Cultural Racism in Hollywood and the Media
Ruthie Grant, Ph.D.
Cultural racism comes into play “when
whites use power to perpetuate their cultural heritage and impose it
upon others, while at the same time destroying the culture of ethnic
minorities” (Gay 33). If one applies that definition against the
most visible, powerful, and influential medium today – the media –
one has no choice but to conclude that Native Americans, Chicanos,
Asians and African Americans have been and continue to be victims of
cultural racism. The media’s ability to shape public opinion, the
police’s power to oppress, and the politician’s ability to create
laws that divide, exploit and disenfranchise, make viable avenues
for Native Americans, Chicanos, Asians and African Americans to
overthrow the iron hand of cultural racism difficult, at best, yet
not impossible. Any attempt to explore cultural racism, by
necessity, must include an examination of how different ethnic
groups have reacted to, or attempted to counter cultural racism in
Hollywood and the media.
It was only within the last few years
that networks responded to collective pressure from a “Brown Out”
that resulted in The George Lopez Show, CSI and Desperate Housewives
with Hispanic surnames in the lead. Cable television were the first
to respond, however, with Nickelodian’s Taina and Lifetime’s The
Division, two shows starring Puerto Rican females who are real life
sisters. The latter, however, are now both cancelled, although in
syndication. The point is, until recently, one was hard pressed to
find a Chicano in a lead role in a prime time television show, even
though African Americans fare a bit better on sitcoms. But then
there’s 24 Hours, a drama featuring an African American as President
of the United States, no less. Oh, but wait, that’s on cable, and so
is The Sopranos, a drama about an Italian mafia family. Oops, did I
mention it’s a stereotype of Italians? One might say, at least
that’s better than having to look in vain to find an Asian or Native
American starring in a family sitcom, drama or episodic on network
television.
In spite of some progress, the
unsettling reality today remains that when Asian, Chicano, Native
American or African American children turn on the television set and
see their race depicted very little, if at all on mainstream
television; or, alternatively, portrayed a stereotype, or a criminal
on network news, a subliminal message is sent and received.
Subconsciously these children come to feel that their ethnic group
does not matter much within mainstream society. Ultimately, many
face either assimilation into mainstream culture or invisibility.
Arundhati Roy, best selling author from India, in her novel The God
of Small Things, candidly discloses how her people came to “adore
our conquerors and despise ourselves.” She labels them
“anglophiles,” or people who are “pointed in the wrong direction,
trapped outside their own history and unable to retrace their steps
because their footprints had been swept away” (Roy 51-52).
Unfortunately, becoming an anglophile is a part of the colonization
process for ethnic groups who have been colonized. Thus, most try
to get in where they fit in, or come to believe that if they quietly
go along, they will get along. More often than not, such attitudes
end up inadvertently perpetuating continued marginalization and/or
lack of recognition of ethnic groups struggling for economic parity
and visibility in Hollywood.
During the Oscar’s and Emmy’s °©–
Chicanos, Asians, African Americans, and Native Americans in Tinsel
Town are most often blatantly slighted or overlooked as Tinsel Town
overtly and covertly practices equal opportunity discrimination
against ethnic actors and actresses. Historically, different
minority groups react differently. For example, when the
brilliantly performed, profound and powerfully moving Asian movie
The Joy Luck Club did not receive a single Academy Award nomination,
one would have expected the Asian community to speak out. Yet, they
did not even utter what amounted to a loud sigh of discontent, in
spite of the fact that The Joy Luck Club was the first dramatic
Asian movie at the box office during that decade – not to be lumped
with action, horror or martial arts movies. Granted, almost a
decade later, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon did win a much deserved
Academy Award, but not for best actor or actress. With The Joy Luck
Club, one might reasonably have hoped that a movie with such depth,
insight and heart would usher in more Asian movies like itself. And
one might also have hoped that The Joy Luck Club might have been
defended by other ethnic communities against institutionalized
racism in Hollywood.
Realistically, however, one must take
into consideration a form of discrimination that came into play with
The Joy Luck Club that is even more ingrained than racism. For
instance, The Joy Luck Club was primarily a woman’s movie, written
by an Asian female portraying mothers teaching daughters their worth
as women by refusing to accept abuse or second class treatment.
Thus, sexism may well have compelled a heavily patriarchal culture
to keep quiet due to widespread acceptance of sexism. Thus, The Joy
Luck Club suffered a double dose of discrimination. Still, Asians
and Native Americans continue to be more under-represented than both
African Americans and Chicanos, no doubt due to the fact that they
are less likely to speak out in public as a collective. Other than
Lucy Lui, Jet Lee or Jackie Chan, there are also very few Asian
actors or actresses who are household names.
The Chicano community did not protest
the Academy’s slight of the beautifully done and incredibly acted
movie A Walk in the Clouds. Other than the lead male, Kenau Reeves,
the other leads in the movie were Mexican, Chicano or Hispanic. The
story had strong family values that offered a rare, historic glimpse
into Mexican culture that one does not often see on the big screen:
the rich or well-to-do Mexican family. Even though Frieda Cahlo
explored the theme of upper middle class Mexican culture, in spite
of having a known actress like Salma Hayek in the lead, the film was
only shown at independent theaters. If nothing else, one would have
expected A Walk In The Clouds to win an Academy Award for best
cinema-photography, but it did not.
Historically, African American artists
tend to be more outspoken and will band together in public protest.
For example, in the early 80’s, Alice Walker and other prominent
African Americans got together and purchased a full-page ad in the
New York Times to honor Toni Morrison who was over-looked for a
literary award they felt she deserved. This act of defiance was
aimed at shaming the New York Times for failing to properly cover
the slight. This publicity stunt worked in that both the Pulitzer
Prize and the Nobel Peace Prize for Literature were subsequently
awarded to Toni Morrison. Later, when The Color Purple was
nominated for eight Academy Awards, yet did not win a single one,
not only did the African American community raise their voices in
loud protest, they went so far as to publicly accuse the Academy of
sending a message to Steven Spielberg not to do black films in the
future, or they would refuse to recognize his brilliance once again.
They proved prophetic in that a decade later, when Spielberg decided
to direct Amistad, once again, the Academy snubbed another amazing
African American Spielberg film, while rewarding him for directing
Schindler’s List. No doubt about it, Schindler’s List deserved an
Academy Award, but so did The Color Purple and Amistad. It seems
that writers, actors, or directors who break the rules or defy
Hollywood stereotypes cannot expect the Academy to reward their
courage, imagination, creativity, or vision.
With the example set by African American
artists on behalf of Toni Morrison, it would appear that Asian and
Chicano communities might have followed suit with The Los Angeles
Times in support of worthy Chicano and Asian American authors who
are consistently overlooked for Nobel and Pulitzer prizes.
Moreover, the same applies for supporting worthy ethnic films
deserving of recognition. The fact is, awards open doors for actors,
actresses and directors to get future projects funded. Thus, they
carry weight in terms of determining what types of films get made in
Hollywood and which ones won’t get made. So one cannot say that
Oscars and Emmys don’t matter because they do.
Even though African Americans continue
to be discriminated against as much as Chicanos or Asians, one can
safely say that one primary reason they tend to be more prominent in
sports and entertainment is primarily because they are more willing
to risk reprisal or denial by publicly speaking out against
discrimination. For example, African Americans did not hesitate to
speak out, ahead of time, the year that both Hallie Berry and Denzel
Washington won Academy Awards. Afterwards, many were equally willing
to point out that Denzel was denied awards for playing
non-stereotypical, positive and compelling roles such as Malcom X
and Hurricane Carter, while rewarded for portraying a crooked cop.
The point is, the “squeaky wheel” is the one that gets oiled, and
when groups do not collectively get together and speak out against
discrimination, the dominant group who discriminates gets to do so
with impunity. On the other hand, since ethnic groups suffer
similar forms of discrimination, it would behoove communities of
color to band together to fight cultural racism collectively,
instead of alienating themselves, fighting separate battles, or
fighting against each other. The best way to win is through
collective bargaining in large numbers. After all, the “Brown Out”
worked when blacks and browns in Hollywood came together to protest
the lack of programming for Chicanos on mainstream television.
For any disenfranchised group not to
come together as a whole or with other disenfranchised groups to
speak out when an injustice or inequity is involved, is the
equivalent of standing quietly by with a painful smile on one’s face
as someone steps on the toes of your brand new shoes that are
already too tight. While it is encouraging to see, since September
11th Chicanos banning together with other groups to protest the
treatment of illegal immigrants, it is equally imperative to band
together with other disenfranchised groups to protest stereotypes in
the media that serve to perpetuate discrimination and cultural
racism.
There is much to be learned from
history. In retrospect, Chicanos might have benefited more from the
civil rights movement had they joined hands with African Americans
by collectively identifying themselves as a minority, instead of
buying into the white desegregation ploy in the 1940’s that labeled
Chicanos as “white.” This move became a double-edged sword designed
to placate Chicanos while taking away their power to protest
discrimination by whites after being labeled white themselves; after
all, how can one who has become labeled white effectively or
legitimately complain about discrimination by another white?
Unfortunately, once the Chicano community realized the double-cross
and the double-bind, they were then forced to fight to reclassify
themselves as a minority in order to fight cultural racism and
discrimination in their communities, which continues to this day. In
fact, “Mexican Americans and other minorities had a difficult time
convincing people that they belonged to the civil rights movement”
(Acuna 308). The result for Chicanos was that they were not able to
benefit from or to ride off of the wave of reforms during the height
of the civil rights movement in the 60’s. They had to “wait until
the Cisneros case in 1970 for the courts to classify Mexican
Americans as an ‘identifiable ethnic minority with a pattern of
discrimination’” (Acuna 309).
Part of the problem was that while
Blacks were fighting for desegregation and integration in the 60’s,
Chicano’s had already waged their own separate civil rights movement
during the 1940’s. (McWilliams 245-256). For example, in 1947
Mexico’s ambassador to the United States asked U.S. citizens to make
“a sincere, determined effort to do away with racial prejudices”
against Chicanos (McWilliams 244). Timing is everything, however.
It appears that the Chicano civil rights movement began before the
American public was ready to embrace real change. Moreover, Chicanos
“did not achieve political power” during the 60’s due to extremely
low voter registration, which caused Chicanos to be ignored by the
Democratic Party (Acuna 318). Moreover, although the Chicano
population has “increased from about two million in 1930 to … almost
nine million in 1980, its members have obtained little decision
making power” (McWilliams 285). Low voter registration continues to
be a problem that prevents Chicano’s from being courted by some
politicians, even thought Bush wooed the Cuban population in Florida
because that state was crucial to his campaign.
More importantly, in the 1960’s the
“barrios did not explode with the same fervor as Black ghettos” in
that the “institutions of social control were stronger in the
Mexican barrios than in Watts” (Acuna 310). There was also a lack
of “traditional involvement” by Chicano youth who “often acted
outside the mainstream … often lacking a knowledge of history or any
contact with Chicano associations, many Chicanos outside of Texas
believed that they had begun the Chicano movement and that militancy
had never existed before their generation” (Acuna 311). In fact,
“so many practices and ways of thinking are born out of past
experience that unless these are known, present conduct becomes a
riddle (Gustavson 80).
History proves that the ruling class has
always utilized a “divide and conquer” mindset with poor people or
ethnic groups, thus, effectively keeping marginalized groups divided
against each other as well as within their own groups. When the
infrastructure is destroyed from within, there is little hope for
such groups to join forces from without to gain economic and
political power. Historically, the power structure has also managed
to keep ethnic groups under foot by limiting access to quality
secondary education and higher education. “A recent study of high
school students showed that the aspirations of Anglo, Chicano, and
Black students were very similar, but that expectations of Chicano
students, conditioned by American society, were much lower”
(McWilliams 290). As a result, Chicano students have a much higher
drop out rate.
In addition, minority enrollment for
Chicanos and African Americans immediately dropped at UCLA once
Affirmative Action was abolished. Protests by students at UCLA,
after the fact, amounted to “too little - too late.” Slowly and
insidi-ously, Chicanos and other minorities are losing gains fought
for during the civil rights movement. Today, Asians, Chicanos,
Native Americans and African Americans still lag behind the national
average in terms of economic parity, political power, visibility on
the big screen, and prime time television. Moreover, these groups
continue to be denied loans from mainstream banking institutions to
support self-employment, home ownership, or higher education.
Federal Government aid amounts to a drop in the bucket. And now
mothers are cut off from Aid for Dependent Children before they have
adequate time to complete a college degree. Further, these ethnic
groups continue to be excluded from high paying, upper level
management positions in Corporate America, and from influential
political posts with real power. Many politicians of color tend to
be too conservative to be effective, and those who dare to actually
fight against the establishment end up hobbled by the system or
killed (Acuna 307-356). Warren Beatty’s film Bulworth, starring
Hallie Berry, was a courageous and powerful commentary on this sad
fact.
Cultural racism in Hollywood and the
media is insidious, divisive anddevastating. Dissemination of
information and education are keys to turning this disaster around.
Yet it cannot be done while cultural racism continues to be
propagated through public educational systems that employ far too
many under-qualified, uncaring or racist teachers. Of course, a
start would be to pay teachers more than policemen with a high
school diploma. It is a fact that non-racist, competent, and caring
teachers can and do make a difference in the lives and future of
children of color. Teachers have the power to break the cycle of
ignorance and apathy by respecting all children, empowering them,
inspiring them, and teaching them cultural pride, diversity and
tolerance.
Martin Luther King already proved the
efficacy and effectiveness of boycotts and economic sanctions to
bring down oppressive power structures. Major change in Hollywood
and the media will not occur until communities of color come
together collectively and use their enormous buying power to say
“no” to sponsors of biased news shows, or “no” to networks that fail
to carry prime time shows featuring family entertainment with
non-stereotypical Asians, Chicanos, Native Americans, or African
Americans in the lead. The question remains: are ethnic minorities
willing to set aside cultural or racial differences long enough to
see the similarities in their situations, and embrace the reality
that the real power has always been in the people. All the people
have to do is wake up and own their power.
WORKS CITED
Acuna, Rodolfo “Occupied America” Harper Collins
(1988).
Gay, Geneva “Racism in America; Imperatives for
Teaching Ethnic Studies,” Banks,
James A. (editor) Teaching Ethnic
Studies: Concepts and Strategies. Washington
DC: Nation Council for Social Studies (NEA)
1973.
Gustavson, Carl “A Preface to History” (CAPCO
Reprint)
McWilliams, Carey “North From Mexico” –The Spanish
Speaking People of the United
States, Praeger Publishing (1990).
Roy, Arundhati “The God of Small Things” Random
House (1997). |