Long Day’s Journey into Night: Reading Push, Watching Precious

by Latoya Peterson, originally published at Jezebel


Before reading Push, I braced myself and prepared for depression. Before heading to see Precious, I packed three travel sized packs of kleenex. But the unrelenting despair I was warned about never quite materialized. Instead, I saw hope.

Crazy right?

Hope was the last thing I was expecting when I checked out this story. After all, I had published SLB’s essay/post “Reveling in Bleakness,” and every time I announced something about Precious, one of my readers would plug Percival Everett’s Erasure. Reading any of my online feeds was a race and class related cacophony, and I hadn’t even touched a page.

Last Thursday, I settled in for what I thought would be an extremely painful and devastating read…or, worse, something so disgusting and exploitative that I would reject it outright as poverty pimping. But neither of these things happened.

Instead, I fell headlong into the alternately horrific and hilarious world of Precious Jones, one that was both familiar to me and strange at the same time. I enjoyed Precious’ rapid fire thoughts, found her casual allegiance to Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam interesting, and watched her openness to the world, even as she was limited by circumstances. I understand the impulse that many would have to cringe at much of the piece – the world painted is tangled with dysfunction and pain, and graphic depictions of sexual and physical violence aren’t for the feint of heart. But again, I read the novel dry-eyed. Perhaps I didn’t have any tears left to shed for Precious. I’ve been holding in the secrets of others for years – the circumstances described in Push are extreme, but not unimaginable. I loved watching Precious progress, watching her world expand, watching her cope in the same ways I’ve seen so many other girls do. As I have done. Acknowledge what’s fucked up, push onward. And, in a wonderful touch, Sapphire allows the other girls to have their say at the end of the book, revealing the same vibrant inner lives as Precious possesses. I smiled when I closed the book.

The next day, I hopped on the train to NYC to watch the film adaptation. Again, I prepared for devastation that did not materialize. I did cry – especially at Mary’s final monologue, which I will get to later – but spent a lot more of the movie laughing along with Precious. Sometimes, life is so fucked up it rolls into the absurd, which is what happens in Precious. The abject misery of the dank apartment she shares with her sadistic mother is mitigated when by many other scenes of teenagers reclaiming their lives and their narratives.

My favorite character, outside of Precious, had to be Joanne. Actress Xosha Roquemore clearly evoked the spirit of Remy Ma and dropped her into the 1980s. Every time she was on screen, I died laughing at her empathy and warmth, undercut with flourishes of hard posturing.

The film does many things well, starting with the Susan L. Taylor (!) cameo as the fairy godmother who opens the film’s first fantasy sequence. Daniels is able to capture the horror of what happens to Precious without glamorizing the violence, making use of quick cut scenes and strategically placed fantasy sequences to pull both Precious and the viewer away from the act. In addition, Daniels stays fairly true to the book, pulling many lines directly from the pages. And many parts of the book remain as the author intended – Blue Rain remains a lesbian in the film, and her partner is shown a few different times. In addition, Daniels makes wonderful use of visuals – the laughter-filled, happy scenes with Precious in the hospital, surrounded by friends and a doting veg*n nurse (played by Lenny Kravitz) provide a stark contrast with her return to the brown void with her mother.

However, while I would count the film as a success, there is a major stumble that happened taking the book from page to screen.

Over at Feministing, Rose writes:

A few days remain until Precious debuts across the country on Nov. 6th. The story, originally told by Sapphire through the novel Push, is an ode to negotiating inclusion and exclusion in the media. It’s about much more than the New York Times’ account: a “Harlem girl raped and impregnated by her abusive father.” (That’s practically all the ink dedicated to Precious the character despite an accompanying a column that extends for 5 pages.) It’s about inclusion and what it says about who is valuable in our society. That’s best captured in Push, when Precious explores this:

    I am comp’tant. I was comp’tant enough for her [Precious' mother] husband to fuck. She ain’ come in here and say, Carl Kenwood Jones–thas wrong! Git off Precious like that! Can’t you see Precious is a beautiful chile like white chile in magazines or on toilet paper wrappers. Precious is a blue-eye skinny chile whose hair is long braids, long long braids. Git off Precious fool! It time for Precious to go to the gym like Janet Jackson. It time for Precious hair to braided.(64)

But what I love about the book is that Precious is not a defenseless subject. She is a survivor who resists against her exclusion by striving for her own inclusion. She does this by learning how to read. She then uses her literacy to read about the lives of Black women through writers such as Alice Walker, Ann Petry, Ann McGovern and others. The story ends with her literally penning her own story fully epitomizing the agency she had all along despite sexual trauma and despair.

Which was precisely my take. From the beginning of the novel, Precious’ voice explodes on the page, providing us with a heroine who may not be the most educated or literate, but has a vibrant inner life. This doesn’t exactly translate on screen – Sidibe voices some of Precious’ thoughts, but slowly, and no where near as many random, flitting ideas are explored over the course of the movie. This omission changes our perception of Precious – in the book, she bright, quick-witted, and runs a constant narration about the things she has encountered in her world. Once she discovers the alternative school, the reader is excited as Precious is finally given a chance to express what she is thinking – she has a space in which to speak where she is valued, as well as a new method (writing) that unlocked more possibilities for reflection, introspection, and discussions.

In the film, this part is flattened a bit. I am aware that books cannot be translated exactly to the screen, but condensing Precious’ thoughts removes a lot of her own agency. After Precious acts out in math class, getting into a verbal confrontation with her teacher, Mr. Wicher, she feels some remorse and ruminates on a goal that’s slightly out of reach:

I didn’t want to hurt him or embarrass him like that you know. But I couldn’t let him, anybody, know, page 122 look like page 152, 22, 3, 6, 5 – all the pages look alike to me. ‘N I really do want to learn. Everyday I tell myself something gonna happen, some shit like on TV. I’m gonna break through or somebody gonna break through to me – I’m gonna learn, catch up, be normal, change my seat to the front of the class. But again, it has not been that day.

This was on page five. Her character is established as wanting something more, knowing there is something more, but not quite understanding how she can reach her goal. The movie makes the classroom scenes closer to a “Freedom Writers” scenario, with Paula Patton veering way too close to the typical “nice white lady” trope.

Ah, Paula Patton.

While I think Patton is gorgeous and talented, I don’t believe she did the character of Blue Rain justice.

Part of this is not her fault – the character of Blue Rain in the book is considerably darker, with dreadlocks. Now, this may not seem so important on its face. After all, casting makes character changes all the time, right? This shouldn’t be this big of a deal.

And it wouldn’t, if the character of Precious wasn’t so thoroughly indoctrinated with self hatred and displaying her color consciousness throughout the entire book. When she has her first child, she wasted no time in calling the EMT a spic before he helped her, quickly revising her opinion of him to use the more respectful term “Spanish” and comment on his “coffee-cream color, good hair.” Her nurse in the hospital is described as “butter color,” looks at her lightness, and opines “It’s something about being a nigger ain’t color.” Henceforth, that nurse is called Miss Butter. She worships light skinned people in general, and whites most of all, believing that if she were white, her life would be better. She says:

My fahver don’t see me really. If he did, he would know I was like a white girl, a real person, inside.

