Of Push, Precious, Percival, and “My Pafology”

by Latoya Peterson
erasure

The reality of popular culture was nothing new. The truth of the world landing on me daily, or hourly, was nothing I did not expect. But this book was a real slap in the face. It was like strolling through an antique mall, feeling good, liking the sunny day and then turning the corner to find a display of watermelon-eating, banjo-playing darkie carvings and a pyramid of Mammy cookie jars.

—Thelonious Monk Ellison (Percival Everett), Erasure

I knew that before I wrote a word on what I felt about Push and Precious, I was going to have a problem.  One, my personal experience colors a lot of my perception of the novel and the movie.  While Precious’ narrative is not close to mine (I’m way closer to Lola, from Oscar Wao) there were lots of notes of familiarity.

A few too many for comfort.

In discussions with the Racialicious crew, Thea and I actually got really close to parsing out why I feel so strongly about the work.

Thea wrote:

On the topic of African American lit…I am reading Don’t Erase Me right now by Carolyn Ferrell.

I guess it is supposed to be stories of black girls in the ghetto. The stories I’ve read so far are all about incest. So this trend is starting to bother me. Though I guess it could just be what I’m reading…

I wrote back:

It’s not really a trend if it happens a lot.

My sister and I were *not* molested by anyone growing up.  That made us a rarity.

Carmen pointed out that works that do feature incest and black people (like The Color Purple, The Bluest Eye) do tend to get critical acclaim and recognition, and wondered why that was. I  thought that the issue may be that white reviews, book publishers, etc, only know how to respond to black dysfunction, but that doesn’t erase the fact that so many of us go through this type of abuse.

Then Thea got all MFA on us, writing:

Just to clarify I didn’t mean that I thought sexual abuse was a trend. That would be a pretty awful thing to say. It’s more that I’m reading a deluge of books for an AfAm lit class that are about incest, or about black dysfunction in the inner city.

It’s distressing because while I don’t doubt for a second that this happens and that this is something that needs to be talked about and talked about until it stops happening, I am also quite sure that there is a lot more to being poor and black in the city than incest and family dysfunction.

It’s interesting to look at the way that black lit has changed since the 80’s until now. Alice Walker and Toni Morrison ruled the 80’s and they had a certain voice that was about the horribleness of life, but also that really celebrated the richness and joy of life.  The books I am reading now (Don’t Erase Me, I Got Somebody in Staunton, Holding Pattern) were all written after 2000 and they are all narratives where the protagonist is incredibly atomised and it seems like they have very little joy in their lives, and even more, have very little ability to perceive joy in their lives.  So that gets me down. I wouldn’t even say these books are disturbing, more than anything they are just bleak bleak bleak. Like Thomas Hardy bleak.

But I think it is an interesting shift – interesting potentially that there appears to be no longer any need to appear joyful. No need to feel like, if you’re writing for the black community, you gotta also be celebrating life (a secular Christian sort of approach).  That is a really marked difference – no more is there that strong black woman “we will overcome!” vibe.  In these books there’s no salvation. Which I guess makes them different from Precious? Seems like there is salvation at the end of Precious.

I wrote back:

Yeah, I’m probably super defensive since this is more or less the issues I’m having writing about Push and Precious.  And the worst part is it isn’t even in the books – I don’t have beef with those because Push shows Precious and the other girls with (1) vibrant inner lives and (2) personal agency, even within limited circumstances which other people are either missing or refuse to acknowledge.

I also tend to get super defensive in these discussions because, in essence, people (not you, the mass of reviews I’ve waded through) are saying that me and my family either (1) are black stereotypes, (2) too dysfunctional to be believed, (3) the “real” black life.  None of these things are inherently false or true, and that’s what keeps getting lost in these convos.

I agree with your point about bleakness – do you think it might be the street lit boom exerting some influence on literature?  I read Erasure last night, and while I enjoyed the book, I felt like Everett misfired at Push – his point is made by The Coldest Winter Ever much better than Push, and the “My Pafology” parody is about a nihilistic rapist, a far cry away from the introspective Precious.  I am not surprised – sometimes in our rush to distance ourselves from anything negative, or “detrimental to the race” we can miss a lot of cues of realism.  I loved how Precious parrots Nation of Islam ideology as a way to stay strong in the face of hardship. I also love how she later rejects many of the flawed ideas she learned once she outgrows them.  But that kind of nuance is almost never discussed, perhaps because people don’t recognize it for what it is.  They see someone speaking “improper” English and can’t be bothered to parse the content of the sentences.

Upon further reflection, I’ll even argue that The Coldest Winter Ever deserves a bit more credit.  Instead, My Pafology reads a lot like much of the street lit we’ve discussed before. And yet, I feel like that nuance doesn’t matter.  Negative is negative is negative, regardless of how it is used and to what end.

There are many things overlooked in critiques of Push/Precious, one of which is the frank discussion of incest.  As many readers here and at Jezebel pointed out, many of the reviews kind of waltz over the continued sexual abuse by both father and mother. (Something else that is never mentioned is Precious’ horror that her body reacts when she is being raped – something that her father uses as a justification that she “likes” it.)  And I wonder why this is being dismissed.  Would it have been okay to discuss the incest if the narrator was different, the situation was different?  Like this?

“So,” Jack said after we’d settled into the pine-and-leather booth.  “How was your day?”

