thuviaptarth | VVC09: Problematic vids

Entry tags:

vidding,
vvc 2009

VVC09: Problematic vids

I was going to do this later, as part of my general round-up on premiering vids, but since I am already getting queries about my initial comments on two of the vids, I'm breaking it out. I found two of the premiering vids shown racist and one to display cisgendered erasure of trans/genderqueerness. By "racist" or "cisgenderist" I do not mean that the creators of these videos or the people who enjoyed them consciously intended to cause offense, harbor conscious racial or gender prejudice, or commit or support hate crimes. I mean that I believe the videos perpetuate and reinforce racist or cisgendered ideologies and the erasure of genderqueer people and people of color.

I am a white, cisgendered woman. I don't speak as a person of color or a genderqueer person; I don't know if any of the people of color or genderqueer people at the con agree with my complaints, because I did not discuss the vids below with them. If I am saying something problematic with respect to race, genderqueerness, or any other oppressed identity in this post, I hope readers will feel safe to point it out, and that my friends will not attack just complaints out of mistaken loyalty to me. I am leaving comments unscreened for now but may change this if heavier moderation seems required.

deejay, Fight the Power (Tropic Thunder)
In Tropic Thunder, Robert Downey, Jr. plays an Australian actor (hair dyed blonde, blue contact lens) who wears blackface makeup to prepare for a role as a black man. I'm told the movie is a parody of Method acting. I haven't seen it.

The vid is about the vidder's ~~desire~~ [appreciation] for Robert Downey, Jr.['s sexiness], and uses clips of his other roles to illustrate ~~her appreciation for him~~ [this]. The vid doesn't comment on Tropic Thunder as a movie, because the particular vices or virtues of the movie clearly do not concern the vidder; instead, she clearly wants to share her appreciation of Downey's sexiness and her happiness in fandom as a place where she can celebrate that sexiness with other women. It is a light-hearted, playful vid.

Blackface doesn't make me feel light-hearted and playful. Blackface makes me feel like I've been slapped in the face. Watching blackface in a vid that doesn't comment on it at all, among an audience of a hundred fifty of my friends and acquaintances who mostly seem to be laughing and enjoying the ride, didn't actually make me feel slapped. It made me feel so thoroughly disassociated from my own emotions that I might as well have been floating above my seat, looking down at everyone. I could not talk to people about it then, and I could not talk about it the next day at Vid Review, and I'm not particularly happy to be talking about it now.

No, I don't think the vidder intended the use of the blackface clips, without commentary, to be offensive. But that's what being white in a racist society means: you don't have to think about racism, because it doesn't hurt you.

Anon., "Right in Two"
This is a Supernatural vid in which Castiel, an angel played by a white male actor, reflects on the violence of the human world and how it has drawn in his fellow angels, as illustrated by real-world news footage and clips from Supernatural in which Uriel, an angel played by a black male actor, feels contempt for humans, goes evil, murders other angels, and is eventually killed himself. This follows a common pattern in the mass media in which people of color appear only in relation to violence--usually as perpetrators, occasionally as victims. I found the use of real-world news footage, and the pain of people of color both imaginary (Uriel) and real (Rodney King, Iraqi people, black people in footage of the LA riots from the 90s), to give "depth" to the suffering a white male protagonist horribly offensive and trivializing, and thoroughly disengaged from any understanding of the causes and consequences of violence. (I am reminded, unfortunately, of

morgandawn's "Testify," a Starsky and Hutch vid in which footage of the U.S. Civil Rights movement and the use of a song associated with queer pride are used to express the stories of two white male cops.)

By framing this as the "universal" story of an angel responding to the "universal" tragedy of human violence, this vid erases the specific political, racialized, and imperialist history of many of the clips used. Furthermore, by sending this in as a response to a challenge for a theme of I.D.I.C (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations), the vidder seems to be saying that diversity leads to violence and warfare. Frankly, that is not what I had expected from the challenge responses.

