives’ and whatever else, but at the end of the day, Coonskin is a racist movie.

  20. Daniel wrote:

    I watched the film yesterday, and I can say that although I haven’t yet fully formed an opinion on it either way, to me it’s definitely too complex and interesting to simply classify it as an artistic failure or a reinforcement of racism.

    Is it a transcendent piece of racial and cultural satire? Probably not. I certainly wouldn’t show it to a child, who wouldn’t be able to do anything aside from accept it all at face value. But I’m not a child, and I don’t believe anyone else on here is.

    And just to get all semantical-like for a moment here, I hate it when people capitalize the words “White” or “Black”. They’re not nationalities, for Christ’s sake.

  21. -H- wrote:

    @ Daniel

    I believe you should try getting “all semantical-like” for a moment.
    Question: If PW Botha were still alive and he moved to the USA and became a citizen, what would that make him?

    Take your time before answering.

    White is a way to label those who fall under the umbrella of white-privilege. Black labels those people descended from the stolen Africans kidnapped to this country and forced to build it.

    I am a Black man.

  22. -H- wrote:

    @ ebogjonson

    Well said.

  23. Gregory A. Butler wrote:

    “And just to get all semantical-like for a moment here, I hate it when people capitalize the words “White” or “Black”. They’re not nationalities, for Christ’s sake.”

    Daniel,

    Late breaking newsflash for ya - in America, White and Black ARE NATIONALITIES - and have been for the last 400 years or so.

    Maybe you didn’t get the memo.

  24. Daniel wrote:

    “Late breaking newsflash for ya - in America, White and Black ARE NATIONALITIES - and have been for the last 400 years or so.

    Maybe you didn’t get the memo.”

    Unwarranted Self Importance.

  25. Daniel wrote:

    -H-

    No, I get it. It’s a matter of principle. People should be proud of who they are. It’s still grammatically incorrect and annoying. But there’s no good reason for me to be an asshole about it.

  26. Ratrace wrote:

    Gregory, I don’t think my friend was a self-hating anyting. He was (and still is) a smart self-aware young man well ahead of his age who wanted to show me a different kind of film. One that deconstructs racial stereotypes and asks me to confront my own pre-conceived notions.
    Perhaps the film doesn’t execute as well as it could but I believe his satire was done well enough so that those who are open to being challenged will see they racist elements that Bakshi is trying to point out to us. Maybe not the best film nor a complete success at conveying its message but one that is honest in its efforts. It won’t convert anyone, but it did open my eyes.

  27. Gregory A. Butler wrote:

    “It’s [capitalizing Black and White] still grammatically incorrect and annoying”

    Daniel, why is it “grammatically incorrect” to capitalize the names of ethnic groups?

    Furthermore, why is it “annoying”?

    Unless you have a problem with Blacks getting the same level of written courtesy as Italians, Jews, Greeks, Hopis, Pakistanis ect ect ect..

    Do you?

    “But there’s no good reason for me to be an asshole about it”

    Indeed there isn’t!

    Ratrace,

    If YOU like Bashki’s racist film, that’s fine (it’s kinda messed up that you’d like a film like that, but that’s your cultural taste… hell, some folks liked Birth of a Nation!).

    But why do you need to hide behind a kid from the projects to justify your liking for this truly messed up film?

  28. Daniel wrote:

    Gregory-

    “Unless you have a problem with Blacks getting the same level of written courtesy as Italians, Jews, Greeks, Hopis, Pakistanis ect ect ect..”

    It’s kind of different, the way I see it. Italian Americans are called Italian Americans because they’re Americans whose ancestors are from Italy. They’re also white people.

    African Americans are Americans whose ancestors are from Africa. And they’re black people.

    Of course many black Americans are undoubtedly descended from people of other nationalities aside from African.

    So yeah, you’re right. I can understand the idea of considering American Black people a unique ethnic group.

    I’m still not going to capitalize the w in “white people”, though.

  29. Ratrace wrote:

    Gregory, I was afraid you’d go the low road and throw my friend out there as some kind of racial camouflage on my part.
    First, nobody has established that Bakshi’s film is necessarily racist. Detail it for me if you care.
    Second, my friend was how I came about this film. To me the fact that here was a young high school drop-out kid who was a lot more clued into the world than I, Mr. Joe College, is what was more important. And he was trying to clue me into some of the things I had missed until then. That’s it.
    But go ahead, tell us how the film is racist. It seems the consensus is still up in the air. Show me.

  30. -c wrote:

    I’ve seen the movie, I got it on DVD from ebay. While in college I watched lots of oldschool blaxsplotation films from sweetback to cotton comes to harlem to the mack; and I even watched coonskin. While coonskin differs becasue it was created by a white guy, I never thought it was racist and I never thought it was too critical of one group but tried to be crital of american on a whole. People forget that the american experience while mutually exclusive is still a collective experience. We all live in the same country, and we all have the same psychic injuries from our past. SO, yeah I liked cookskin, and yes I’m back, but I’m not from the projects. Black folks ain’t a monolith you know?

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.