“Fine. I, um, did some laundry, went to the book store —”

“Oh yeah? What’s you get?”

“Oh this psychobabble thing I’d been wanting to read.”

“What?”

“It’s called The Drama of the Gifted Child.”

“Uh-huh.  What’s it about?”

“Oh, I don’t know, just stuff about your childhood and how you’re affected by it.”

“Mmm.  So, did you have some childhood trauma?”

It was an interesting way of putting it, and I didn’t quite know how to answer.  Trauma seemed so big a word, as if I’d have to have been a survivor of a war or a pawn in a horrible divorce.  I was neither, but my childhood pain felt just as large.  I realized this was an opportunity to tell him about Lucas, but it was too soon to spill such pain.  On the other hand, I could give him a peek at my baggage to give him a chance to run if he couldn’t deal.

“Um, well, nothing catastrophic.” I let the moment pass.

The excerpt above is from Benilde Little’s Good Hair, one of my favorite books. Good Hair is often described as “a black comedy of manners,” and focuses on Alice Andrews, a Newark-born Manhattanite who is having problems finding her place in a class conscious society. Is her story more valid than the one of Precious Jones, because Andrews’ world uses proper English, is college educated, and everyone has a career?

On of the things that grates on me so about the discussions around the work is the lack of analysis of the underlying content. I’ve read lots of street lit, mostly because I make a habit of reading what others around me read. And I have lots of issues with street lit on both a systemic level and a content level. But while I was reading through My Pafology, I realized that while it is a direct response to Push (some similarities is narrative and tone, and some of the same words – like “down sinder” for “down’s syndrome” – are used), it appears that Everett missed the point. He interprets it as a glorification of hood life, and not a character narrative.

Thea writes a little later:

That’s what I really struggled with about Erasure.
1) There are are too many stories about black dysfunction, and often white literary culture takes that up as the “real” black story, to the detriment of both black folks who didn’t have that experience, as well as the black narrative in general, which is complex and diverse
2) That doesn’t mean that the stories about black dysfunction aren’t true or real.

What Erasure (to me) seemed to be saying was that there are too many stories about ghetto life, and none of them are true. My Pafology is supposed to be mirroring Push – fictional Monk writes the book to either make a point or make money, but it’s taken up by a fictional racist white literary culture as being a true representation of life. So Everett is saying that real life Sapphire just wrote the book to make money and real life white culture is too racist to recognise that she’s lying up the wazoo.

It’s such an uncomfortable and difficult position to be in, to be saying on the one hand that black culture shouldn’t be essentialised to just be stories about really difficult lives, and saying on the other that those stories are still true. And I think you are very right that what gets lost in the mix is the fact that those “essentialised stories” are also complicated ones with characters who have rich inner lives.

What you say Latoya, about both Everett and culture in general not recognising the nuances in Push’s story, reminds me of your critique of Oscar Wao – how none of the critics got what Diaz was trying to do with Lola. They either ignored her, or didn’t pick up on the nuance and thought Lola was evidence of Diaz’s sexism.

…I guess ultimately people are getting to get what they want to get out of Push/Precious. The annoying thing though is that the folks who think it is
(1) are black stereotypes, (2) too dysfunctional to be believed, (3) the “real” black life.
aren’t going to recognise that they’re not getting the full story of Push. They’re not going to think – hey, maybe there’s some parts of this story I just don’t get – they’re going to think that they fully understand it, and that this is all there is to this story. They’re not going to recognise that potentially they don’t ge the whole story because they lack some kind of lived experience that would enable them to pick up on the nuances.

That really pisses me off. Like I can read Ulysses or whatever incomprehensible great British novel, and I can recognise that just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean that it isn’t good. It prolly just means I don’t know enough about what Joyce is referencing to get Ulysses. But folks with privilege are rarely going to read a book about a marginalised experience of which they have no understanding – because the experience is so poorly represented in mainstream culture – and think hey, maybe I don’t get some parts of this book, because I don’t know anything about what this writer is referencing.

What this whole grad school thing is teaching me is that people with privilege/entitlement are incapable of understanding that there a billion things in the world that they know nothing about.

As I have edited this site over the last couple of years, my beliefs on a lot of things have changed dramatically. There was a time when Spike Lee’s comments about Tyler Perry’s “coonery and buffonery” would have prompted me to agree, and launch into a discussion about black owned media and stereotypes. And while I still think that conversation has some worth, when the question was posed to me by Vocalo a few weeks back, I found myself instead talking about systems, and the danger of a single story, the Chimamanda Adichie TED talk Thea posted a little while back. I argued that Lee was angry, and his anger was directed at Perry when it should be directed at the tyranny that occurs when our experiences are flattened. We shouldn’t have to self-police representations of blackness, concerned that one negative portrayal will damn all of us. We should be able to exist as we are: flawed, complicated, beautiful, and proud.

And the media we create should be able to reflect that.

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

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Link Love Roundup: What We’re Reading… | Clutch Magazine: The Digital Magazine for the Young, Contemporary Woman of Color on 10 Nov 2009 at 5:00 pm

    [...] Racialicious Of Push, Precious, Percival, and “My Pafology” – Another great read by our girl Latoya (GO) [...]

  2. epi speaks on: blogs/articles you should check out. « Epi_Speaks on 18 Nov 2009 at 6:33 pm

    [...] 18, 2009 · Leave a Comment Mostly I’m just here to lead you here. A blog on the movie Precious, and the book Push. There’s not much more I can say, because [...]