For a very different take on the vid, see

destina's comments.

jescaflowne, Go Baby (Cherry Lips)
This is a colorful, energetic vid that's mostly about action, based on the Charlie's Angels movies. Laura's post singles it out as "mainstream sexual objectification"; during Vid Review,

jarrow mentioned the vid didn't work for him because the visuals were of women but the song was about a man. My issue wasn't quite either of these. I'm very fond of the way lots of vids genderfuck pronouns, either deliberately inverting them as commentary or just plain ignoring them in favor of emphasizing the story rather than the ostensible gender roles, each of which is a subversive move in its own way.

But "Go Baby (Cherry Lips)" is about genderfuck, or genderqueerness, about a boy who's addressed as male or described as male in the second person/apostrophe ("You're such a delicate boy/in the hysterical realm"), but who's described as female in the first verse ("This life can turn a good girl bad/She was the sweetest thing you had ever seen"), is based on the work of J.T. Leroy, and was first paired on a single with the song "Androgyny." Notably, it celebrates genderqueerness--and particularly the "femininity" of "men"--rather than using it as an insult or a put-down. For me, using this to talk about the sexiness of cisgendered women--who are already expected to follow those dictates of femininity--erases the genderqueerness of the song and contributes to the invisibility of genderqueerness and the policing of gender identity in popular culture.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Thanks for writing this.

(I saw deejay's replies to you and, uh... wow. Yes, what impact could the casual & uncritical use of racist imagery possibly have on ANYONE?! ~~People of color don't count.~~)

Have you actually watched the film?

Nope. I haven't seen your vid, either, which is why I'm not talking about either of those things; I'm talking about your comments.

You said, basically, that because you weren't thinking about race when you made the vid, your vid says nothing about race. 1. Intent is irrelevant. 2. Dude, you included clips of blackface in your fun crack vid, and you didn't carefully consider the possible interpretations? You're astonished that someone might bring up racism in response? Blackface is racist imagery. People still do it. It's not something you can throw around casually (that's about using it to make a political point, but it's a good general guide), especially if you're white!

It's racist and it's hurtful, and that's the "impact" it can have on people.

I've read varying reports on how okay Tropic Thunder was, but at least they used it purposefully.

ETA: left in an abandoned half-sentence, oops.

Edited 2009-08-20 14:43 (UTC)

Any still-brain-dead-from-two-days-of-air-travel comments made are genuine here. I remain astonished that anyone is taking the vid out of the context in which it was created. Especially if they haven't even bothered to watch it yet (or its source).

For the record, anyone's attempt to lecture me about the "hurtfulness" of racism is entirely unnecessary. Thanks.

I don't doubt your sincerity.

I think

thuviaptarth is looking at it within the context in which the vid exists, namely... Oh, hey, while I was writing this, ze said what I was going to. So yeah. That context.

I'm sorry. You seemed confused as to what the problem is. Should I just lecture you on the hurtfulness of blackface?

Try watching the film, it's quite iluminating.

And, no, I truly have no actual desire for RDJ. *g*

Okay, I tried to rephrase that part.

Iluminating (see above) is actually illuminating, yay! (I kan spel? Nooo.)

Substitute "sexiness" for "acting ability" and you would be getting closer to the intent of the actual vid.

Slapping anyone was never the intent, and I apologize (yet again) to you for any sting you may have felt at any time.

Substitute "sexiness" for "acting ability" and you would be getting closer to the intent of the actual vid

But the "Woof!" comments don't connote acting ability; they connote sexiness. You didn't choose clips that showcased RDJ's variety of roles or his acting ability, you chose clips in which he looked pretty.

You've commented repeatedly about intent and context. I don't think you ever intended to be hurtful. That's really not the point. The context of the vid is a racist society and world in which blackface has been used repeatedly to demean, humiliate, insult, and discriminate against black people, and that you didn't intend to invoke this history doesn't mean that it's unreasonable for other people to see it.

