Deconstructing Coonskin

by Latoya Peterson

Coonskin is a 1975 film written and directed by Ralph Bakshi, about an African American rabbit, fox, and bear who rise to the top of the organized crime racket in Harlem, encountering corrupt law enforcement, con artists and the Mafia. The film, which combines live-action with animation, stars Philip Michael Thomas, Charles Gordone, Barry White and Scatman Crothers, all of whom appear in both live-action and animated sequences. Coonskin utilizes a number of references to various elements from African American culture, ranging from African folk tales to the work of cartoonist George Herriman,[2][3] and satirizes racist and other stereotypes,[3] as well as the blaxploitation genre,[3] Song of the South,[1] and The Godfather.[2]

Originally produced under the titles Harlem Nights[1][4] and Coonskin No More…,[5] Coonskin encountered extreme controversy before its original theatrical release when the Congress of Racial Equality strongly criticized the content as being racist, although none of the group’s members had seen the film.[1][2] When the film was finally released, Bryanston gave it limited distribution and initially received negative reviews. Later re-released under the titles Bustin’ Out[1] and Street Fight,[1][3] Coonskin has since been reappraised, with many considering it to be one of Bakshi’s finest works.[1][3]

—From the Coonskin Wikipedia entry

I rewatched Coonskin over the weekend, and like I said in the original post, I still don’t know how to feel. I think Winn has the best summary of Coonskin:

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.

Over the past few weeks I have read a lot of the interviews that feature Bakshi, trying to understand his mindset in creating the film. While I encourage everyone to watch the film, I have done a short analysis of some of key components of the film below.


Black Cultural References


Archy and Mehitabel

Bakshi explains a lot of the reference points for the film by drawing from his own experience and some what forgotten cultural cannons. In part 3 of 10, there is a monologue by a black woman describing the demise of her relationship with a cockroach. This is the only time in the film a black female character speaks for herself, not specifically in response to a male character. The words coming from Mehitabel are tinged with loneliness and regret, describing the pain of abandonment that black women experienced in that era.

In an interview with Metroactive Movies, Bakshi puts the reference into context:

Metro: Another sequence that I wondered about was the pastiche of George Herriman and Don Marquis’s “Archy and Mehitabel,” in a monologue about a cockroach that leaves the woman who loves him.

[NOTE: Marquis (1878-1937), a columnist for the New York Sun, was one of the few who managed to produce poetry on a deadline. His most famous character was a poetry-writing reincarnated cockroach named Archy, and his best pal, the alley cat Mehitabel. It sounds cute, though it isn't; often Marquis rivaled e.e. cummings. Marquis' illustrator was George Herriman, creator of the noblest comic strip of them all, Krazy Kat.]

Bakshi: Herriman is my favorite cartoonist. He was mulatto.

Metro: That’s right, he kept it a secret, though. So that’s why he’s referred to in the film.

Bakshi: The deal with the story of Malcolm the cockroach who leaves the woman who’s been taking care of him is based on personal experiences of black men I knew who couldn’t afford to feed their families, so they left because they couldn’t stand to see them suffer.


Br’er Rabbit and Black American Folklore

While watching the movie, Rabbit is caught in a tough situation where he is almost killed by the shakedown pastor he stole money from. Struck by inspiration, he starts begging “Please don’t throw me out the window to that cold ground below! Shoot me, strangle me, do anything you want…just don’t throw me into that garbage can!” Predictably, they throw Rabbit out of the window and I chimed in for the next line: ” ‘Cause I’se born and raised in a garbage can.”

My boyfriend looked at me like I was tripping. “What,” I asked, “You never heard of Br’er Rabbit?”

Apparently, he hadn’t. Br’er Rabbit (or Brother Rabbit or Briar Rabbit) is part of that dying tradition of American Folklore – things I grew up learning (along with Johnny Appleseed, Paul Bunyan, and John Henry) but that are not considered standard knowledge and may or may not be taught in school. Attributed to slave narratives (though also linked to Native American traditional stories) Br’er Rabbit tales feature a trickster who can be the villain or the hero using his wits to outsmart his enemies. This was a clever inclusion on Bakshi’s part.