Comments

  1. Nina wrote:

    This is a fantastic post! I have been feeling conflicted about Push/Precious. It it one of my favorite novels of all time. I found it inspiring as an undergrad. I knew, however, that there would be problems with the work. The first of which is its parentage. It is being directed / produced by two people who are Black when it’s lucrative. Well, more so Oprah than Perry, but he does his fair share of making money off of caricatures of Black folks, so I suppose they are still one and the same. The other issue I had with it was that I didn’t think people would get it. As a mass, people tend to want to view an experience as THE experience because they have never had to face a reality different from their own. The simple can not grasp it because they have never had to. I’m not mad about it, it’s just happened to work out that way.

    I am still torn about how I feel about this film. I want to see it, but I kind of don’t. I am very overprotective of the literature I love. This is on my top 5. Though it is important that they are shared with the world, I sometimes think Push and For Colored Girls are works that are better kept in our hearts as the great works that they are rather than be “written down, spliced down, passed around among strangers’ hands.”

  2. Adrienne wrote:

    Yes! Yes! Yes!

    “We shouldn’t have to self-police representations of blackness, concerned that one negative portrayal will damn all of us. We should be able to exist as we are: flawed, complicated, beautiful, and proud.

    And the media we create should be able to reflect that.”

    That is EXACTLY how I feel. It is a weird place to be in to be able to relate to the themes of child molestation.

    The other thing we don’t talk about much is how underrepresented Black women are in the media in roles that show our vulnerability and humanity. In the media we have to be strong, hair on point, perfect attitude for the circumstances in the tv show or movie. If we are going to be ghetto we have to be ultra ghetto. If we are going to be bourgeoisie then we have to be ultra bourgeoisie in the media. Its ridiculous.

    I sometimes want to shake people and holler,”Have you known a Precious in your life?”

    The imperfections of Precious should make us uncomfortable but maybe for a different reason than we assume.

    I wantn to put on a t-shirt that says “I AM PRECIOUS” and let people feel whatever they feel about that.

  3. Seattle Slim wrote:

    Years ago I stumbled on a Pretty Ricky fan site forum from a black celeb blog, and noticed that the girls, usually teens and tweens, were writing fan stories featuring the creatures in the group.

    WOW! It was more salacious than any Danielle Steele book or romance novel I ever read and the level of prurience was something else.

    One of the recurring themes that disturbed me, of the MANY, but really took the cake was the incest or the theme where mom’s new man takes advantage of the protagonist(s) in the fan fiction.

    I’ve been writing for a long time, I’m writing now for NaNoWriMo. I’ve never had that occur in any of my writings because I’ve never experienced incest or sexual molestation from a family member or friend. These girls are writing about things that are most likely closer than they let on or we think.

    This is seriously happening in our community and we are still hiding from it.

  4. curlyscales wrote:

    Excellent post.

  5. uu wrote:

    I think this is a wonderful post. Thanks to the wonderful articles about literature and people of color using literature to give voice to themselves and their narratives, it makes me want to start a publishing house to allow them a chance to getting their individual stories out.

    Like adimanchi ngozi mentioned in her T.E.D presentation, it does no one anygood to have a narrow view of peoples lives by the groups they happen to inhabit.

    Its a crazy pipe dream I have, but if I could just start a publishing house and recuit POCs to write their stories, their literature, awards would be won left and write and it would change the dynamics of the American literary world as we know it.

    dreams

  6. PPR_Scribe wrote:

    Great post. I think I will have to stop reading these analyses of the book and movie until I have read/seen them. I am fascinated by the discussions and fear that neither art work will live up to the lively conversations about them!

    For me, the frustrating thing is that it seems that “Black pain” is the preferred mode of universalizing us Black people to the world. Yes, diversity of representation is important. But we do not have that diversity.

    Again, I have not read the book or seen the movie. But I think about a book like Colson Whitehead’s “Sag Harbor.” Would something like that turned into a movie (assuming it ever would be) garner a standing ovation at Cannes? Is a story of upper middle class Black people summering on Martha’s Vineyard be deemed “unrealistic”? And to boot if nothing “traumatic” happens–no KKK cross burning on the beach in front f their house, no sexual abuse by the owner of the ice cream store where the protagonist works?

    And more importantly, why do we have so few stories about that kind of coming of age about Black young women?

  7. The Black Bot wrote:

    “We shouldn’t have to self-police representations of blackness, concerned that one negative portrayal will damn all of us.”

    It’s not one negative portrayal. It’s 400 years of negative potrayal, and I would like to see it coming to an end.

    It would have been different if she were a white girl. White people can have diverse stories without it affecting them because they are seen as individuals. Black people are a collective, on the other hand, and anything that represents us negatively just contributes to an already shattered image. I will not embrasse an effort that crushes already broken peices. We should stop acting on what we wish the world was, and recognize how it is, and portray ourselves in a positive light. After all, no one else is.

  8. jmn wrote:

    “That really pisses me off. Like I can read Ulysses or whatever incomprehensible great British novel, and I can recognise that just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean that it isn’t good. It prolly just means I don’t know enough about what Joyce is referencing to get Ulysses. But folks with privilege are rarely going to read a book about a marginalised experience of which they have no understanding – because the experience is so poorly represented in mainstream culture – and think hey, maybe I don’t get some parts of this book, because I don’t know anything about what this writer is referencing.”