Marinate on that for a second. She would be real if she were white.

He would not climb on me from forever and stick his dick in me ‘n get me inside on fire, bleed, I bleed then he slap me. Can’t he see I am a girl for flowers and thin straw legs and a place in the picture. I been out the picture so long I am used to it. But that don’t mean it don’t hurt.

In Precious’ mind, whiteness is equivalent to being loved, safe, and wanted. The movie briefly shows this by having Precious look in the mirror and see a young white girl, but this moment is robbed from its potency unless you are exposed to the constant self-hatred throbbing in her brain.

Later in the book, Blue Rain models self love and acceptance for Precious, and for the first time, she is able to see that dark skin and natural hair can be beautiful.

This dynamic does not exist with Paula Patton in the role. She would be yet another light skinned person with “good hair” representing progress – something Precious would see as unattainable for herself.

On a broader scale, as many people picked up watching the trailer, the positioning of Paula Patton and Mariah Carey as Precious’ light skinned saviors reinforced existing societal ideas – the evil or helpless dark skinned people being uplifted (or punished) by the benevolent light skinned people. The casting serves to help reinforce existing prejudices that we see played out onscreen time and time again.

But even outside of that, Patton’s portrayal of Rain did not make me believe that she was someone Precious could trust. That Mad TV sketch I linked to above? That was the scene between Precious and Blue Rain after Precious confesses she is HIV positive. Down to the heavy handed command “write.”

The other moment in the film that radically departed from the book was Mo’Nique’s shining moment. In the social worker’s office, Precious’ mother Mary gives voice to what caused her to look the other way when she knew her child was being sexually abused, and gives insight into why she chose to perpetuate this dysfunction. In the book, this speech isn’t much of a speech – it’s a confession, with Precious cursing her mother out in her head the whole time. But on screen,the sight of the film’s monstrous antagonist breaking down and offering to forgo the sacred welfare chance to be reunited with her daughter is both disgusting and moving. You are revolted at Mary’s confession and yet, simultaneously empathizing a little, a master stroke.

But this doesn’t exist in the book. And while I think it adds to the movie immeasurably, I don’t think Mary should have automatically been humanized on principle. If you want the evil mom to be given full representation and humanity, go read the Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao. But here, I think Sapphire deliberately chose not to humanize Mary’s character. Why? I believe the answer lies on page 31.

I talk loud but I still don’t exist.

In life, the character of Precious Jones is marginalized and invisible, ignored unless someone wishes to do her harm or use her in some way. Her only refuge is her mind, where she essentially keeps herself company. And thus, Sapphire – who reveals a bit of this sentiment in her interview with Katie Couric – makes the entire novel about her. It’s all about her thoughts, her eyes, her reactions, her perceptions. (The other girls publish their stories in a supplement after Precious’ story ends.) And so, shifting the focus to anyone else would ultimately start to overshadow the story of Precious. Even for a moment.

So while I think the film does an amazing job walking the tightrope between humanizing Mary and keeping her at arms length, ultimately, this story belongs to Precious.

There is so much more I could write – perceptions about the film, familial violence, sexual abuse, black stereotyping, the single story conundrum, other critics take’s, race and Oscar bait, what I thought about Erasure, which was a literary response to Push – but those will have to wait for another post.

Reveling in Bleakness [Racialicious]
Erasure [Amazon]
The Not-Rape Epidemic [Racialicious]
Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire [IMDB]
On Representation: Push versus Precious [Feministing]
Reflections on Lola [The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao] (Part 1 of 2) [Racialicious]
Katie Couric Interviews Sapphire [What About Our Daughters]

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

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Long Day’s Journey into Night: Reading Push, Watching Precious | Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture « Raven’s Eye on 08 Nov 2009 at 5:07 pm

    [...] via Long Day’s Journey into Night: Reading Push, Watching Precious | Racialicious – the intersection o…. Share and [...]

  2. Precious. « PostBourgie on 09 Nov 2009 at 3:17 pm

    [...] **Latoya makes the same point here. [...]

  3. Finally Precious – Part 1 « black girl blogging. on 17 Nov 2009 at 2:00 am

    [...] of Paula Patton, I”m gonna have to agree with Racialicious here and say that I was disappointed at the casting of Paula Patton to play the part of Blue Rain. [...]

  4. Uptown Notes - Precious was Extra-ordinary on 17 Nov 2009 at 7:41 pm

    [...] on what the film missed and some issues that deserve serious consideration. Both The Root and Racialicious do an excellent job of taking these on and I won’t rehash them so please do read them!!! This [...]

Comments

  1. anon wrote:

    armand white has a different take
    http://www.nypress.com/article-20554-pride-precious.html

  2. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @anon –

    Armand White also counts “Norbit” as good black cinema.

  3. Katie wrote:

    I find it strange that the book – and often discussion of the book – downplays the sexual abuse from her mother.

    The book is very clear that her mother sexually abused her multiple times, but it doesn’t seem to come up in the therapy sessions. Precious also doesn’t tell anyone that I remember, the way she admits to being raped by her father.

    I’d love to see discussions acknowledge that she was a survivor of sexual abuse from BOTH her parents.

  4. Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist wrote:

    Sigh. That’s it, I’m gonna go buy a copy of the book… the film doesn’t come out in my area for like, 3 weeks or something.

    You have convinced me to check out Sapphire’s works!

  5. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @all -

    Let me just mention:

    1. The other post I allude to at the end are in process. They’ll be up tonight, just later than usual.

    2. Critics like Juan Williams and Armand White will be dealt with in a separate post.

  6. Thea Lim wrote:

    Clap clap clap! Yay! Thanks Latoya, this was really great.

    I’m really happy that you emphasised Precious’ subjectivity. This is the first time I have heard about that, and that really radically changes my impression of the film.

    It is disappointing and upsetting that ideas about black inner city womanhood in our culture have sort of eclipsed the story of Precious. More than that, the whole notion of victimhood and the way that’s perpetuated totally sucks: the consistent way that victims get twice victimised, once by their aggressors, and then another time by the idea that a victim is a passive actor in a cycle of violence.

    I really appreciate how you emphasise that this is a story of resistance – I would’ve had no idea by reading the reviews and convo of Push/Precious so far, and that actually makes me really want to read/watch the book/movie.

    It’s annoying the way dominant ideas can sometimes drown out how a story of victimhood can also be a story of resistance. But what the dominant culture sees within a particular narrative is not important at the end of the day, if the people that the writer was really trying to reach, get it. Thanks for teasing out the real intent of Push.

    What I do not like about Erasure, among other things, is how hopeless it is. I think as people of colour it’s easy for us to lose sight of what we’re trying to do in the first place, which is Resist. Nothing is more important.

  7. mk wrote:

    I’m really excited to read the book now…don’t know if the movie will make it here anytime soon.