The Muhammad Ali/Sonny Liston Fight

This one was a cultural reference I didn’t get. Near the end of the film, Brother Bear becomes a boxer for the mafia. In response, Rabbit finds his own boxer (who represents Muhammad Ali) to take on Bear. The other boxer gets into the ring and taunts Bear, calling him an Uncle Tom. My boyfriend then drew a parallel to the Muhammad Ali/Sonny Liston fights which appears to be backed up by the movie. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Miss America

Coonskin speaks frankly about the legacy of slavery. After Mehitabel’s soliloquy, Brother Rabbit, Brother Bear, and Brother Fox walk around Harlem taking in the view from the streets. After watching a homeless man joyously picking a “genuine cotton sweater” out of the trash, Fox curses the man for getting excited about “some goddamn old sweater.” Rabbit cautions him to remember that the man’s father was a slave, and that “some brothers were beat up so bad that they never come around.”

The next scene is the entrance of Miss America. Represented as a buxom blond with light freckles, America is often pursued by hapless black men in search of reconciliation, but ends up abusing them physically or accusing them of rape after luring them to her side. Black men are often shown fighting her, trying to distance themselves from her, or trying to win her favor, but a true union with America often remains frustratingly out of reach. It is an apt metaphor for the African-American struggle to correct a dysfunctional relationship with our nation, but sexualization of the interactions between the black men and Miss America reinforce stereotypes as it challenges the relationship dynamic.


The Idea of False Salvation

It could a pointed commentary on shakedown artists, fake preachers who hustle the poor out of money with false promises of salvation…or it could be construed as an indictment of black church culture. There are multiple scenes in Coonskin when people who are supposedly of faith act completely out of character – I think the interpretation of the scenes depends on your own life experiences.

The Role of Women

In this film, women are generally decorative objects with no will or sovereignty of their own. This is demonstrated clearly in part 6 of 10, when a racist cop is lured to Rabbit’s lair and tempted by a topless live-action black woman performing a provocative dance while another scantily-clad animated black woman drugs him. Throughout the movie, women are seen as prostitutes or possessions, decorative arm candy, a prize to be had. We have no voices here. When I watch the film with men, it is almost as if we are watching two different movies.


The Mafia, Gay People, and being “Anti-Idiot”

I haven’t been able to find a good explanation as to the role and prominence of effeminate gay white men in Coonskin from Bakshi. I’m sure he was trying to make some kind of statement, but whatever it was is lost on me. I did find a few quotes about the Mafia imagery (emphasis mine):

Metro: Coonskin is a very angry film. Can you describe what your state of mind was like writing it?

Bakshi: Um, I’d say it was a series of different states of mind. The issue is, if you want real freedom, freedom comes with being able to look at what’s right and what’s wrong about your people. It isn’t about shoving things under the rug. When I made the film, there were con artists in the black liberation movement. That explains the part about Savior manipulating the masses, and the Mafia helping to spread drugs under the protection of racist cops.

There isn’t a person growing up in America, who doesn’t have run-ins with some racist, Jew or Italian joke, and the question is how did you react in those moments? I tried to analyze these situations, so these movies worked on that level. I was also very young and naïve when I made Coonskin, naïve enough to think that everything would be OK as long as I was honest. Another thing that I was doing was making fun of the black exploitation movies, the ones where if you’re white, you’re dead.

[...]

Metro: While the film has a reputation for racism, it is really at its most angry when it goes after The Godfather, who pits Brother Fox, Brother Bear and Brother Rabbit against each other. The Godfather looks like a red-eyed warthog, and he’s voiced by an uncredited Al “Grandpa” Lewis.

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. As for what [producer] Al Ruddy thought, Al could care less! Al thought Coonskin was wonderful … every one thought the picture was going to be anti-black, but I intended it to be anti-idiot.

[...]

Metro: There is one baffling image: The Godfather’s wife tries to kill her husband as punishment for sending his sons out to get killed. And after she herself is shot, she turns into a butterfly.

Bakshi: She’s meant to be a character of great purity. Giving birth is an act of great purity. 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 [Mafia] guys don’t give you any room.