    This!! I’m falling in love with Thea a little here …

  9. Adrienne wrote:

    PPR_Scribe,

    If I’m not mistaken, there was The Inkwell which was a really sweet film.

    I personally don’t think that there should be a chasm between the different experiences of Black folks shown on the screen.

    But I do know that every good movie has some kind of conflict that arises. A movie where nothing challenges the protagonist is a boring movie. If the Black girl who summers at Martha’s Vineyard runs into a major dilemma or conflict, then that would make the beginnings of a good story.

    Based off the book Precious, I classify it as Black abused girl pain.

    It is truly sad how many Black women I know who were sexually abused as Black girls. It is as if our bodies are not seen as worthy of respect.

    The way that Precious’s father and mother treat her body is a symbol of how the larger world views us, regardless of socioeconomic class. After all when you have just been attacked and assaulted, you won’t look dignified even if you summer at Martha’s Vineyard or watch t.v. all day Harlem.

    There usually will be something indicating something wrong, no matter how a girl tries to cover up her pain. The epidemic of child molestation isn’t limited to socioeconomic class or complexion.

    I think the book is worth a read to see why we feel strongly about it in either directions.

  10. Restructure! wrote:

    Great post. My fav quotes from this post:

    But that kind of nuance is almost never discussed, perhaps because people don’t recognize it for what it is. They see someone speaking “improper” English and can’t be bothered to parse the content of the sentences.

    and

    They’re not going to think – hey, maybe there’s some parts of this story I just don’t get – they’re going to think that they fully understand it, and that this is all there is to this story. They’re not going to recognise that potentially they don’t ge the whole story because they lack some kind of lived experience that would enable them to pick up on the nuances.

    I have not read Push yet, but I really want to now. I was a bit reluctant to read this book, because it is advertised as:

    Claireece Precious Jones endures unimaginable hardships in her young life. Abused by her mother, raped by her father, she grows up poor, angry, illiterate, fat, unloved and generally unnoticed. So what better way to learn about her than through her own, halting dialect.

    and I thought that was what it was all about.

  11. PPR_Scribe wrote:

    Adrienne, I remember that–though I had forgotten the title until you mentioned it. (Thanks!) That is along the lines of what I was talking about. Though my question still goes beyond-could it be made?-to would it spur audiences to a standing-O?

    “Conflict” does not always have to be the sort of trauma experienced in movies like “Precious.” What I am struggling with is the question of what “universalizes” POC to ourselves and to White audiences. If there is a lot to humanity (anyone’s), then why is Black humanity specifically pretty much only revealed through pain and suffering? For example, why are love stories with Black leads (what few they are) condsidered “Black movies” instead of this kind of universal portrayal?

  12. Linda wrote:

    Great post, but the My Pafology section of Erasure isn’t only based on Push. It’s more based on Wright’s Native Son, and probably other “black” “ghetto” books as well.

  13. ktrujillo wrote:

    “That really pisses me off. Like I can read Ulysses or whatever incomprehensible great British novel,…

    Joyce (and his novel Ulysses) are Irish…not British. Considering the history of subjugation of the Irish by the English it is an important distinction.

  14. 9jah wrote:

    In previous posts about this movie I’ve been taken aback by folks saying they know “many” people like precious. My reaction is “really??”

    Yes, the themes dealt with in the movie exist and are often swept under the rug. I’ve met and worked with young people from dysfunctional families. Throughout the movie, I found myself thinking that it provided a glimpse into the backstory of people who are generally discounted in our “blame the victim” society. Still, precious’ character is an amalgam of kids Sapphire has encountered. Precious, I believe, would be very exceptional. It feels to me some people are more than eager to embrace a “woe is us” mentality.

    Precious was: poor, very obese, illiterate, physically abused, emotionally abused, sexually abused, incest victim – by mom and dad, impregnated by incest – twice, mother to a down syndrome daughter and contracted HIV. She was also a woman, black, and dark skinned to the extent these qualities present unique challenges in one’s life. She basically professed to possessing no true redeeming qualities. There just are not that many people like that and we should bear this in mind.

    On black culture and single story – sexual abuse (and whatever other gloom and doom there is in black books and film) happens; it happens in the black community. However, it is not an element of black culture, i.e. there is nothing inherent in black culture that brings about, fosters, promotes or justifies etc.

    It happens in white society. It also happens in latin society, asian society and basically anywhere there are humans. I don’t understand the compulsion in movies relating to black folks to racialize human issues.

  15. Keith wrote:

    It can be said that sexual abuse against children of both sexes perpetrated by both opposite and same sex assailants is the 800 pound gorilla in the room that no one wants to talk about within the black community. I have never read street lit, and I am not the type to censor others, although I would often get crap from other blacks growing up who thought I was trying to be white because I didn’t fit into some stereotype .

  16. Keith wrote:

    Actually I should say low income and working class black communities.

  17. mieko wrote:

    I remember reading similar controversy surrounding Zora Neal Hurston’s “Their Eyes Were Watching God”. Apparently, when the novel came out in the 20s (correct me if I’m wrong) there was much criticism surrounding the character, Janie, and her circumstances (poor, rural, running around with men). African Americans, her detractors said, should be viewed in only a positive light- shown as successful, moral, and prosperous. Any other portrayal would hurt “our” image.
    This, IMO hurts creative integrity, and authority. I agree with the article- instead of attacking people for writing their truths, we should attack those who would restrict our truths to only a few options. We are fighting the wrong people- literature should not be censored for fear that it is bad PR.