  8. Yolanda C. wrote:

    I find it strange that the book – and often discussion of the book – downplays the sexual abuse from her mother[...]I’d love to see discussions acknowledge that she was a survivor of sexual abuse from BOTH her parents.

    Katie, I completely agree, and I’ve been wondering exactly the same thing. In Push the mother’s sexual abuse of Precious is made explicitly clear. I can’t speak about the movie, since I haven’t seen it yet. But the fact that commentators on both the book and movie ignore this detail is deeply disturbing,

  9. Tim Jones-Yelvington wrote:

    I have been excited abt this movie, but also worried, and I think for many of the reasons you’ve outlined — it is a story of resistance and claiming voice/agency — and in Sapphire’s book, so much of that is accomplished through language (including the decision for Precious to speak in her own voice), I’ve been worried that voice wouldn’t come through on screen. Based upon Oprah’s involvement and the way the story’s being sold in the media as a sort-of personal triumph narrative (as opposed to one of survival/resilience/resistance), I’ve also been worried the collective liberation and popular education-ish classroom Blue Rain cultivates would become something a little bit more privileged savior-esque (in addition to Freedom Writers, I was thinking Dangerous Minds, that Meryl Streep w/ the violins movie, etc.), which it sounds like is kind-of what happens.

  10. April wrote:

    I don’t think the classroom scenes veered off into Freedom Writers/Dangerous Minds territory at all. I think that’s because “Precious” is ultimately about Precious and *her* journey. The movie doesn’t designate anyone as her “savior,” and for that I was grateful.

  11. Pockysmama wrote:

    I think the main reason the Precious’ mother’s sexual abuse has been ignored is becuase we as a society find it more palatable to discuss father/daughter rape than sexual abuse by a woman, let alone a mother. It is still our last taboo though we see it all the time. In fact, many people always say “where was the mother?”

    I saw the interview of Sapphire on Katie Couric’s web show and she said two things I thought were memorable. One, every time in the past this work has been performed, the actresses have always completely ignored the mother’s role in the abuse, and generally make no reference to the mother’s physical or sexual abuse though they ALWAYS mention the father’s. She ascribed it to the inability and discomfort to confront, let alone portray, the darkness that lies in a woman and mother such as Precious’. We are nearly inured to the thought of fathers raping their daughters, yet mothers doing the same exact thing sends our heads right back to the sand, total and utter denial.

    The other memorable comment she made was that, given the author, setting of the book/movie, the director and the actors it was more than likely going to be perceived as a “black” (or “urban”) movie which she felt was unfortunate. She relayed a story of screening the movie in a very wealthy, upscale, predominantly white area and at the end of the screening, a older white woman standing and turning to her to say (loudly) “I’m 60 years old and that was my life 45 years ago.” The unfortunate issue in this movie is that many will say that this is more of an issue in a minority community than in a white community and that very sentiment is what will doom countless of girls to continue to be born into and raised by dysfunctional families. There is a saying that: “All happy families are happy in the same way but all dysfunctional families have their own dysfunction.” The shame in our society is that Precious’ story is NOT unique for a girl of any color and very few girls will have the perseverence and self-knowledge that Precious inherently possesses to push through such an upbringing.

  12. atlasien wrote:

    “Armand White also counts “Norbit” as good black cinema.”

    You just cast eternal discreditation on the poor man with those nine simple words. ZING!

    I’m actually looking forward to seeing this movie now, whereas I was previously dreading it.

  13. Julia Su. wrote:

    I think “Erasure” is a magnificent book, and I think the same about “Push”.

    If “Push” and Sapphire are actually targets of Everett’s satire in “Erasure”, I think he was terribly wrong about them. Wouldn’t be the first time I disagreed with someone whose writing I love, and it wouldn’t be the last.

    If someone else is suggesting that “Push” is the kind of exploitative book Everett is satirizing in “Erasure”, I think they are terribly wrong, whether or not Everett shares their misconception.

  14. ashlynn wrote:

    Having read Push many years ago as a kid, I’m so excited to see this story on the big screen. I really hope that the classroom scenes don’t resemble Freedom Writers/Dangerous Minds…I think that would defeat so much of the story for me. Black people can save themselves, thanks.

    Anyway, to echo some of the previous comments regarding the film largely ignoring the sexual abuse Precious endured from her mother, I definitely find that striking as well, especially since Lee Daniels is a gay man himself. But then again, I’m not surprised; it seems that sexual abuse, and domestic violence for that matter, can only be seen in the scope of heterosexuality or male-male(yes, priest and young boy) situations. It’s as if there’s some invisible wall there- much like when men get gung-ho about lesbians but can’t begin to fathom sex between two males. Which would align itself with patriarchy, now that I think of it…but then…how is it defined the other way around?

  15. Lyonside wrote:

    One thing I’m not looking forward to is the tone of film reviews. The NPR review made no less than 2 size/fat jokes, and the announcer afterwards also made an arguable size/weight reference. I was like, really? That’s all you took home from the movie? Asses…

  16. eric daniels wrote:

    Precious seems like another “PULP FICTION” from the black female writing tree/movie tree that I have seen and read since the 1980’s. From the predictable reviews it looks like Oscar nominations for Sidibe a ton of awards for Mo’Nique and I wouldn’t be surprised if Winfrey, Perry and Daniels got Oscars (a belated one for Oprah) but I will skip this flick because it reeks of the same plotline of past Black Female Empowerment movies the last two decades…

    1. black female oppressed, raped
    2. bad black male
    3. liberal white person
    4. stands up to the black oppressor
    5. dreams of being white
    6. Overcomes with faith, prayer etc…

    Did I miss anything because outside of “Daughters of the Dust” and “Eve’s Bayou” none of those films that always won awards had any artistic merit whatsoever upon a second and third viewing and was enjoyed generally by black elites ,white liberals and sociologists looking for the evil black poor person to justify their intellectual ideas.

    I can say with certianty that it will elicit sobs, awards and more movies and books from the female “pulp fiction” writers of black america, just hope there isn’t a Janet Cooke amongst you.

  17. Tiffany wrote:

    Im still debating if I want to see this movie and read the book.

  18. SAL wrote:

    I have very mixed feelings about this film–and the book. I remember seeing Sapphire at a predominately white Ivy League university in the 1990s. It was so nice to see another black face (she was there for a reading). I said hello to her–we were in an empty hallway–and she deliberately walked past me without saying a word. A very intentional snub. I was in my mid-20s, she was older, and I couldn’t help but think it was because I was young, fair skinned, and had the appearance of being upper middle class (far from it). I can see why she would write such a book–lots of self-hatred and baggage rattling ’round that brain. I think we Americans love train wrecks, especially when they involve minorities and the poor. Precious looks OTT–yes, I’m sure I’d cry with the best in them as it touches on a lot of things black women and women face, even if on a micro level. But there’s something very, very ugly about the film, particularly at this moment in American history. It is as if we’re saying this is what it means to be black and poor, and there’s no escape. There’s no escape because the society at large doesn’t clamor for it. It has become comfortable with a populace that has lived in abject urban poverty for decades now, as if this populace sprang from the rat-infested earth it inhabits. That is plain wrong. Also, despite its ridiculous moments, White’s review is worth a read. I know we women like to agree on everything, but we shouldn’t stand behind a film, especially one directed by the guy who directed Monster’s Ball, just because it’s a story about an obese, raped, dark-skinned black girl growing up in abject poverty. We’re smarter than that.