The Future of Coonskin

As I wrote in the original post, the tee-shirt line Supreme is selling expensive tee-shirts with Coonskin prints on them. In addition, Al Sharpton’s protests of yesteryear are mostly forgotten and cinematic icons like Spike Lee and Quentin Tarantino are open fans of the film.

Other interviews with Bakshi have reported that the Wu-Tang Clan was interested in creating a sequel to Coonskin:

UGO: I read you met with the Wu-Tang Clan recently.

RALPH: Yes, they were a lot of fun. They want to do Coonskin 2. Rappers love Coonskin because it’s pretty much early rap with the poems and attitude. I walked into a meeting with the Wu-Tang Clan and two of the guys got up and recited Coonskin in its entirety. I’ve spoken to [Coonskin producer] Al Ruddy, who just won an Oscar for Million Dollar Baby. Albert says he’d love to do it and I’d love to do it with the Wu-Tang Clan. We’ve left it with the agents, who will probably kill it, but let’s hope for the best.

It appears that Coonskin has officially hit cult status, despite not being released on DVD.

However, there is one question that still remains – is Coonskin racist?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Coonskin Revisited at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on 29 Apr 2008 at 6:01 am

    [...] couple of weeks ago Latoya posted an entry titled Deconstructing Coonskin here at Racialicious. I was aware of the film prior to this although I had never seen it in its [...]

Comments

  1. Gregory A. Butler wrote:

    Latoya,

    A couple of thoughts on the Liston Ali thing.

    Sonny Liston, the son of a sharecropper from rural Missouri who didn’t even know his own birthday and who reportedly never learned to read or write, began his adult working life as an enforcer for cosa nostra gangsters in St Louis.

    If people who owed money to loansharks needed to be beaten up – he did it. If a union picket line needed to be attacked – he’d be part of the goon squad.

    And, he’d also do some prizefighting on the side, where his day job beating-people-up skills were put to good use (and the gangsters he worked for got to make more money – by running illegal betting action on the side and, occasionally, having Liston take a dive – deliberately lose a fight – if it meant that they wouldn’t have to pay out quite so much money to the bettors).

    When he fought the boxer once known as Cassius Clay (but now and forever immortal as Muhammad Ali) it was billed as a battle between two different kind of Black men.

    And it kinda was – Muhammad Ali was a clean cut Olympic champion, an ardent champion of African American freedom (who actually threw the medals he won at the 1960 Rome Olympics into the Ohio river as a protest against Jim Crow segregation in his hometown, Louisville) and one of the most prominent NoI Muslims in America at the time.

    More importantly, it was billed like that to the fight fan public – and in particular to the segment of the fight fan community that illegally bets on these contests.

    Liston, the favorite (with the White bettors at least – many of whom hated Ali’s Black pride and nationalism with a passion) is suspected by some of taking a dive in that fight – possibly at the behest of the cosa nostra guys from St Louis who still ran his career.

    Of couse, Ali was the superior fighter – he had been professionally trained, unlike the street fighter Liston – so it’s also possible that Ali would have won no matter what kind of deal Liston’s bosses were trying to pull.

    This was kind of a precursor for other Ali fights where he was the big bad militant Black man fighting against “Negroes” who “knew their place” – which is how the Ali – Frazier fight (Ali’s first since he was banned from boxing for refusing to be drafed into the Army to fight in Vietnam) and the Ali – Foreman “Rumble in the Jungle” in Zaire were billed.

    Ali basically built a career based on the persona he put on display at the Ali – Liston fight.

    As for Liston – he died under mysterious circumstances in Las Vegas a few years later, in what may have been a mob hit made to look like an accidental drug overdose.

  2. "Daigoji" aka Kareem wrote:

    This was an interesting read and, like many of Bakshi’s films, Coonskin has indeed hit cult status and many DVD afficianados have been clamoring for a release.

    The Fight at the End:
    I think I disagree with your boyfriend on that one. For some reason, the “uncle Tom” context seems to fit more the battle between Ali and Frazier – if you remember the environment of the time, Ali had just converted to Islam, and put Clay vs. United States behind him, the boxing and African American community was split between the “patriotic” Frazier and the “daft-dodging” Ali – or the “Uncle Tom” Frazier and the “Real Brother” Ali…

    Interestingly enough Ali lost the first (the infamous hook in the 15th put him down), but won the rematch…

    Is Coonskin racist?
    Great question, and I found myself associating it with other Blaxploitation films of the period – while they were designed to “empower” they often, like coonskin, only reinforced negative stereotypes.