  18. Keith wrote:

    And what is consider a truth? Does a writer who adopted a bohemian lifestyle really talk for an inner city black youth that grow up with economic and social disparity that she herself has not experienced? It sounds like poverty porn. To me their is an issue with those who have (Rappers, writers, etc) exploiting a life style that they have not lived in order to make a profit. Again I believe in freedom of speech, that doesn’t mean I will not complain about the exploitation I see.

  19. Heather Leila wrote:

    “They’re not going to think – hey, maybe there’s some parts of this story I just don’t get – they’re going to think that they fully understand it, and that this is all there is to this story. They’re not going to recognise that potentially they don’t ge the whole story because they lack some kind of lived experience that would enable them to pick up on the nuances.”

    You know, Oscar Wao is partly incomprehensible to people who don’t speak Dominican Spanish, don’t read comic books and aren’t from New Jersey. But I’d say enough people got beyond it to go ahead and accept that it is a good book. You don’t think they would do the same for Push?

  20. Keith wrote:

    What part of poverty porn don’t you get? Let’s keep it real class and race plays a big part in what’s being argued with street lit.

    BTW most people who think they are middle class aren’t. One of the biggest cons going is that their actually is a middle class, like back in the 50’s and 60’s.

  21. mieko wrote:

    @ Keith: I’m talking emotional truths. Fiction is a lie by definition, but the point is to reveal greater truths through the use of these fictional settings, characters, etc. I’m not saying that anyone can make up anything willy-nilly. That would produce no truth at all, and serve no purpose to anyone. But if someone wants to write responsibly (e.g. properly researching historical periods/countries and neighborhoods/languages and dialects) about the perspective of someone in different circumstances than themselves I say let them do it as long as we don’t fall into the “single story” trap, where these voices are the only ones being represented. In cases like this (far too often in our communities), stories need to be ADDED to restore the balance, not taken away.

  22. Keith wrote:

    @mieko – but is that the case in street lit or even gangsta rap? These are people writing in order to compete in a market, ie for sales. Tell me honestly if they are coming from the heart emotionally as you put it or geared toward making sales in a market where exploitation runs rampant.

  23. Thea Lim wrote:

    @ktrujillo

    What I meant with that comment is that James Joyce is often read in “British Lit” classes as part of the English Lit canon. But yes, he and his writing are Irish. The subjugation of the Irish by the English does not change the fact that Irish – or white European male – voices dominate what is considered exemplary English Lit.

  24. Lindz wrote:

    “Like I can read Ulysses or whatever incomprehensible great British novel, and I can recognise that just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean that it isn’t good. It prolly just means I don’t know enough about what Joyce is referencing to get Ulysses.”

    This is how I feel about Push. In a world where I was told just because of the color of my skin I should connect with stories like Push and Coldest Winter Ever, I could actually identify with Theolonius Monk Ellison. I grew up in a rural setting instead of urban, so I could share in the character’s feelings about street lit, which I read as being ‘this isn’t my story’ and ‘I don’t get the appeal.’

    My frustrations with movies like Precious is that they seem to continue the single story of the black dysfunctional poor urban family. And while Precious might be different than other works of the urban family, it is not being marketed as such, in my opinion.

  25. Jen wrote:

    @Thea You got me thinking with your comment about Hardy (by the way, thank you for calling him bleak, four years of that man’s books in high school and uni, god, anyway) and accusations that Push is “poverty porn”. Jude the Obscure goes pretty heavy on the crushing horridness of his life, not to mention features suicidal kiddies, and from what I recall it was a pretty controversial work at the time (and semi autobiographical). Do you think works like Push will eventually be seen as canon lit? And if they do mean the mainstreaming of these stories, is it in a good way? Are we seeing a new American canon forming?

    I’ve had to order a copy since it doesn’t seem to be on the shelves in Australia yet, but I’m curious to read it, not least since there seems to be a wall of books dealing with people’s experiences of child abuse and neglect. What is it that sets Push apart? (er, I guess that’s @Latoya too!)

  26. PPR_Scribe wrote:

    I had forgotten, until this Shadow and Act post, that Angela Bassett is set to direct a movie version of “Erasure” next year. Should be interesting.

    http://www.shadowandact.com/?p=12410

  27. Thea Lim wrote:

    @Jen

    I think Hardy was probably more like Everett than Sapphire – he changed the landscape of Victorian writing by writing about the people on the other side (I guess Dickens did too) – the people who lived in abject poverty.

    I find his books interesting (though disturbing!) because he was really trying to trouble that portrait of “Regency England” with the ballrooms and carriages and whatnot that characterise Jane Austen or the Brontes (not that they weren’t also critical, but obviously they were less so than Hardy).

    That’s the thing though, about English Lit written by white folks – there is such a panoply of ways of being and ways of being white; to the extent that they’re not even thought of us as a portrait of whiteness, but just a portrait of humanity.

    I hope that both Push and Erasure make it into the canon. As much as I have reservations about Erasure, like Latoya says, we need all of these stories if people reading American Lit in the future look back to our lit for any kind of accurate portrayal of black/American/human life.

