Ballad of the Magical Half-Negro (by Baz Luhrmann)

by Guest Contributor SLB, originally published at PostBougie

I could never be a real militant. Because there’s no way a real militant would’ve sat through Baz Luhrmann’s latest epic, Australia, which clocks in at a superfluous 3+ hours, and dug it as much as I did. It’s a film rife with knee-jerk infuriation potential. It’s got everything to rankle the revolutionary: racial slurs, a brother taking bullets for Hugh Jackman, an abusive white-on-black relationship, the phrase “I’m as good as Black to those people out there,” and even a little blackface for good measure. But I’ve yet to mention the race-baiting facet that receives the brightest spotlight: the magical Negro (and Half-Negro, as it were) archetype.

From the first frame, a puerile, adorably accented voice works overtime to endear you to what will inevitably be another racist tale of White colonists winning the day. But even so, the charms of that voice are hard to resist–especially when you see the chocolate-drop face it belongs to. Nullah (Brandon Walters) is a biracial pre-adolescent (maybe ten? eleven?), happily living on rundown property called Faraway Downs with his aboriginal mother, a few other servants, and a villainous White rancher named Neil Fletcher. Aboriginal mom, villainous White rancher… you probably already see where this is going.

Enter Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman. All you need to know about them is that, by the second hour of the film, Nullah is in their custody and by the third hour of the film they’ve lost him to the desolate Catholic mission camp where all mixed-raced Aboriginal children in a priest’s or policeman’s plain sight were herded, after being stolen from their secure, healthy Aboriginal households. Will the stubbornly feuding, but madly in love Kidman-and-Jackman reunite to reclaim their “creamy” boy, Nullah, by the film’s
bombastic ending?

This is a Baz Luhrmann flick. Come on, fam.

But speaking of “creamy,” Nullah is the butt of a ton of racial slurs throughout the film, the former being chief among them. He’s also called a half-caste, a half-half, a half-breed, and an in-between. He often forlornly muses, “I notta Black guy. I notta White guy,” and seriously, this little boy is an instant cavity; he’s that sweet. And he’s indomitable. The child is nearly killed no less than five times in this film and he never, ever seems at all upset about it… which is fortunate, because if he were prone to depression, his character would have Tragic Mulatto written all over it and, really, in a film this full of stereotypes, we really didn’t need that.

Perhaps Nullah’s obliviously carefree attitude has something to do with his grandfather, King George, known to the White community surrounding him as a Bushman/witch doctor/magic man, who stalks Nullah
throughout the film. They sing to each other in these white-whale-like voices that manage to guide them to safety no matter how screwed up things are—up to and including Japan’s explosive obliteration of Darwin, which King George just stands amongst, never bothering to take cover, looking cryptically around like he’s causing it all, and the foot soldier blasts that ravage the quaint little mission camp where Nullah and all the other “creamy”/half-breed/half-caste biracial babies are housed.

There’s an overabundance of Aboriginal mysticism in this film. King George and Nullah are responsible for everything from calming a charging herd of cattle to finding water in the “Never-Never,” a dust bowl from which no one has ever emerged alive, to preserving the love of Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman. The Whites in the film look up to them and/or fear them for their feats, without ever having to consider them equals. Case in point: when King George approaches a renovated Faraway Downs to collect little Nullah for his walkabout, a traditional Aboriginal rite of manhood, Nicole Kidman feels entirely justified in trying to forbid the proceedings. (In the end, she comes around, and the last shot of the show is Nullah pulling off his Westernized polo shirt and trotting into the bush with dear old granddad.)

Oddly, though, even with all this going on, I still adored this large-scale hodgepodge of half-stories. I don’t know what that says about me, except that I’m obviously not a militant. And I have high Baz Luhrmann tolerance—and even higher Hugh Jackman tolerance. Add to the mix a cute little Aboriginal kid whose real life story includes beating leukemia at the age of seven and… well. I, like some of Aboriginal Australia, am one step closer to accepting the Prime Minister’s formal apology for more than a half-century of stealing biracial kids and selling them into indentured servitude. I said one step closer. And it’s a really small step… I just… well? What can I say?

Sappiness covers a multitude of sins.