  3. Black Canseco wrote:

    Ty Cobb is one of the greatest hitters in baseball history. But he was an insufferable bigot. Bobby Jones was arguably the dominant golfer in the first 75 years of the PGA’s existence; but if Tiger Woods tried to get a game with him, Jones would sooner take a 9 iron to Wood’s head than tee up with him.
    Closer to this post, Al Jolson was an immensely talented performer, but no matter how many black folks told him that his blackface act was racist and hurtful, he continued doing so because their opinions didn’t count nearly as much as his white audiences’ did.

    This notion that you can’t be biased if you’re exceptionally talented or successful is kinda absurd. As if the two things were mutually exclusive.

    I’ve seen Coonskin twice. Once when I was about 10, and again in the last couple years (my oldest sister made me sit through it on VHS).

    It was racist then, as it is now.

    Now is Bakshi a bigot? I’m hard-pressed to say no. The “i didn’t mean it like that” excuse gets a little old after awhile. At some point you just have to call BS and challenge folks to look at their actions even if they may be the result of sub-conscious/ internalized-learned behavior.

    As for Spike Lee and Wu-Tang liking it, isn’t that sorta like the “I’ve got some black friends” excuse? Just because a few black folks laugh at it, that makes it okay, right?

    By this line of thinking Disney, LooneyToons, etc. shouldn’t have re-cut all the old Bugs Bunny, Woody Woodpecker, Tom & Jerry, Jungle Book cartoons to remove the overtly racist, anti-black language and visuals from its movies. But they did so because they knew what it was no matter how they tried to defend it.

    If Coonskin were primarily focused on other ethnic groups such as Jews or Mexicans or Chinese or Arabs employing comparable visual and tonal stereotypes would there be as much hemming and hawing over its merit as there’s been over CS over the years?

    As a piece of animation, Coonskin’s pretty high-end, but content-wise it simply is what it is.

  4. Black Canseco wrote:

    Glad to know that Q. Tarintino, one of the most schlocky over-hyped auteurs in history, likes Coonskin, too. I think that says a lot about him when put in context of the over-the-top hood images of black folks he’s put forth over the years.

  5. cacy wrote:

    I saw *CoonSkin* in 2003-2004 at home on VHS and I liked it. My roommate was a skater and the video was his. He was also associated with Supreme so from that perspective I can, barely, understand the connection between skateboarders and the imagery of the film. My roommate was/is a black guy from Guyana, South America and had a white girlfriend at the time.

    When I saw the film I was into the overall idea about how blacks were/are treated by America, the blonde dragon lady. I really didn’t care about the mafia or gay stuff in it but there were moments where I cringed at the portrayal of black men and women… I dont care what your intentions are, depicting me or people who look like me, that way to comment on racism or whatever is gross.

    I also know some of those Supreme guys and without talking to them, I can’t say I understand why they would publish a shirt with that imagery other than they thot it looked cool.They are not that deep so as to put out a message shirt about racism. Why would they? They are in the business of making money.

    I can also say with certainty Supreme’s clothes suck. Why would a company associated with skateboarding carry a line of trousers with shallow pockets? I bought a pair of pants one day a few years back. It was POURING RAIN in NYC and I was soaked… I walked into Supreme, got a pair of pants, changed and hopped on my deck after the rain stopped. I could not move three feet without my change falling out my shallow pockets. I made sure they knew my feelings and since then I’ve never felt or supported anything they put out. BUT I’ll let you know who supports them: Young Japenese people with cash to burn and white kids in the burbs. Maybe they would line up around the block to cop that t-shirt. Japan’s got issues with black folks anway so maybe that shirt would appeal to those kids. This is not a sweeping general statement…. Its a fact; alot of clueless Japanese people are walking around with burnt skin and burnt hair trying to look like “black” people. Its twisted.

    Anyway, Bakshi may have been trying to comment on racism, the mafia and all that but the adage is true: the road to hell is often paved with good intentions.