  28. Fiqah wrote:

    Latoya, Thea, thank you for having these discussions and back-and-forth about Push/Precious. It’s a refreshing departure from the likes of Juan Williams, who I understand y’all will be flaying here in the near future! :D Anyway, thanks for adding some dimension to all this talk.

  29. Tricia wrote:

    Awesome post.

    (followed a Shakesville link)

  30. InfamousQBert wrote:

    i just started reading this last night and i’ve found it incredibly compelling and moving. you can see the depth of her mind within the first few paragraphs. it blows my mind that anyone would read this and only see the “ghetto” narrative. i say that as someone who grew up middle class white. like you said about joyce, i don’t have to fully understand/relate to her life to see the depth and quality of the book and the importance of the story it’s telling.

  31. c.n.edaw wrote:

    Awesome post.

    Just read Push last nite. I grew up in the suburbs, often the only black kid in my classes. BUT…for about six months, while we were having a house built, the apartment we stayed in had me assigned to an inner city school in a rough neighborhood.

    I have to say, that while I understood Push to be a work of fiction, and I know it is certainly not representative of the entire black urban experience, nor could any one story possibly be—I could not help (for the first time in years) but think about so many of those girls I met during that brief amount of time who, at least outwardly, seemed to be a lot like Precious.

    And now I wonder, if what I dismissed then as just being “ignorant jealous girls” who “took no pride in themselves”, covered up something much more than I could have ever imagined.

    I know I will be castigated for saying this, but even at 14 years old; I felt that something MORE than a cultural acceptance of larger frames and poor diet led so many girls to be so incredibly obese at such young ages. Something MORE than just distrust of blacks with more resources, speaking proper English
    and having lighter skin and longer hair would prompt one girl to attack me with a knife in the bathroom one day.

    There was in some very young girls, a deep ANGER and resentment that I did not understand and that I felt could not just be explained away with the simplistic answers adults always gave me when I wondered why I was so often the target of this anger.

    For a few hours last night, for the first time I felt like maybe I was in one of those girls’ head and I understood why they may have behaved the way they did–whether they suffered from only one of Precious’ many burdens, just a few, or all of them.

    To me ,that’s what good books are supposed to do.

  32. LBell wrote:

    “What this whole grad school thing is teaching me is that people with privilege/entitlement are incapable of understanding that there a billion things in the world that they know nothing about.”

    This sums up my grad school MFA experience PERFECTLY.

  33. Jen wrote:

    Linda actually made my point for me I think. Everett’s Erasure is responding to the general tendency toward myopic views of black life (ghetto). I read more resonances of Native Son in My Pafology than of Push. I think it’s also important to close-read Push. It is not merely a work of realism. I see Sapphire using tropes of excess/the absurd/the grotesque as a way to approach traumas that are essentially unrepresentable.

  34. PhyllisMontanaLeBlan wrote:

    My name is Phyllis Montana-Leblanc. I was featured in Spike Lee’s documentary; “When The Levees Broke” and am the author of “Not Just The Levees Broke” My Story During and After Hurricane Katrina. Foreword by: Spike Lee. I have only seen the trailer for “Precious” and was stricken with fear. I am in the process of writing on a similar subject. The story had long been “put away” until we were evacuating New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina and I saw my past abuser. I knew then that it was time for the purging of my souls’ healing and to share with those in need as well as myself. The trailer of “Precious” hit me with fear because I saw what I felt a long, long time ago and am now armed with “what don’t kill you, makes you stronger.” I am taking my own time with reading the book and seeing the movie. No matter what people say or how they label a situation, I am stepping out on faith and knowing that my journey was for a reason and that is to take the hand of someone and lift them up into knowing we are all in need and want of love and there has to be a way of holding the hand of another and helping to remove hurt and pain and refilling that cup to overflowing. I am determined to dust off hearts and help them to “shine.” I have long since learned that “what people think of me is none of my business” because my purpose is to love, heal and help to move from the old into the new. There is a reason and a season for everything and the more we reach out to each other in a healing sense, we can also heal ourselves. Fear is a helluva curse and we must face them in this time while we have it. “There but for the Grace of God…”

  35. Jen wrote:

    @Thea Looks like I’m going to have to read Erasure as well! I’ve found all of the stuff on Racialicious about Push and co really interesting, I don’t know if it would have even occurred to me to seek it out if it hadn’t been for you guys. So thanks for that!

  36. atlchick09 wrote:

    I think there are two main dilemmas with this Precious phenomenon. Yes, the stories of young black women, regardless of their socio-economic status and experienced trauma, are rarely given a peep in white society. Thus, one can claim that Precious exposes the story of someone who is largely invisible in dominant culture. Yet, when we are given those rare glimpses into the lives of black people, they are often in the form of dysfunction, which is the other side of the argument.

    Think about the history of black Oscar award winners and nominees, for example. Our wins are far and few in-between. But in the rare instance that our talent is acknowledged, 9 times out 10, these are for roles playing out some sort of stereotype. Yes the story and life of a mammy, a woman who works unheralded long hours for her white boss, is an important one, and Hattie McDaniel won an Oscar playing one. Yes, the story of a black woman who found solace in a formerly racist white man after her imprisoned husband died in the electric chair and whose obese son was killed provides a touching love story that color knows no bounds. And Halle deservedly won an Oscar for her heartfelt portrayal. Certainly, having movies wherein black men are rapping pimps or corrupt cops can provide harrowing glimpses of complex characters, and Terrance Howard and Denzel Washington were rightly acknowledged for their roles. And indeed Taraji played a charming, sassy caretaker in Benjamin Button and has since catapulted to A-list status.

