Menu
by Sean Lyons Every winter, cinemas are flooded with “social injustice” films which highlight a certain area of inequality or oppression, either in the past or present day. These films are blatantly tailor-made to appeal to awards committees, often presenting the issues in a one-dimensional and preachy fashion. At a glance, Green Book appears to fit this bill. Its plot of an Italian-American man being hired to drive an African-American gay man through the south of the US in 1962 reeks of “awards bait.” As a result, I had no great expectations when going to see it. However, Green Book is more than just an “Oscar movie” as it contains a number of interesting observations on race. It is careful not only to depict the overt type of racism that is easily identifiable to us but also the subtler manifestations of racial bigotry. It begins by introducing us to Tony (Viggo Mortensen), a nightclub strong arm who conforms to the traditional stereotype of the Italian-American male; he enjoys baseball, food, family, music and most crucially, he is a racist. This is displayed early in the film when he disposes of the glasses that two black plumbers drank out of in his house. We soon learn, however, that Tony’s prejudices are only skin-deep. In spite of the racist implication of the aforementioned action, he has no qualms when offered a job as a chauffeur to Dr. Shirley (Mahershala Ali), a black classical pianist. This is our first indication that Tony’s values are not as strong as he would have us believe. Dr Shirley flips all of Tony’s preconceptions of black people: he is well-dressed, well-spoken and well-educated. This forces Tony to dramatically reassess his view of black people. If Dr Shirley doesn’t conform to his view of the typical black man, does it mean that this view is a lie? It becomes clear that Tony has no true ethical opposition to African-Americans. His “values” at the beginning of the film are merely informed by his environment and upbringing. Dr. Shirley reveals himself to be tremendously resentful of lower-class black people, as demonstrated by his interactions with them in the south. He views himself as a black man who has risen above the common rabble and escaped the conventions of his racial stereotype. As a result of his climb, he believes that black people who don’t make the effort to better themselves are perpetuating stereotypes and contributing to racism. What is worth noting, however, is that no matter how much Dr Shirley betters himself, he still falls victim to racism wherever he goes. It becomes evident that in trying to improve himself, he is really trying to “make himself white” in the eyes of white racists and this can obviously never be the case.
Green Book asks a question about whether a person prone to persecution can avoid said persecution. It also answers this question: they cannot. At one point, Tony claims that he is “blacker” than Dr Shirley because he eats fried chicken and enjoys the music of black artists like Little Richard and Aretha Franklin. He also claims that his conditions are worse than Dr Shirley’s because he was raised in poorer circumstances and is also subject to frequent racism. What Tony doesn’t understand and what Dr Shirley deftly points out to him is that white people are born with innate privilege. The pessimistic note of this observation is that no matter how much a black person may improve themselves to break the glass ceiling that society places above them, the colour of their skin means that they will always be subjected to racism. Green Book has plenty to say about how we view race and racism. Sadly, the “we” in question is white people. The film is centred around Tony and how he develops from being a committed racist to being a kind and compassionate person who eventually welcomes Dr Shirley into his home. Tony is the “white saviour” who shields Dr Shirley from racism throughout the film. Dr Shirley only develops as a character with Tony’s assistance. It is very much a film about racism through a white person’s eyes and applauds Tony for his transformation more than it shines a light on his former depravity. As a result, Dr Shirley is of secondary importance in the film. What could have been a film about an African American gay man navigating the perils of a divided 1960s America is instead a film about the white man who found it in himself to see him as a human being. It focuses on the need for love in order to unite people of different ethnicities and backgrounds. In doing this, it spends little time depicting racism through the eyes of a black person. Despite this, the film’s multi-faceted look at race provokes thought in the viewer and makes it a film worth seeing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
UCC Film WritersEditorials and reviews by students at University College Cork. Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
|