  19. wendi muse wrote:

    i read the armand white review and yours here, and i think the one thing that the two have in common is the mention of the light-skinned savior bit. it’s tired, it’s old, it needs to be deleted from our movies.

    i am not a fan of lee daniels, blaming monster’s ball as the primary culprit. i hated that movie and the strange light-skinned/dark skinned people dynamic is there too, right down to the overweight, dark-skinned pity case.

    i’ve been trying to keep up with reviews for this movie just to determine whether or not it’s worth dropping $12 on or if i should just bootleg it on my computer or wait for netflix. i think the end result from having synthesized what i have read thus far is that fear of stereotypes. will this be the Roots of 2009, making white people go “omg, black people have it so bad! let’s (pity) help them!” or will viewers be able to separate out the element of this being an individual story and not necessarily a blanket portrayal of black life, urban life, black female life, etc? i think these issues need to be dealt with, sem duvida, but i also don’t want to be thrown onto the pity pile. . .

  20. thewayoftheid wrote:

    SAL,

    There is more to the story than her being an “obese black girl living in abject poverty.” I’m tired of people acting like it’s some type of “black pain porn.” It’s a story with a universal theme.

  21. April wrote:

    @SAL

    “It is as if we’re saying this is what it means to be black and poor, and there’s no escape.”

    Who’s saying this? It seems that you’re the one making the jump to generalize this film as just another flick about someone black and poor. I have not read Push, but I did see Precious, and IMHO, it absolutely did not present a message of “no escape.” Like Latoya, I felt that it in fact left me with hope, though not of the simplistic “happy ending” variety.

    “I know we women like to agree on everything, but we shouldn’t stand behind a film, especially one directed by the guy who directed Monster’s Ball, just because it’s a story about an obese, raped, dark-skinned black girl growing up in abject poverty. We’re smarter than that.”

    Really? I’m a woman, and I have certainly no problem disagreeing with anyone! (And, by the way, I happened to like Monster’s Ball, even though I heard plenty of (mostly black) detractors carrying on that it made black women look bad, that they hated Halle Berry, that she didn’t deserve the Oscar, etc. Also, Lee Daniels didn’t direct that film–he was one of its producers.) It seems that your objection stems in large part from a personal grievance against Sapphire. That’s fine, I suppose, but please don’t accuse anyone of having a herd mentality just because something doesn’t suit your sensibilities.

  22. Lydia wrote:

    Some questions/concerns about the transition from the book to the movie can be answered by Sapphire’s interview with Katie Couric that can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5506X9tVwH4

    It is a 45 minute interview.

  23. mute wrote:

    Like others, I’m still deciding whether I want to read the book and/or see the film. While I know there are men and women who deal with this abuse and worse, it also seems like SO much to me (but I guess that ’s just another reason that I need to read the book and see the film, hunh?) I’m intrigued and feel like this is a major cultural event I should take part in, but I also don’t want to be in *that* place right now. I’m glad you found notes of redemption in the book, but I’m still afraid I won’t see them. There’s so many things Precious is made to suffer with, I don’t know if I’ll be able to wrap my mind around them and not feel like I need to get back on Prozac.

    Anyways, I loved Erasure and had no idea that it was a response to Push. I’ve never picked up Sapphire’s work, but from hearing other folks talk, I didn’t realize it’s literary value was debated. My favorite part of Erasure is when the professor protagonist is sitting in the clinic waiting room and is suprised by a discussion on There Eyes Were Watching God and Jean Toomer’s Cane with the young mother next to him. “I felt an inch tall because I had expected this young woman with blue fingernails to be a certain way, to be slow and stupid, but she was neither. I was the stupid one.”

    Speaking of which, I can’t wait for the Juan Williams run-down. I just read some tripe of his in the Wall Street Journal conflating the growth “hood lit” (which he classifies Push as), black women’s reading habits, and black folks supposed shunning of good wholesome middle class values. There’s some “that’s what’s wrong with us” and “what happened to being like the Cosby’s” type of ish. Oh, Juan.

  24. Adrienne wrote:

    I am disturbed about the Dangerous Minds and Freedom Writers references because Paula Patton is a Black woman.

    The saviors of Black children in the inner city in Dangerous Minds and Freedom Writers are White women.

    Paula Patton AND Blu Rain aka Ms. Rain are Black women.

  25. Orville wrote:

    Paula Paton was chosen for the role of Ms. Rain because she is attractive. It’s all Hollywood in the novel Ms. Rain is a dreadlock LESBIAN woman. I guess this movie had to be PC to reach a wider audience.

  26. Orville wrote:

    Was anyone else disturbed when Precious talked about wanting a light skinned boyfriend?

  27. RCHOUDH wrote:

    I liked your review of this book/movie Latoya! That said I’m also unsure of whether or not I want to see this movie because even with the hopeful ending, I feel as though there are so many depressing elements to the story.

    With that said, I’m pretty peeved at the way some film critics have reviewed this film. Take what the Wall Street Journal states, “you might mistake this production for a raw slice of life from a Third World country where movies can still be instruments of moral instruction and social change.” I mean really?? Issues of poverty and abuse are nonexistent in the developed world? What a stupid review!

    The New York Times review states that, “An unstated but self-evident moral of Precious, set during Ronald Reagan’s presidency and based on a book published in the year of Bill Clinton’s welfare reform, is that government can provide not only a safety net, but also, in small and consequential ways, a lifeline”. Ok but isn’t it true government’s neglect for providing basic services to its urban poor, is what exacerbated Precious’ situation?

  28. Adrienne wrote:

    If I am not mistaken, in the movie Ms. Rain is a lesbian.

    I still stand behind Black women of all complexions as a dark skinned Black woman with locs.

  29. Roxie wrote:

    @eric daniels it’s not like that. Go see it.

  30. merq wrote:

    I saw the movie, and while I agree that the trailers had me concerned about what I called the White Savior phenomenon many moons ago.

    Still, I thought what somewhat lessened the bad taste Carey and Patton’s characters would’ve left was the sort of reluctance they seemed to have to heroism. Both initially had a beaten down, “some of these fuckers wanna get over, so I need to stay sharp” vigilance to them, rather than the annoying benevolence of your traditional White Savior/Nice White Lady.

    Having said that, I agree that casting Patton as Blu Rain was symptomatic of Hollywood’s “less-melanin in the lead” philosophy.

    I was more sorrowful at the start of Precious than at its end. Why? Because one of the trailers leading up to it was for Invictus, the new Mandela movie coming out. In true Hollywood form, they could not trust one of the most revered, inspirational figures of the 20th century with a feature-length movie. So Mandela seemingly will have to play second fiddle to… a white rugby player?

    I quit this bitch. Goodnight.

  31. pennibrown wrote:

    I first read push in 96 when it first came out. i re-read it again last weekend. I had been dreading seeing the movie because the book affected me so viscerally, I fear falling apart in the theater. This review makes me feel better about seeing it. I cried in several parts of the book. But, now I realize that my tears were because I really wanted to say to Precious, You are real. I see you. You are not invisible!

    I was concerned also about Paula Patton’s role. I wanted the movie to depict a brown woman so that Precious could see that somebody like her can be happy.

  32. n wrote:

    While I agree that the whole fat black woman with the skinny white savior thing needs to end and that the light=good dark= bad thing is evil (its why I hated Norbit) please please try to separate the choices of those who cast things from the cast itself.
    I live surrounded by people who look like Precious, I look like Mariah. If I were ever to help someone out it would not be because I was a whiter savior, but because I have friends, cousins, nieces and inlaws who look like Precious and we are part ofthe same community and family.

    I understand the need for better representation but some of the comments here REALLY REALLY hurt my feelings.

    There are those of us who look like Mariah but had lives like Precious.Hell, MARIAH did.

  33. Tryingtoreadmore wrote:

    This is my first time reading a book that a movie was based upon. I was a little skeptical after reading the book in how they were going to portray such taboo topics. I thoroughly enjoyed the read of the book and could feel all of Precious’ pain. While I think the movie was good; Monique did a superb job, I don’t think it gave the full feeling of Precious and her struggle. She endured so much! Then at the end, they portray this somewhat happy ending that was not in the book. I am not saying don’t see the movie but I do recommend, like a good friend did to me, to read the book first. It gives you a whole new outlook on life and the movie.

  34. Nadra wrote:

    N, I don’t think anyone said something about Paula Patton personally other than that she’s attractive and light-skinned. No one said that light-skinned blacks don’t have it rough. However, the colorism in “Precious” is a problem considering that Blu Rain (Patton) in the book was dark-skinned with dreadlocks and provided a role model for Precious. By switching Rain to an actress of Patton’s complexion, how is Precious to overcome her colorism? More problematic is that director Lee Daniels admitted in a New York Times Magazine interview to being prejudiced against those with dark skin. Seems this prejudice played out in his casting.
    Also, how did Mariah live a life anything like Precious’? I know her parents split up, she had to work and her single mom didn’t have much but to compare her to the Precious character seems far-fetched.
    Lastly, to those in the know, is Everett’s novel specifically a reaction to Push or to “hood lit” generally?

  35. Adrienne wrote:

    I think it is really naive to think that Paula Patton’s character is somehow different at the core than in the book. Its the same story.

    Some of the comments here upset me because:

    a. I know women just like Precious.

    b. Sexual abuse of Black girls is a common theme with the women I knew who mask their hurt by being morbidly obese. (Listen, I am NOT saying that all obese Black women were sexually abused…I am saying that the obese Black women I know have stories of abuse that would shatter any notion that such stories don’t matter. Of the many Preciouses I know, one woman told me of how in childhood her stepmother used to hang her in the closet by her thumbs and her father did nothing to help her.)

    c. Roles in Hollywood are a competition, the best Black actress wins. Paula Patton being light-skinned shouldn’t take away from the role she plays. I have faith in her. I don’t buy the “dark is better” spiel for the movie. I don’t buy the stereotype that light skinned Black women don’t have dark painful demons from their past. Come on now.

    And I read the book “Push” myself.

    In my opinion it was the kindness of every single person who became an ally for Precious. There are NO saviors in the book.

    I don’t even know where are the White people are in the movie y’all keep referencing.

    d. Mariah Carey alluded to being able to relate to Precious but backed away from sharing what parts of Precious was similiar to her chaotic life in an interview.

    I am noticing a deep colorism going on in the comments. Complexion is a weak argument for why would Paula Patton and Mariah Carey relate to the movie, to the character or be able to deftly play the role they were hired to play.

    I almost feel like Precious (the character and the movie) just can’t win.

    Don’t women and girls like Precious matter? The reason the book touched me had everything to do with the many Preciouses I’ve known and met in my lifetime. Their experiences matter.

  36. Adrienne wrote:

    Yes, Mariah had a hellish childhood. She talked about the violence that was in her household with her parents. The time her house was firebombed, because her multiracial family wasn’t wanted in the neighborhood. Lena Horne dealt with sexual assault as a girl when her mother got her from her grandmother’s house and dropped her off at a strange man’s house and took off to live her life.

    Light skinned Black women don’t get the blues?

    This discussion is reminding me of a running joke my sister and I have. Both my sister and I are dark complexioned. My sister is darker. Every Sunday without fail the minister’s wife would ignore everyone else (in a predominately Black church) and make a beeline to my sister to make pretentious talk and show her teenage daughter how successful my sister is. Everyone else would be ignored, including myself and our mother, because after all it was my sister’s job to give her daughter self-esteem and to be a role model. Sister and I would make eye contact when we saw her coming and whisper “Here she comes” and know that everyone was going to be ignored, even if they said “Hello…”

    I get the reasons why it would matter that Paula Patton’s character was dark when it comes to following the book exactly. But all the comments about a White person saving Black kids, and whether Mariah and Paula would even be able to relate to the story or character really upset me.

  37. n wrote:

    @Nadra
    I suppose my objection is to the assumption that the ONLY possible reason PP was cast was her color (or lack thereof) and that by casting her it was not only because of colorism but colorism AND to fit the white savior mold.

    I agree that considering the role it played , to change the appearance of Blu Rain alters the story.

    I also know that African American women who happen to be heavy or “sassy” or urban don’t often appreciate when their roles are reduced to- they only picked her because she’s the stereotypical fat sassy neck rolling finger snapping black woman. Maybe. Or maybe there is more.

    Its the rush to judgment and the absolute firm statements that THIS IS why PP was hired that disturb me. Maybe. Maybe not.

    I’m aware of the colorism AND concerned about it, but it stings to read these things soemtimes because some of us do feel like we’re automatically counted out and our success or role attribute SOLELY to being white-like.

    Im not trying to medal in the oppression olympics. Not trying to take the focus away from Precious and her issues ,many of which stem from her appearance. But I guess I’m asking if my, if I dare say it, sisters can be gentle.

    I feel like PP and MC are being erased and counted out solely due to their appearance, by some. That bothers me just as much as Precious being counted out due to hers.

    Re Mariah- She’s experienced some isolation,rejection and abuse. Chaotic childhood, a mother who wasnt quite a mother and an absent father. Getting beatdowns for being mixed. Her talent perhaps saved her from the fate of her sister. I’m sure she can relate.

  38. n wrote:

    P.S. I actually am considering seeing the movie now based on what has been written here. I was afraid it was more tomfoolery. Like um, Sheneneh & Wanda the Movie.

  39. Lady Di wrote:

    Adrienne said

    <Roles in Hollywood are a competition, the best Black actress wins. Paula Patton being light-skinned shouldn’t take away from the role she plays. I have faith in her. I don’t buy the “dark is better” spiel for the movie. I don’t buy the stereotype that light skinned Black women don’t have dark painful demons from their past. Come on now.

    Who on here said that? You are totally derailing the subject and making out to be what it is not. I don’t think no one said anything about light skin people not understanding pain or going through trials and tribulations. The point is that Lee Daniels altertation to the Blue Rain’s appearance is odd. Why did Lee Daniels make Blue Rain out to be light skin, tall, thin , and with “good hair”, which Precious praises and frets over all the time? Sapphire didn’t make Blue Rain out to be that way in the book and that was for a reason. Precious suffers from internalized racism and makes it VERY clear in the film and the book. Blue Rain is an essential character in the story for a reason. She is the first woman she can actually say that is pretty and has dark skin and has dreadlocks that she felt was not attractive and this woman helped her. It was more effective that way. People who benefit from the status quo can easily tell people who don’t to love themselves and everything is going to be alright. However, it far more effective to see someone who is just like you who has overcomed the issue that they have. I can tell my gay friends to love themselves and everthing is going to be okay. However, I am heteosexual and cisgender person who can go on in life and no one blink and eye and say nothing about it because its normalized. No one will look at me like someone farted when I say I am heterosexual or straight like they do with gay people. I respect your opinion but you are in denial to say that it doesn’t matter that Blue Rain’s appearance didn’t matter because in the book it did.

  40. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @n/Adrienne –

    I’m not sure if you both addressing other commenters or my post, but I’ll respond a bit.

    1. The issue with the casting for Precious isn’t that light skinned women don’t have pain. It’s that the fact that the character of Blue Rain helps Precious to overcome her own self hatred by modeling being confident and brown skinned with natural hair. As others mentioned, it’s pretty pivotal to the plot. Can the plot be changed for the purposes of the movie? Of course. But that was a big, structural change that does play into existing tropes that we see time and time again in the movies. It’s different from altering the character that Mariah Carey played – Mariah’s character was always a side character, and not much is made of her race, appearance, etc. Blue Rain, on the other hand, has her appearance tied to the plot.

    I did not mention Mariah on purpose – partially because of how differently her character is in the book, and how the opportunity was used by the character in the film.

    In the book, the white social worker is still the enemy. Lee Daniels originally tapped Helen Mirren to play the role but she could not continue due to a scheduling conflict. Mariah stepped in there. While the movie follows the book plotline of Precious stealing her own file, it glosses over what is stated in the file – that the social worker basically thinks Precious isn’t going to make it in the alternative program, and should go on workfare.

    With Carey in the role, it is different. One, the race of the social worker shifts (which is covered in the movie). And Carey’s presence changed the role from semi-enemy to something approaching friendship.

  41. Adrienne wrote:

    N’s post expresses exactly what disturbs me about this dialogue.

  42. n wrote:

    @Latoya
    I get you. I suppose my comments a response to commenters here and elsewhere who were quite unhappy about both MC and PP and there was some spillover.

    I agree totally that there is colorism and that the role would have more accurately depicted the journey Precious was on.

    I just wanted to urge a little more caution, a teeny bit, for those who state that Paula was cast solely for her appearance, if we don’t KNOW that.Address the possibility and the discrepancy without quite going as far as dismissing any other assets the actress may have that played a part in the casting.

  43. G.K. wrote:

    About Paula Patton–in a recent interview I read, she said that she hadn’t been able to find a movie role for a year before she got the part in PRECIOUS, and that it was still hard to find good roles as a black actress in Hollywood period. So despite folks claimed she only got the part because she was light-skinned, according to her it really hasn’t helped her career that much—she said she’s still had to work hard to find those good roles. She also said it was her own mother’s teaching career that inspired her for the role, and that she felt blessed to receive the part. I think she’s on the cover of this magazine,too—there’s some great pics of her in it.

  44. Kendra wrote:

    I feel that some may be misunderstanding Latoya’s point concerning PP. There is nothing inherently wrong with her being chosen for the role, but given the importance of Blue Rain’s fictional appearance, PP being a light-skinned woman with what I’m assuming is non-natural hair, PP’s physical portrayal of Blue Rain as “model” for Precious deviates from the book’s intention. I don’t think anyone is saying she got the role because of color privilege. Myself, as a light-skinned black woman, while I can admit to not having a life that was rosy, I know that this isn’t about me. This is about what Blue Rain was meant to be to Precious, according to the novel.

    I bet a lot of natural girls feel as though they are not well-represented. If all you have to look up to are black women with non-natural hair, it seems as though society finds you partially absolute. And the negation of that part can feel like a negation of the whole.

  45. kendra wrote:

    Really, this has much to do with identity politics. Precious is a very color conscious individual, given the way she names people. I don’t know if Blue Rain’s name was a title given by Precious, but PP’s physical portrayal may not match up if that were the case. It may defy some aspect of Precious’ novel-given mentality

    Also, it’s obvious that generally as a minority you are not as likely to be gainfully employed in Hollywood as your usually white, white male, white able-bodied etc. counterparts. I feel for PP and her struggle, as many WOC and MOC and QPOC go through this. But I also realize that colorism is present in medias featuring black and non-black persons. I don’t feel it is the fault of individual actors and actresses, hence I don’t feel anyone is attacking PP for her appearance. Rather it is the way of the beast which is Hollywood. There may be many who are of PP’s complexion who only get work once in a blue moon. But because of societal valuing of lighter skin, a perceived overrepresentation of persons like this, similar to black women with loose and defined curly natural hair, there is a confirmation of the status quo, of what is already considered beautiful and valuable.

    All these things do not necessarily adhere to the realities of black people of all colors and and various other differences. It likely serves as a reminder of what central context we cannot separate ourselves from, which is white supremacy.

  46. Adrienne wrote:

    I think that’s Paula’s natural hair, but hey I could be wrong.

    I still believe Paula Patton as Ms. Rain could be the mentor to Precious because of the kindness she shows her and her own comfort in herself as a Black woman and as a lesbian.

    Locs and being dark skinned are not the one way the Ms Rain character could be strong and kind and comfortable in herself as Black and lesbian and show Precious that she is loveable, and worthy.

    I can totally see how that change in transition from book to movie can happen….because lets be real, what are the qualities that would be required for a Black woman to teach by example how to love yourself as a Black girl?

    I reject a limited view that Ms Rain cannot be different in complexion and hair texture and also be the woman that impacts Precious by her example and comfort in her own selfness. PP as Ms Rain can also challenge Precious to defy any beliefs she has that limits her love for herself.

    If we don’t believe this, then we believe in limitations upon the way a role can be played by a Black character who goes out of type (based on the book) based on our assumptions about skin color, hair texture.

    I think that Paula Patton can be a successful Ms Rain because there are surprises that can arise out of our snap judgements, assumptions and mistaken beliefs about others who differ from our expectations physically.

    Even Precious learns this in the book just as we, the reader learn this..don’t assume to know what a persons life, talents or limitations are without getting to know them in depth. Don’t assume to know what she could bring to the role despite being different from type…a good actor will suceed at this and a mediocre actor wouldn’t.