    Yes these stories are complex and real and wonderfully acted. At the same time, they focus on the mammies, criminals, and white saviors of the black experience. And these are practically the ONLY roles played by black people (save Jennifer Hudson in Dreamgirls) rewarded either the Oscar or given significant Oscar attention. Why is that?

    This dynamic becomes even more problematic when we live in a world that is not likely to interpret the stories of pain in black communities as a function of systemic injustice and racism, but something that can be resolved with lift- yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps individualism. Go into any social work classroom, which are primarily white female oriented, and try and find one that connects white privelege, discrimination, and capitalism to drug abuse and incarceration rates of people of color. Go to most large non-profit organizations that serve populations of color, and see if they empower their program participants with
    voting rights education or civic education to change the policies that have disadvantaged them. Instead, they get a curricullum focused on self-control and
    psychiatric remedies.

    My experience in social work classrooms was a very sad one, with the knowledge that many of those young white women in my classes were going to be thrust into the worlds of the Preciouses and have pity for them, but will cringe at the thought of analyzing institutional racism in understanding how Precious got there.

    In my opinion, this is a historical trend of focusing on just the pain and not the “why” behind the pain that will continue sporadically in the near future. White mainstream society will hail these works when they come out, and we’ll continue to have this debate. Only when progressive minded and brave souls who desire to tell the story of “why” and get acclaim for it at least as much as those stories that stop at the surface will this debate ever end.

  37. Jennifer wrote:

    @atlchick09 Thank you for adding yet another dimension to this discussion.

  38. lm wrote:

    “But this book was a real slap in the face. It was like strolling through an antique mall, feeling good, liking the sunny day and then turning the corner to find a display of watermelon-eating, banjo-playing darkie carvings and a pyramid of Mammy cookie jars.”

    Yeah, that’s the kind of thing I seem to remember reading a lot of black men said after the ‘Color Purple’ film too.

    Methinks they’re much more sensitive to the issue of how they’re being portrayed, and completely insensitive to the portraiture of black women being abused, and how common the latter occurrence is.

    Kind of like how defensive (some) white people are when something they’ve done is called out as racist – because they think they’re being called racist, and they’re much more hypersensitive to being called racist than they are to actually stopping doing the racist thing.

    (And no, black men don’t tend to see the parallel. The ones I’ve observed – and I’ve observed more than a few dozen dozen – are very defensive and angry that the parallel even gets raised. I expect to see Eric Daniels, or whatever his name that commenter is, weigh in with a defensive rant on the subject any second now.)

    When I was growing up, I think I always thought that a person who was a member of an oppressed group would be more sensitive to members of another oppressed group’s oppression, not less.

    Then I finished growing up.
    *long sigh*

  39. lm wrote:

    @atlchick09

    “At the same time, they focus on the mammies, criminals, and white saviors of the black experience. And these are practically the ONLY roles played by black people (save Jennifer Hudson in Dreamgirls) rewarded either the Oscar or given significant Oscar attention. Why is that?”

    Probably the same reason Denzel won his Oscar for that thug Alonzo Harris in Training Day, and not for his portrayal of Malcolm X.

    JMHO. YMMV.

  40. atlchick09 wrote:

    Yeah, I alluded to that Training Day mess. Denzel murked Malcolm X, absolutely devoured that role, and he’s portrayed numerous roles brilliantly.

    Film portrayals of dysfunction amongst blacks, whether real or sensationalized, gripping or medicore, has always been more critically received by the white-dominated film industry than anything else. Seriously, Hustle and Flow? Gag, barf. I even know folks in the music industry who WORKED with Three 6 Mafia who were dismayed that they won the Oscar for that. I grew up listening to 3 6 and love those dudes, and I know that song they won for was crap.

    Because of that undergirding discomfort, I find it extremely difficult to dish out my money for Precious. I’d rather just read the book and give the author some play.

  41. jazzmanchgo wrote:

    First of all, God bless Gabby. Aside from her astonishing gifts as an actress, she’s a powerful role model for girls and young women who are struggling with body image oppression. Every time a chubby little girl sees Gabby and decides, “Hey — it’s okay to like myself the way I am!” an important victory will be won. May she prosper and succeed in all she does. She’s magnificent.

    Props to Mo’Nique, as well, for having the courage to play such an unsympathetic character with such fearless brio.

    One reviewer said that this film perpetuates stereotypes as egregiously as “Birth of a Nation.” That comment was mean-spirited and vastly overdrawn (although the chicken-stealing scene in the film was pretty cringe-inducing). This being said, though, the movie itself is very problematic on several levels.

    As has been noted elsewhere, the “good” and “successful” people in this film are all light-skinned (to say the least — most could easily pass for white); the “evil” people or people with “issues” are dark-skinned. But this problem isn’t isolated; it needs to be seen in context — which, in this case, is the unrelievedly bleak portrayal of “ghetto” life.

    Everyday life in the ‘hood, according to this movie, is depraved and ugly beyond redemption. The combined effect of these images is insidious. Between the darkness of all those complexions and the bleakness of those scenes from Precious’s life and environment, the message is clear: for Precious to be rescued, she needs to be rescued from nothing less than “Blackness” itself.