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

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. A Footnote on Australia at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on 30 Dec 2008 at 12:00 pm

    [...] the Wind isn’t really the best comparison this writer could have made. (Though, to be fair, SLB’s review does show that the comparison might be spot-on.) Between lot of interesting criticism of the novel [...]

  2. Australia Day 2009 « Zero at the Bone on 27 Jan 2009 at 8:32 am

    [...] there are reviews more specific than mine. Here’s a range of reviews and here’s what they had to say at Racialicious. Also at Racialicious, a tourism ad tied in with the movie. It incorporates all [...]

Comments

  1. Jess wrote:

    Question: is the kid the same one in the Australian ministry of tourism (or whatever it is) advertisements where the mystical kid suggests people go on walkabout (and bring some dollars to Australia in the process)?

    The magic-negro/native bit is an old trope, no?

    No small irony: I was looking through a Rand McNally atlas I have published in 1968 or so. There’s a chapter on “races of the world” and it files Australian aborigines among “caucasoids.” The classification was based on the aborigines having straighter hair, certain facial hair patterns and facial characteristics. Of course, this thing predates DNA studies but still… weird to think that at that late date such things were still common.

    Three hours of Australia? You’re a braver one than I. I mean, i thought the Lord of the Rings was good, but I wasn’t unhappy that Peter Jackson cut some stuff to clock in a shorter film, you know?

  2. GEC wrote:

    Haven’t seen the film, however your review sounds consistent with Baz L’s aesthetic. I don’t think it’s helpful to judge our reactions to “beautiful cinema” too harshly. It is made to seduce the senses. I want to recommend another Australian film, 10 Canoes, which tells an Aboriginal story for Aboriginal peoples. It is beautiful without apology or appeasement of colonial sensibility or guilt. Consider it a refreshing post-Baz L. eye-wash.

  3. Roxie wrote:

    I came out of Australia feeling the same way you described…and I also wondered, since this was clearly a throwback to the old MGM films of 30’s/40’s/50’s, if the racism was part of that?

    Dunno.
    I was simotaneously sappied and angry.

  4. Matthew wrote:

    You’re right, the Magical Negro trope is a tired and true ploy that seems to carry resonance with audiences. Here’s a draft of a paper coming out in the journal _Social Problems_ in 2009 that addresses the Magical Negro phenomenon: http://people.virginia.edu/~mwh5h/MN.pdf

  5. Eva wrote:

    Matthew:

    Thanks for that link, I’m going to read that.

    I did not see the film, but from what I’ve heard, I’m glad I didn’t waste my money. People ask my why I adore the movie “Flyboys”, well it’s because the black pilot doesn’t die in the end, and doesn’t do anything heroic to save the white character, in fact the black pilot is a pretty bad ass character.

  6. Paz wrote:

    Jess – when Racialicious posted the ad for tourism, I thought the same thing. I honestly don’t know much about the Aborigines, so I don’t feel like I can make a judgement on Luhrman’s use of them in the film. I suppose it’s good that he approached the subject at all…he could have had just a whitewashed, starry-eyed view of Australia consisting of white lovers. I wonder how aboriginals in Australia responded to this film.

  7. Jessica Yee wrote:

    This is the same reason I cannot watch Apocalypto, The New World, or any other erroneous cinematic attempts to “tap into” Indigenous culture.

    It disgusts me too much to sit there and watch, and then get kicked out for getting angry.

  8. leslie wrote:

    funny you used the term chocolate drop to describe the adorable child actor. During my daughter’s first week of kindergarten, I was sitting on the playground watching my daughter play. I started talking to this australian woman. She was really cool especially considering that she was the only suburban white mother who was cool enough to sit down for a conversation. At that point ,all I could get out of any of those soccer moms were surface greetings. Anyway my daughter came running up and she went into what a cute chocolate drop and she always wanted one and they are really popular in Australia and everybody wants to adopt one. She said that everybody in America likes to adopt chinese babies but in Australia they want chocolate drops. My daughter is bi-racial, i’m black and her father is from India. When I told her that she flipped saying that my daughter looks like one of their natives, they would just love her back home. Being my child is not a puppy, I didn’t know if I should get offended and give her a piece of my mind, with a smile of course. But I didn’t want to get the reputation as the angry black woman so soon in the school year, i just laughed my ass off at the fact that she was so open with her racism. Like its no thing to objectify our kids like that.

  9. hexy wrote:

    Jess: Yep, same kid.

    Paz: Not so well, actually. See my comment on the next post.

  10. Jess wrote:

    Well, if it’s the same kid then if nothing else, good for him. I mean, he’s getting paid and all, you know?

    I have another question for any Antipodeans out there, about a an actor I saw on a favorite TV series. Lani Tupu — is he Maori or something? And what of the treatment of aboriginals in comedies (I recently say Summer Heights High and thought it was absolutely hilarious, and they used a number of indigenous actors and touched on a number of issues of race and bigotry. But I am not always sure how it plays in Australia, not having grown up there.

    I was thinking about this as I wondered what the opportunities were like in New Zealand and Australia for indigenous people in the film/TV industry, especially given that more US film and television outfits have been filming there over the last decade or so.

    Any thoughts/help?

  11. MoeHailstone wrote:

    Of course racism was the part Roxie, its always a Hollywood fixture to bring out a “remember the good old days?” movie instead of one that encompass’ the closer racial equalityof today. There is always a “whitewash” disconnect and you can sense it before you see the movie. You want a shade of history, best to go with a documentary. Whenever its a movie, its to satisfy someone’s malevolent twist on things.

  12. Meg wrote:

    @Jess – Lani Tupu is Kiwi born, and his name (so I’m guessing him as well) is Samoan. Or i guess to be general he is of polynesian descent.

    I haven’t seen much of Summer Heights High but if you’re thinking of the main character ‘Jonah’ he’s also of polynesian descent which is why he’s targeted with the ‘FOB’ insult.

    At a guess there’s more opportunities in NZ than Oz for any non-white actor – aussie tv is incredibly white, and more specifically wax-headed. Shows with ethnic diversity aren’t really seen on commerical networks. They tend to be shunted to SBS which is publically funded and created to cater to different ethnic communities in Oz.

    A mainstream actor who comes to mind is Cliff Curtis (recently Die Hard 4) who is Maori but seems to be used to play any character who needs to have dark skin – i don’t know if that’s good or bad. Good for his career, bad that ‘any dark guy’ will do for whatever role (mexican, arab, italian, etc).

    In general i don’t know that increased film productions in this part of the world really increases opportunities for indigenous actors that much. A lot of the starring roles are filled by non-local actors, the rest are background. I think for sci-fi type things it helps to have an exotic look maybe?

    The discussion of Australia (the movie) illustrates the difficulties though. If you have an indigenous project it gets pigeon-holed and mainstream assumes it has no relevance to them so it doesn’t get seen. But if you have mainstream (i.e. rich directors/producers)attempting to expand storytelling to other ethnicities/cultures that they are not familiar with they get stomped on for at worst blatant racism and at best stupidity/bad acting. If there was more diverse storytelling in the first place the pressure might be eased a bit on movies and we wouldn’t be so self-conscious. Seriously, Australia (the movie) was to show off Kidman’s *cough* acting and Jackman’s pecs, the messing around with the indigenous story seems oafish and tacked on to gain critical acclaim for an unoriginal love story.

  13. deb wrote:

    A mainstream actor who comes to mind is Cliff Curtis (recently Die Hard 4) who is Maori but seems to be used to play any character who needs to have dark skin – i don’t know if that’s good or bad.

    Yes! I think I first saw him in “Three Kings”. He played an Iraqi. I thought he was hot.

    I just learned about another film that deals with Australia’s “creamy” people. It’s called “Rabbit-Proof Fence.” Here’s a clip.

  14. Jess wrote:

    Meg — thanks I was wondering.

    Summer Heights high was on HBO here in
    the States. I found it was really incisive. I’d recommend it as Lilley, who plays three different roles in the show (Jonah included), takes on varying kinds of racism and classism in a way that is really, really funny. He’s also not cynical — that is, I never got the sense he was being vicious.

    Tupu isn’t a well-known actor here in the US (except to Farscape fans) and so I haven’t seen him interviewed on the subject of being an indigenous actor. But I think it might be an interesting conversation.

  15. Aisha Gabriel wrote:

    Thank you for the blog entry. Comments were great, too. I think in this case all perspectives have truth in them. The indigenous story was an excuse for the Kidman-Jackman romance and to show off his wonderful body. I liked his body and liked many things about the film. Maybe I should turn in my militant card, too. Smile. First, and foremost, I liked that a mainstream film was revealing the aboriginal story. Americans don’t know. I want to give the film credit for telling the story from the ground and not from the glossy heights of the white privileged characters. Others will say I’m deluding myself since the main characters are white. I say Jackman and Kidman are what got Americans into the theater; after that they were served up a sloppy love story AND a history lesson AND some cultural sensitivity experiences. The point is not that the film had racial stereotypes in it but rather how the slurs, etc. were used. Were they used in a way that unconsciously slid the film into the very racism it was trying to depict as bad or were they used in a very conscious way as part of the film’s argument against racism? There are things that I want to give the film credit for—lots of showing, not telling, of aboriginal experience. Ordinarily, we would criticize the film for reducing aboriginal culture to magic realism. (We know this happened because there are no other depictions of aborigines–they aren’t bankers, lawyers, landowners, teachers or even just parents.) But I can’t go there because in the 1930-40s what else can we say aborigines were or could be in their own land due to European domination? So the film didn’t lie or misrepresent on this point. Jackman’s best friend and brother-in-law doesn’t count because he fits the same stereotype laying down his life in a spiritual transforming of an otherwise life-taking situation. As for Jackman’s character being considered more black than white I liked the idea. He was the counterpoint to the little kid believing that he wasn’t white or black. In other words, biracial kids were and are caught in nowhere land and so were/are whites who grow up enculturated inside one of our communities. Not to say that Jackman and the child are equals; the child is defenseless. The film could have done more with that issue. Instead, it worked to show us how whites tortured other whites if someone dared to step outside the box of their privilege and control and that was useful. Same thing in the U.S. In the 1930s, whites burned down the homes of whites who tried to be decent to black families. I liked one of the comments that asked what did aboriginal people think of Australia. A’a

  16. Westerly wrote:

    “This is the same reason I cannot watch Apocalypto, The New World, or any other erroneous cinematic attempts to “tap into” Indigenous culture.

    It disgusts me too much to sit there and watch, and then get kicked out for getting angry.”

    That’s me as well. Except for the getting kicked out part because I wouldn’t be in the theatre in the first place.

    I must be getting old because I honestly don’t have the stomach for it anymore. I simply cannot eat the stale, cold, rotting left-overs that someone serves up with a smile and nod along and pretend it’s a fresh, expansive, nourishing, and subtle banquet – or that it’s garish fast-food but ultimately harmless.

    Novels, films and media are a form of entertainment but they also contain varying degrees of propaganda. (The 19th century novel is a classic example of how ‘mere’ entertainment was used to persuade the British on both the glories of empire and the necessities of colonialism. And what better way to do that than to paint ‘overseas adventurism’ as one big safari, romance or lark? What better way to naturalise a state of mind?)

    What really amazes me is the sheer length that current novelists, film and TV directors, video game makers and those working in mainstream media arts and entertainment will go to in order to regurgitate the same old boring, lying, ’standard’ tropes, the same old whitewashes, the same old tired excuses, the same old glamourisation/centralisation of whiteness over and over…and over, again. Except a few timely modifications and tweaks here and there – a little bit of varnish on what is essentially the same old crumby paint job.

    “Australia’s” trailer alone, tells me that it’s just in service of the same old cause – the one that keeps trying to put an insanely positive gloss on colonialism; the one that keeps trying to convince everybody that not only are white lives at the centre of the universe, but that they are the only lives that are worth considering while everyone else is a useful aid or backdrop on the great white stage. That the whole world is ‘their’ stage, and their story.

    And I, for one, am over it. Sick to death of it. Can’t do it anymore. Shoddy story-telling, dishonest evasion, and pathological lying (which, more often than not is at the heart of these ventures) is not my idea of ‘fun’. There has to be better stories out there that are more psychologically truthful and compelling to read/watch.

  17. Nick wrote:

    You might want to check out “Ten Canoes”.

    Directed by a white Australian (of dutch decent) but considered a decent representation of aboriginal culture (prior to european colonisation).