  47. kendra wrote:

    Correction to my first post. I meant “obselete” instead of “absolute.”

  48. Fiqah wrote:

    Latoya, this was really well-done, and I’m glad you posted it. I

    I’m kind of annoyed that there seems to be a deliberate misunderstanding of the importance of the novel’s depiction of a dark-skinned, natural-haired Blu Rain. In the novel, folks are color-struck. All around Precious, the “light-skin-good/dark-skin-bad” dynamic and all the mess that comes with it is regularly reinforced, so encountering and being inspired by someone who challenges this idea by simply being – AND WHO LOOKS LIKE HER – is significant. While I’m sure that Paula Patton delivers a wonderful performance, I too am disappointed with the casting for this reason.

    Do light-skinned Black women go through it? Sure. But this is really, really not about that, and the continued refusal by some of the commenters here to recognize this is disturbing.

  49. Aiyo wrote:

    Yeah alot of people are derailing the conversation nobody said that light skin black people have it better. That has nothing to do with the post and this is not the opression olympics. LOL

    I agree with the post. I have not read the book but i understand how it’s kind of “funny” how they changed up the appearence of Miss Rain.

    Because Precious has a colour complex having Paula be all “love yourself your are beautiful.”

    Precious would have been like “You don’t understand you’re pretty and light skin with good hair it’s easy for you to love yourself but not for me.”

    Which I get, and Lee Daniels confession to having have a colour complex himself could very well be a factor in the casting of Miss Rain’s character

  50. Adrienne wrote:

    Precious’s support system was a whole slew of people, some who look like her and some who do not.

    Ms Rain isn’t a savior, she’s a catalyst for Precious beginning to challenge how she views herself so negatively, how she views her color, size so negatively. She begins to see what she can do and that she is important to somebody and that she is important to herself too.

    Jo Ann hands her her notebook after Precious speaks up and describes exactly where she left it.

    Rhonda, Jermaine, Rita, Consuelo, the nurse at the hospital who is upset about what happened to Precious… each person had a significant impact on Precious.

    I can see how the movie can get away with Ms Rain not being dark skinned with locks given the other characters’ influence on Precious’s life.

    I also think it takes a village to help a child. Ms Rain can’t be all things to everybody. She’s not a savior or super woman in the story. She’s a teacher who cares about the children she teaches. She’s a Black woman who is calm, observant, gives of her time to help Precious but challenges her to examine who she is, and how she views her world. Ms Rain is strong and human and gentle.
    Then the people in Precious’s class have their own battles and their own strengths…strength as a team, strength as individuals.

    Precious gets to know people who are like her through her classmates and through Ms Rain. Ms Rain is like her not simply because they’re the same color, and because Ms Rain has locks…but because Ms Rain is a Black woman who nurtures Precious while urging her to not give up on herself.

    I would dare say Ms Rain and her classmates urge her not to disassociate. To be firmly in the present. To prepare herself for the battle to come. The abuse teaches her to disassociate from the world, from her body, from herself…and she tries to grasp ahold of herself, her body, her Blackness, femaleness, motherhood, belief in herself because of all of them.

    That is why I am not critical of Ms Rain not looking like the Ms Rain in the novel. It wasn’t Ms Rain’s hair and complexion that helped Precious, but her actions, comfort in her own skin, belief in Precious, and the ways she was able to faciliate in her classroom a safe place for Precious to fight for herself with children who were also fighting for themselves too.

    Precious had beliefs about skin color that later changed as she began to look deeper at people, once she got to know more of their story and their battles and made the connection between how others treating her becoming how she saw herself.

    If Ms Rain’s role was different than it is in the book, and perhaps if Precious herself described Ms Rain as having an impact on her because Ms Rain is dark like her, and has locks, then I would buy the argument of the significance of someone who looks like her impacting her fight to climb out of a hellish life.

    To me “someone who looks like her” has a different translation depending on what is meant by the person speaking it.

    “Someone who looks like me” applied in discussing Barack Obama is normally about his being a Black man, and not his complexion…but in some situations, its a phrase used to mean skin color, hair texture. When the phrase is applied as the be-all-end all to why Precious changes and grows in the story, I am skeptical given all the other circumstances and people who had an impact on her life in different ways…all because they did not ignore her or despise her like she was in previous schooling.

  51. Fatemeh wrote:

    Latoya, this was a wonderful post, and I had a lot of the same thoughts after finishing the book a few days ago.

    Well worth the wait, friend. You rocked it. :)

  52. melody wrote:

    this is great, latoya! please write more about the single story conundrum, sexual abuse and race as it relates to Precious!

  53. chicagorose wrote:

    Oh dear God can we just STOP with not getting the point of the criticisms voiced about Patton? I am getting really sick of this, *as a light skinned female*, reading other light skinned females NOT get it, EVERY time issues that clearly involve colorism arise. Damn it. IT’S NOT ABOUT YOU. Substitute a white person uttering your complaints and perhaps you’ll begin to get an inkling just how whiny it comes off. I’m sorry. Even if your experiences have been similar, It’s. Not. About. You. Not the article. Not the book. And not the comments voiced about the article and book. Take a deep breath and pull back. And for once give space to an issue that too frequently sits in the shadows because we’d like to ignore it.

  54. chicagorose wrote:

    If that sounded too much like sit down and shut up, I could not care less. I had a dark skinned aunt. Her fair skinned sister was my mother. Their issues were simply NOT the same. I had a dark skinned grandmother (the mother to my aunt and mother) who was the matriarch of the family we all looked up to. She and my aunt had “good hair”, I and my mother have/had coarse. Yet my grandmother was forever comparing herself to her lighter skinned mother and first cousins, and as a result she was a highly colorstruck, critical person, even though she could be warm and loving. Please don’t negate what people are trying to say about how VERY crucial skin color is in the film. This is the *why* behind how the black community behaves regarding skin privilege. It’s like me saying that I have nappy hair so I can relate to a darker skinned sister’s pain and humiliation for having nappy hair too. Oh please. I tried having that conversation over the phone with a cousin of mine and could feel her side eye through the phone. Again, it is NOT the same. Skin privilege erases a multitude of sins in how we are perceived if not the pain we still endure. Stop belittling that fact by bringing hurt feelings into it. You are inadvertently playing Oppression Olympics.

  55. lunanoire wrote:

    Unfortunately, this skin color derailment discussion falls under the category of “things we do to each other as POCs.”

  56. katnos wrote:

    I was surprised to see Paula Patton cast in the role of Ms. Rain. Reminded me of when Kevin Spacey played the role that was originally a black man in the book Pay it Forward. Someone I know has an issue with Don Cheadle playing the light skinned Petey Green in Talk to Me. I think we have a picture in our mind of what the character looks like.

  57. Lady Di wrote:

    Chicago rose said:

    If that sounded too much like sit down and shut up, I could not care less. I had a dark skinned aunt. Her fair skinned sister was my mother. Their issues were simply NOT the same. I had a dark skinned grandmother (the mother to my aunt and mother) who was the matriarch of the family we all looked up to. She and my aunt had “good hair”, I and my mother have/had coarse. Yet my grandmother was forever comparing herself to her lighter skinned mother and first cousins, and as a result she was a highly colorstruck, critical person, even though she could be warm and loving. Please don’t negate what people are trying to say about how VERY crucial skin color is in the film. This is the *why* behind how the black community behaves regarding skin privilege. It’s like me saying that I have nappy hair so I can relate to a darker skinned sister’s pain and humiliation for having nappy hair too. Oh please. I tried having that conversation over the phone with a cousin of mine and could feel her side eye through the phone. Again, it is NOT the same. Skin privilege erases a multitude of sins in how we are perceived if not the pain we still endure. Stop belittling that fact by bringing hurt feelings into it. You are inadvertently playing Oppression Olympics.

    You are derailing the subject at hand lol. I’m dark skin and has never been mistreated for being dark. Just because you haven’t gone through it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist and doesn’t mean that some dark skin women will go through it. Also doesn’t mean we are playing “Opression Olympics” We are saying this pathology in POC communities exist. We will still have colorism because of colorism apologist like yourself.

  58. Lady Di wrote:

    opps I’m so sorry Chicago Rose we are on the same page. Sorry ma! disregard my first comment to you I meant to quote someone else

  59. c.n.edaw wrote:

    I just read the book. I wonder if film makers think colorism is too difficult to convey in film. Or that the subject matter has limited appeal. Or that the subject matter is one of those dirty laundry issues no one wants to tackle at length. Or, that perhaps there’s not a story about colorism that has such strong universal appeal someone is willing to make a movie centered around it.

    I also wonder if that is why, despite it’s prevalence, either blatantly or subtly in a lot of literature–especially that about black women– it doesn’t often end up in the final translation on the big screen.

    As much as I liked the “good and bad hair” musical scene in School Daze– I don’t think anyone got a sense of how colorism really causes pain or affects someone’s life–either negatively or positively. It just looked like petty bickering, which in the opinion of some people, it is.

    I recall Nightline and 20/20 both did investigations into colorism and basically fnding that it did indeed influence employment, adoptions, and even which kids get placed in advanced placement courses. Lighter complexioned black people overwhelmingly received more advantages.

    Yet, I also recall a multitude of angry e-mails from dark skinned people claiming they did just fine in life so that report couldn’t be accurate AND a slew of e mails from light skinned people claiming their lives hadn’t turned out so hunky dory– so the report had to be flawed.

    My mother–one of two fair skinned kids in a family of six–also gets darn near hostile when this topic comes up.

    One the one hand she recounts how people taunted her darker siblings and how her white grandmother talked about who had better hair and then on the other hand she tries to claim color doesnt matter. The topic is just too painful for her to see it objectively.

    SO, I just have to wonder if I am making a film, and I want people to see and I am not trying to evoke a reaction just for the sake of seeing people react; if I would choose to gloss over this particular plot point if it overshadows the larger message I want to convey. I might.

    I might prefer people focus on Precious’ many struggles rather than their own feelings about colorism. Just a guess.

    I also figure I might want to take a few liberties with a story in order to feature talented people in my film.

    I always thought Halle Berry was a dead ringer for Dorothy Dandridge BUT I also though there were probably black actresses who could have played the role better despite having no physical resemblance. I’m sure filmmakers and casting directors make those calls all the time.

    I also think the vast majority of people who saw or will see this film never read the book and won’t, so they won’t know there’s any discrepancy.

    I think the colorism/ and the mother ’s sexual abuse of her daughter in Precious are two topics that would not be well received in a film marketed to a mainstream audience. So it was left out.

  60. SAL wrote:

    April,
    I could care less about Sapphire, who is, in my opinion, a hack writer who produced a book at a time when identity politics (and suffering) were all the rage. I have no desire to see this film, although I’m happy for the actors, writers, and producers who all made money off of it. If this kind of thing rocks your boat, hallelujah. I do hope this film encourages people to volunteer with the Preciouses in their communities rather than watching movies about how fekking miserable their lives are.

  61. Ladyfresh wrote:

    Thanks Latoya,

    Now i feel the need to read the book for the compare/contrast.

    but in a few months this was still a harsh film

  62. taurusdragonfy wrote:

    I picked up Push years ago and put it down a few pages in. At the time I was on black author overload I think and I just didn’t have the stomach for another ‘dark black story’. I questioned the authenticity of the story, wondered who the intended audience was, why it had to be written in that awful illiterate dialect. I just felt like it was adding to what I call the zoo phenomenon – where tragic/disturbing/ridiculous stories are hyped by the media allowing people who cannot relate at all to feel liberal and superior when all they are really doing is staring at the spectacle. The more tragic the story, the more the media hypes it audience to be intrigued and entertained. Tragedy becomes a spectacle – and a story intended to be inspiring or giving voice to the marginalized ends up dehumanizing its subject instead.

    So when the movie came out under the flag over Tyler Perry and Oprah with rave Sundance reviews, I cringed at the apparent ‘Black female zoo’. After all, it felt similar to Hustle & Flow with its critical acclaim and scary stereotypical imagery/descriptors. (Don’t even get me started…)

    But I saw Precious this afternoon and I am pleased to say that I was wrong and that I need to go read the book. The movie is so much more than a black story, a poverty story, or even a black female story. It really is about illuminating Precious – someone who is usually invisible. and self-empowerment and education, and encouragement and more than I can articulate at the moment. So glad I read Latoya’s article b/c I wasn’t going to see the movie, but her insight opened my eyes to the possibility that I was selling the story short.

    It is a great feeling to be reminded to re-examine my black female baggage sometimes. The movie was done really well and the actors were amazing especially the sisters in Precious’ class and Mo’nique – phew powerhouse! This was a film in the art sense not a movie in the entertainment sense. and on a lighter note, I’m so off pork for the forseeable future thanks to the movie.

  63. Jennifer wrote:

    Thank you so much for Latoya’s analysis of the film and how it compares with the book. The quotes from the book brought back to me the searing experience of reading it for the first time when it came out. To me it seems that the heavy ‘dialect’ at the beginning is not about putting Precious on display, it’s the author’s attempt to bring the reader personally into and through her protagonist’s journey to self expression. I can’t see how that could possibly be carried through in the film, and I have to say I was also taken aback by Tyler Perry’s involvement. Now I think I need to re-read Push and then go see the film.

  64. Emmeaki wrote:

    Back to the subject of downplaying the mother’s sexual abuse, they hinted at it when the mother was in bed pleasuring herself then called Precious and told her to “come take care of Mama”. If you haven’t read the book, I think it’s not really clear that the mother is sexually abusing Precious too.

    On its own, the movie is good, but it doesn’t really convey the depths of the abuse that Precious has suffered. It also doesn’t convey how illiterate she was before she actually learned to read–I guess this might be hard to portray on film, though.

    As far as Blue Rain is concerned, she was someone who looked like Precious and she was a role model as much because of her looks as for what she did to help Precious. This casting issue isn’t about dissing light-skinned people, it’s just that the character being dark-skinned was pertinent to the storyline.