    Finally, there’s the relentlessly individualistic vision of “liberation” that the film propagates. Once upon a time, movies like “The Grapes of Wrath” and “Raisin In The Sun” –and even, in their own way, the Blaxploitation flicks of the ’60s and ’70s– portrayed poor people as basically good, even noble, folk, mired in circumstances that they could change by working together for social progress. The “bad guys,” by and large, were the oppressors.

    This film conveys a vastly different message: the enemy here is poor people themselves (not poverty, but poor PEOPLE — especially poor mothers). Far from suggesting that unity in struggle is the way to solve problems, this film shows Precious as needing to save herself, as an individual, by distancing herself as far from “those people” as possible.

    Although there are many uplifting and moving moments in the film, although I am in awe of the acting talent shown by both Sidibe and Mo’Nique (as well as the supporting cast), and although I would still recommend it for discerning viewers, I find these messages to be extremely troubling.

  42. Scribe wrote:

    I returned from seeing Precious tonight and it stirred a lot of emotions. When I was watching this film, I wasn’t seeing color. Had it been the case, then I wouldn’t have gone to see it.

    Let’s keep it real. This film was a personal story about a girl who went through a degree of horrendous abuses. Yet, she kept her ground and placed her education and her children (despite them being born out of incest) as top priorities. I couldn’t help but leaving the film disturbed, angered, and wondering where her story led beyond that. It goes to show people that real life isn’t about happy endings and positive portrayals.

    Any person will know that these issues exist in our society. The people who are so uptight over the “image” being portrayed are sending a bad and dangerous message just as much as the ones who want to cellophane wrap us in their stereotypical boxes. That is why people, as in the beginning when Precious didn’t want to open up to that social worker, don’t want to speak out about what’s going on in their lives without the fear of being scrutinized by judgmental people.

    I think people who want to stereotype, when in reality, are unaware of these situations happening, but want to believe its happening to a certain group of people, need to get out more. Better yet educate themselves instead of following idiot Hollywood for advice on the world.

    While I’m still on the topic, while people are critiquing Precious’ image and the portrayals in street lit, I think everyone should take a look at this:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0415856/

    Any abuse doesn’t discriminate.

  43. afro_dyte wrote:

    I wrote about this on my LiveJournal. I did see “Precious,” and while I appreciate the film for what it is, I am ambivalent about what it does, for reasons that previous posters already mentioned.

  44. luv2read wrote:

    I’m confused… I am white, not a writer,just an avid reader. I could completely identify with much of the protaganist’s feelings, in the novel, Push. The times I cried most was when people were nice to her, and it was so foreign. I have delt with the feelings of not being valued, the confusion of feelings in incest, single motherhood, and homelessness. I certainly did not have the entire scope of her issues, and my life is that of a suburban housewife, and mother now. I did not think of this character as a portrait of black culture, but a need for more alternative schools rather than continued money poured into a school system that simply pushes children through it rather than actually dealing with the individual learning needs. I’m sorry I am ignorant to what many of you are feeling. How does the book Push, shed a bad light on just the black culture? The book A Child called IT was a true story of a white boy. Someone would be doing me a great service by explaining the feelings I am reading in these posts. Thank you so much. I thoroughly look forward to reading some of the other books mentioned on this site.

  45. jazzmanchgo wrote:

    Luv2read –

    The issue you address is very complex — but one (overly simplified) way of putting it is that when a “majority” culture or people is represented, the very fact that that majority has cultural hegemony protects its members from being stereotyped by that image. So-called “minorities” do not enjoy that kind of advantage.

    There are middle-class white folks all over the media –on TV, in movies, etc.– so there’s plenty of diversity on offer.
    Unfortunately, people who aren’t middle-class white males don’t get represented that broadly or with such diveristy. I’s a cliche, but it’s true: virtually the only time a lot of white Americans see an African-American or Hispanic in the media, it’s when that person has done something wrong.

    Speaking just for myself — my problems with “Precious” aren’t so much, “What are the racist white folks going to think?” They’re going to think whatever they believe, whether they see this movie or not. My main problems are the messages it may send to the African-American community itself — reinforcing color prejudice (being “color-struck,” in the vernacular); perpetuating the idea that freedom and liberation are a matter of individual salvation and “escape,” rather than collective social action; viewing their own neighbors or counterparts in the neighborhood down the road as “the enemy,” rather than seeing the situation as the culimation of a long history of oppression and disenfranchisement.

    Yes, for instance, we need a hard-eyed critique of welfare — but I want to see it from Malcolm X’s perspective, which saw it a conscious tool of subjugation, rather than stereotyping “welfare moms” as abusive, profanity-spewing leeches.

    Why couldn’t there have been ONE person in Precious’s own building, or on her own block –poor, dark-skinned, maybe even on welfare– who was intelligent, kind, and a good role model? Someone who could have been a mentor to her; maybe someone who marched with Dr. King, or took to the streets of Harlem after hearing Malcolm speak in the ’60s. Why couldn’t she have been inspired, at least a little bit, by the intellectual and cutlural richness of her own heritage?

    The Hotel Theresa, where “Each One Teach One” was located, used to be the place in Harlem where visiting Black dignitaries from the arts (incl. performers who played the Apollo), as well as Black intellectuals and world leaders, headquartered themselves when they visited New York. Couldn’t at least a taste of this magnificent cultural history have been incorporated into Precious’s learning?

    Would that have been too much to ask?