Try watching the film, it's quite iluminating.

And, no, I truly have no actual desire for RDJ. *g*

Your brackets and strikethroughs make me giggle. (Sorry!) :D

Thanks for writing up this post sooner rather than later. I apologize if my earlier comment made it seem like I was questioning your judgment on the vid. I think it's an interesting question, how knowlege of the source material affects interpretation of a vid, because not everyone is going to know the source material (and those who do know it may have differing interpretations or reactions). I do think a vidder should be aware of how her production can come across to these various sections of her audience. And particularly for a movie like this, which controversially played with some offensive concepts and background, it does strike me as...well, I don't think there should be any shock about being called out for seeming unaware of the potential impacts. As I recall, the trailer for the movie created controversy because no one knew what the heck was going on with RDJ in blackface. A vid would likely do the same, for people who hadn't seen the movie. As the saying goes: words have power. So do images.

(I actually don't recommend the movie to you -- unless you're curious -- because it struck me as a typical Ben Stiller boyfest, and I didn't think it actually had anything intelligent to say about either blackface or Method acting, even though I found the execution funny.)

I found your comment about the use of the "Go Baby" song enlightening. I feel a bit behind the curve on issues relating to gender politics and genderqueerness (to the extent I'm not even sure what words I should be using) but that was very clear.

Maybe Deejay was joking, or maybe she thought I made her sound stalkerish, which I certainly didn't intend to. I totally support fandom as a place where women get to express desire in ways most of society doesn't allow!

Your earlier comment was fine. I *didn't* see the movie and I don't mind making that clear. I don't think I'll be seeing the movie because the image of RDJ in blue contacts hit some of my major personal issues around body image and beauty.

I don't know a lot about genderqueer issues myself, and I hope any readers who know more will feel safe if they need to say I'm misrepresenting them. But, at the (low) level of knowledge I have, that's how the vid struck me.

the image of RDJ in blue contacts hit some of my major personal issues around body image and beauty.

Just FYI, if this makes you feel any better, he's wearing the blue contacts because his character is pretty much Russell Crowe.

Like I said, I don't think the movie is that funny (except for the Satan's Alley bit, which I still would watch), but it is at least aware of the racial issues it's dealing with.

I would also say that a vid, using reasonably well-known source that *mocks* the use of blackface (whether it succeeds in that for you or not), can reasonably be assumed to be also supporting that *disparagement* of an offensive action--and need not somehow also make its own separate meta-commentary on the subject or else be considered racist or race insensitive.

I disagree, but I would phrase it the way my original comment upthread attempted to: I think it is reasonable to expect a vidder to not be surprised that people would find a vid racially insensitive, where that vid features racially shocking or racially offensive images without clear commentary.

And I absolutely think that being able to interpret a vid as mocking or disparaging of such images lies primarily in the vidder's execution. This is the danger of playing with controversial material (whether well-known or not): if you can't make it clear that you know what you're dealing with, you risk getting some angry, and at the very least questioning, reaction. By all means go ahead and vid what you want, but don't be surprised if people take issue with something that looks careless.

I don't consider Tropic Thunder reasonably well-known.

Whereas I do (although I also haven't seen it). Therein may lie some basic explanation of our different takes.

Right in Two was posted today in the VVC LJ community - I suggest reading the vidder's notes, they were quite illuminating (or at least, to people who had read the vid in a way that varied from the vidder's intention)

ETA: At any rate, it cleared some confusion I had over the vid, as to what reading was the intended one, because I saw two readings for it, one being the one you described here and one being my first impression, which I found out was closer to the original intent (as in, highlighting the show's racial fail and society's racial prejudice, not using the racial issues to highlight white male emo)

Edited 2009-08-21 01:02 (UTC)

I've added a link to the vidder's post. I don't think s/he was successful in conveying that intent, although I think

[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<user="elz">') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

I've added a link to the vidder's post. I don't think s/he was successful in conveying that intent, although I think <user="elz" site="www.dreamwidth.org">'s suggestion about casting the vid from Uriel's POV instead of Castiel's is fascinating. Though I would still have issues with the use of news footage, or at least the particular news footage selected.