    I think there’s a secret part of Bakshi that’s giddy with satisfaction whenever he sees black folks depicted as stereotypes in his film. The Wu Tang Clan making a sequel? Please. MAybe if RZA pays what he owes to Raekwon and Ghostface. All those fools are twisted.

  6. Black Canseco wrote:

    The clothes are definitely a hipster/smart-ass collegiate kid move. I doubt there’ll be much constructive discussion that’ll come from these t-shirts, either way. People will either dig ‘em or not.

    I can remember many of the same people who defended Apu and his KwikiMart on the Simpsons as being funny and harmless getting all worked up when the Black Bart Simpson shirts got hot. It was like “we” can do this but not “you”.

  7. Black Canseco wrote:

    One more question:

    Bakshi uses “satire” as his primary defense. But how it satire when you’re taking your targets out of context?

    Blaxploitation films weren’t created or financed by blacks. They were created by mainstream studios. (Sweetback’s badass the first so-called blax film was done totally outside the hollywood system not as satire but to have one movie where the black street underclass was the hero. All the other movies were white studios co-opting the ethos of that film and perpetuating stereotypes and black actors trying not to starve by taking the only major parts they could get.)

    The Black Church Hustler is only worth satirizing in the context of all church hustlers (the white ones, too) and understanding the role of Christian churches in the black community.

    I could go on, but i just don’t buy it. Really good satire conveys a context and understanding of the target, not just “here’s something i don’t like–let’s rip on it” vibe.

  8. "Daigoji" aka Kareem wrote:

    Black Canseco:

    Hey not sure if the blax comment was directed at me, but I feel compelled to say something.

    Yes, I am aware (and it is widely known) that the blax films weren’t created or financed by blacks. That said, you can’t deny the “status” many of these films have in the black community. Some of these films are considered, for better or worse, as iconic and are celebrated by the black community. That is the dirty truth… from Hustle Man to Blackula, Cleopatra Jones and Dolemite…

    While mainstream hollywood made these films to make bank, and yes many actors took these roles not to starve, at the time then (and in many cases now) they are praised by many (not some) as empowering.

    That is why I brought them up when referencing Coonskin. Bakshi claiming it is a satire to distance himself from the content still doesn’t take away from the poignant reality that many in the African American community have embraced and love the film.

    If we simply accept Bakshi did this film to make money, like Hollywood did with the blax films, that still leaves us with an interesting reality – these films were and are celebrated by brothers and sisters… that reality in of itself opens the door to numerous “introspective” questions we need to ask.

    Keeping that in mind, how different is Coonskin from 2004′ s Soul Plane?

  9. Dumi wrote:

    Latoya, I’ve been waiting for this update. I was not aware of Coonskin until you posted on it before and I couldn’t wait to get my hands on it. I ran to Harlem and got a copy and I think it’s pretty good, not great, but pretty darn good. Measuring if something is an effective racial satire is a losing game, you will always have folks on both sides saying “no, it missed its mark.” I rarely hear consensus on successful racial satires. Given your analysis above, most of which I share a similar perspective on (though I will admit I missed the Ali fight thing), I’m surprised you came out with a mixed review. The movie is explicitly taking things to such an extreme i can ONLY read it as a critique of race and race-related imagery (though Bashki’s gender and sexuality stuff is not as well done). From the historical connections (B’rer Rabbit) to the portrayal of Harlem (often discussed as a promised land) Bashki did a lot right. Coonskin is different because it’s uncomfortably funny. It plays well to an audience familiar with tropes and the context of the time. Of course I will admit, I can’t imagine I would have received it the same in a mixed race audience, but in my living room I really took to it. But in the end, most racial satires are not the same when they’re fully consumed in the public sphere. Thanks for continuing the discussion.

  10. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    I’m surprised you came out with a mixed review. The movie is explicitly taking things to such an extreme i can ONLY read it as a critique of race and race-related imagery (though Bashki’s gender and sexuality stuff is not as well done)

    There you go, Dumi.

    My review is mixed because I am a black woman. I have two vested interests: womanhood and blackness.

    The two male friends I watched it with came out a bit uncomfortable but they overall enjoyed the movie and the pacing. There is a lot of truth in the tale and a lot of very timely references.

    There is the whole issue that comes up with trying to tell stories other than your own, so there is that. Bakshi was calling things as he saw them, so while he did a lot better than say…Neil LaBute…he is still speaking through his own white lens.

    To me, Bakshi tried to do a little too much in this movie and a lot of things did fail. Like I said, I did not get a clear understanding of what was going on with his commentary on sexuality besides portraying gay as evil.

    In addition, the silencing of black women’s voices in the film cannot be overlooked. I mentioned it as a small paragraph, only because there was a lot to get through. There isn’t a single Pam Grier type woman to be found. We are rendered into objects, to be admired, to be fucked, but not to actually exist. So in some ways, Bakshi was telling a black male story, but had no real use for the black female in a mutual story of survival. The Blax films got that, even though they were created and produced by whites.

    Hard for me to call it compelling when you miss something that big.

    So like I said, the review is mixed. A big blend of mastery and hackery, something that was complicated more by all the interviews that I read with Bakshi in them. He seemed to want to tell his story, his way, and fuck everyone else – which is commendable. But I am not sure I buy the film as satire. Commentary, yes. But satire that reinforces more stereotypes than it challenges? I’m having a hard time with that.

    So for me, Coonskin sits in limbo, kind of a not here nor there. I did enjoy the film and the discussion it prompted among my friends – I am not sure about having it be a stand-in for actual racial discourse, which is what it appears Bakshi was hoping for.

  11. Black Canseco wrote:

    Kareem,

    My blax explanation wasn’t aimed at you or really anyone in the current convo, but more at addressing Bakshi’s claim of satire and examination.

    That black folks like Coonskin–specific numbers of which are up for grabs–might be irrelevant in some regard. I’m sure if we as around we can find people in an ethnic group who “like” or “laugh at” stereotypical and slurish portrayals of their communities. but has that ever been the soul determining factor for whether or not something is wrong? If so, then we need to leave the female consumers of hiphop plus the stripper/video girls, etc. alone because there’s enough of them that are okay with the portrayals of women that we should all just chill on the anti-misogyny efforts.

    It’s hard to like this movie, but i’m all for discussing it.

  12. cacy wrote:

    Re: Sweet SweetBack…

    This was the one of the first independent films made outside the hollywood studio system. Besides van Peebles writing, directing, scoring, starring and producing, it was made by also made by black people, white people, Asians, Latinos, men, women, gays and so on. I’ve never approached it as a blaxploitation film and doubt I ever will.

  13. Persia wrote:

    Just to point out– mostly in context of blaxploitation rather than Coonskin– things can be empowering on one level and still have negative baggage. I think for the most part people are recognizing that, but I wanted to say it explicitly.

  14. Vee wrote:

    Is it racist. No.

    Did his satire clearly and successfully communicate his intent? No.

    Is Coonskin a good animated film? Yeah, it incites feelings in many viewers and it is still being discussed, enjoyed and loathed.
    Different from films like Soul Plane? I don’t have an answer to that, but I will say there are people who really enjoy films like Soul Plane, or a Flavor of Love that have no socially redeemable value. How different is some of the material in Coonskin from Spike Lee’s Bamboozled, Living Color, or some of the Chappelle Show’s skits?

    Comedy can really make some people feel uncomfortable. Cartoon imagery especially can cause tension with some audiences. I discovered that some people find any portrayal of a dark person with big lips uncomfortable. I recall the controversy with the images of Kara Walker were thought to reinforce stereotypes, and we’re talking about paintings forget an animated film. There’s more to the perception of ethnic images, I’m just scratching the surface.

    Latoya, I recognized the total absence of a strong black female, or better yet, a developed black female character when I first saw the film a while back. Then again that happens often in animation. You practically do not exist.

  15. cvalda wrote:

    “Spike Lee’s Bamboozled, Living Color, or some of the Chappelle Show’s skits?”

    Interesting thing about that, Chappelle changed his style when he noticed a white crew member laughing – and felt s/he was laughing ‘at’ rather than ‘with.’ And Bamboozled really isn’t positive about African American artists playing to stereotypes.

    It’s all a bit thorny, and I think there’s a risk here of saying “provocative=good” or resorting to intentional fallacy (the idea that artistic intent trumps affect on audiences.)