I agree that there are problems with the execution, and just the fact that people have such polar opposite readings of that vid really makes that obvious, but I understand the vidder's intent (and I agree with the point they were trying to make). However, rough around the edges is a good way of describing not the execution (and by execution, I don't mean the editing itself but the way the argument was laid out)

Just to offer an alternate take on the "Go Baby (Cherry Lips)" vid -- I can mostly reconcile the lyrics & the images by linking the three main characters of the movie to the "we" of "we're right behind you" in the chorus (rather than the subject of the song, whom the vocals address).

But that also depends on my read of the movies, which is along the lines of a sort of postmodern/parodic burlesque of femininity. From that perspective, the movies have a certain affinity with the genderqueer theme of both the song & JT LeRoy/Laura Albert's books.

I wouldn't want to push my take on the movies too far into Judith Butler territory, especially since it's heavily grounded in my own viewing experience (each time, I saw them in groups of primarily women, both straight and lesbian), but I don't think it's totally idiosyncratic either.

I can see that. I also wasn't aware of the JT Leroy connection until after the con -- my initial discomfort was based entirely on the lyrics.

I also don't recommend the movie to you, although I will say I enjoyed it immensely and kind of think it as genius in some parts -- but I live and work in Hollywood, so none of it was lost on me. Particularly since, if I were going to deconstruct Tropic Thunder, it's not a film about race or the portrayal of racisim or prejudice against people with special needs (which is where I had the most difficulty with the film), but about the entertainment industry's pervasive and all emcompassing need to appropriate everything and anything for their own distorted use if it means it will sell tickets, or boost their ego, help them win an oscar, give them an identity, etc etc, without ANY consideration for the individual or group they are "portraying", which is then expanded to comment on all individuals who sensationalize personal experience for the purposes of acquiring fame.

Whether the film succeeds in any of the above is moot, imo. Like I said, I live and work in Hollywood, I see this go on EVERY DAY; I thought it was rather brilliant, once I got past the gore and Ben Stiller's bombastic often down right annoying acting.

I haven't seen Deejay's vid since watching it in Premieres, but I remember going into it being nervous, largely for the very issues you raise. I found it *fascinating*, then, to watch the crowds reaction, which was, iirc, largely favorable. The vid is very light-hearted on the outside, and I don't really know if Deejay's intention was anything other than creating a light-hearted RDJ-is cool-vid, but personally, it just played right into the same theme that was my understanding of the movie. If that makes sense.

I'm very grateful for your comments regarding "Go Baby". Everyone's comments for that vid have been very insightful. I confess all I took away from that vid was shiny happy kick ass girls, but I don't hear lyrics that well when watching a vid (I think I'm too focused on the visual) and I had no previous knowledge of the history of the song. The Charlies Angel's movies go right up against the line for me re: the portrayal of sexualized women for the benefit of men. On the one hand, it's all about girl power for both the characters and the actresses, but on the other, it's all fake, silly, ott, and ridiculous, and then there's Charlie, who is never there, and not seen, and bestows his benevolant god-like approval on them, which is really creepy.

That's fascinating, thank you!

Yeah, I don't think I'm going to see "Tropic Thunder" any time soon; I've been having a lot of issues lately with stories that use events that affect women or people of color as metaphors for depersonalized "universal" themes (e.g., "Dollhouse" and whether it's "really" about rape or identity).

I haven't seen the Charlie's Angels movies, either. I can definitely see why a lot of people enjoyed the vid;

jescaflowne is really great at drawing visual and kinetic parallels between the moves for fighting and the moves for more traditionally feminine pursuits like modeling, dancing, and cheerleading. I loved her cheerleaders vid in Club Vivid.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

VVC09: Problematic vids

no subject

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject