Can we forgive old movies?

[Tech priest support]

On a thread about animated superhero movies someone brought up the old superman movie serial cartoon episode "the mechanical monsters" which was an undeniable masterpiece of very old school animation and a very influential cartoon as it may have contained the first consistent, animated, transforming robot.

 

While it's not really possible to deny that this cartoon, and the series it was in, was a masterpiece of animation and deserves a place in cinematic history, and it would be very hard o find anything objectionable about this episode, the same can't be said for other episodes.

 

I've seen all the episodes of this beautuifilluy animated and technically excellent series,  and I'll admit many episodes are horribly racist by today's standards. Racist stereotypes abounded in this series. If a non white person appeared in this series, you can be he would be a walking stereotype writ large.

 

An episode set in Africa was really awful, with Africans portrayed as  evil, bloodthirsy,  pointy teethed, pointy headed, subhuman savages. And don't even get me started on how the Japanese were portrayed. The fact an episode about Japanese saboteurs was literally called "Japoteurs" is all that need be said.

 

And at the time this series was made racist stereotypes were the zeitsmode of the times. Movies like "gone with the wind" were loaded with them.

 

So in today's world can we forgive old media for being racist, sexist, xenophobic, etc? Or do we have to condemn it?

 

Personally I say we should view things in terms if the world they were made in.  I mean I'm pretty fond of the U.S. constitution, and it had some pretty bad stuff in it like the 3/5ths decision. That doesn't mean I want to scrap it. It needs revision now and then and fortunately was made to be revised as necessary.

 

While we can't really revise an old movie without really ruining it, can we just admit it's a testament to social progress and evolution that things in media that were once acceptable are now very objectionable? 

 

I would not even try o have this discussion on some sites, like RPG.net, as it would be impossible given the Borg mentality that exists on them and the absolute intolerance of anything other than absolute mindless agreement with the "correct" view. I think most folks here are sufficiently unassimilated to have an actual discussion on a matter like this.

 

 

 

https://youtu.be/DadH3KjHZws

 

 

 

[Badger]

 

Well, being someone who watches a lot of old Westerns (I grew up on John Wayne movies) I may not be the best to decide.

 

But, I have to agree it is a product of the times, for the most part.  Although, some things they should have known better.  I am slightly more forgiving with Japanese portrayals in WW2, extremely uncomfortable with it, but we were in the middle of a pretty brutal, cutthroat war with them, you cant forget that before you do pass judgement. 

 

THe nation and the Western world, for that matter, seem to be in a mode of wanting to hide history, to fear history, rather to confront and learn from it.  I worry that will ruin us all someday.

 

If I gather more thoughts, I'll try to re-reply

 

[Starlord]

I've forgiven lots of people in my life...doesn't mean I still hang out with them.

[Tech priest support]

7 minutes ago, Starlord said:

I've forgiven lots of people in my life...doesn't mean I still hang out with them.

I'm not sure I'm getting your meaning here.  Do you mean we "forgive" old media for being racist but then seal it away in a toxic waste vault forever, never to be seen again? I'm not too jiggy with that. I mean if we want to look at history of animation these are pretty essential to seeing how the medium evolved. Also they do show how social values have evolved.

 

Do you mean we acknowledge that this happened, accept it as history and not do it anymore without trying to erase history? Yes that's the spirit I agree with.

 

 

[megaplayboy]

There was a Superman radio serial in the 50s that had him taking on a thinly disguised KKK.  

[Tech priest support]

Yeah, once again comics and SF lead the way in some social issues. Personally I think when we got to the rotten, hellish heart of Nazi Germany it made some people realize where casually acceptable racism and prejudice could lead gen a civilized society.

 

 

https://www.supermanhomepage.com/radio/radio.php?topic=radio-reviews/070146-fierycross

[Lucius]

 

What exactly are you asking?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary isn't sure what "forgive" and "condemn" mean in context....

 

[Hyper-Man]

And here I thought we were going to critique blazing Saddles ?.

[DasBroot]

It's a viable target for this topic.  Deliberately over the top or not.

 

Persecuting those who are different and objectifying them as lesser or evil is as old as man itself:  These tones echo back through art and culture into antiquity.  Most of it is still on display and most of the writings with these tones often get a pass on 'well, they didn't know any better'.  Which is not true, in my opinion - many people have always 'known better': we're probably not significantly more intelligent or self-aware than our ancestors (just better educated). 

 

Should they be buried or should they be used as examples of why society has needed, still needs, and will always need to change its approach?

 

It's something close to my own heart as my children are half African-American.  The thought of them seeing these old depictions and taking them to heart in some way... hurts.  So bury them?  At the same time while things are better there's still enough racism to go around and they will be exposed to it sooner rather than later (and my son has been - he just isn't old enough to understand it yet, but he's getting there far too soon).  So prepare them?

 

I believe that pretending that these works were never made isn't the right call ... but that perhaps limiting access until context can be established is.  But what is that context? "People used to suck, but we're getting better (hopefully)?"  What does contextualising accomplish?  Does saying 'People don't think like this anymore' negate the hurt or insult of the original work?  I don't know - I can't know - but I suspect not.

[Cygnia]

In a similar vein, I no longer listen to old Cosby comedy CDs, read Marion Zimmer Bradley or watch "The Usual Suspects".  I just CAN'T.

[Hermit]

 

This applies to more than movies so... in general:

 

Context needs to include details like the time period, maybe a brief mention of what was going on in the current history. War Propaganda, for example, even when you're the 'good guys' (ala the Allies in WW2) is rarely going to be nice to the enemy nor too concerned with their feelings. You need context to explain things like that, even if you feel it will never excuse it. 

 

Then comes the big challenge of who decides what is too offensive? Blazing Saddles uses racist language, and that may outrage some despite the fact part of the whole theme is how racism is idiotic and racists are idiots. There are some who want to ban Huckleberry Finn because, in my opinion, they completely miss the substance of the message because of the style of how it is delivered.

 

 I know the slippery Slope argument has it's flaws, but I do think that there are some dangerous precedents to deciding that if something has warts, it cannot see the light of day ever, and certainly cannot be enjoyed. I can admire Thomas Jefferson's contributions to this country without approving of his owning slaves. I can laugh at Kentucky Fried Movie while realizing that A Fistful of Yen is the very poster child for "Funny but WRONG". I'd hate to see either TJ's works or Kentucky Fried Movie banned entirely, and not just because returning the Louisiana Purchase at this stage of the game would be a #####. Okay, that's not likely to happen, but it seems to me there is a danger in demanding pristine perfection and modern day morality from all creators of the past and their creation.

 

So, speaking for myself,  I'll err on the side of being offended and walking away from something when I find it so rather than suggesting it be forbidden from even consideration by mature adults who have to decide for themselves where they draw their own lines. I detest the term "trigger warnings" but yes, if you feel something is dubious, put a warning on it for others (Though I myself tend to take dates themselves as a kind of warning) and try to provide a little summary context. 

 

Of course, things get more complicated when you talk about what you want your kids to see or not see. One person's "Absolutely not" maybe another's "They need to see this"

 

 

 

 

 

 

[death tribble]

There are a few that can't be forgiven and I can't give you the names because I don't know the names. One was a cartoon that was crudely racist. Made in the 1930s.

 

Others are based on the fact that they are portraying racism or sexism and airbrushing that from the film means you have nothing to work with. Odds Against Tomorrow with Robert Ryan as a racist working with Harry Belafonte springs to mind.

[Christopher R Taylor]

If you cannot forgive old movies, probably best you avoid watching them, reading old books, talking to old people, reading history, and thinking about things you're unfamiliar with, uncomfortable with, or are new to you.  Maybe some bubble wrap to snuggle in.

[Tech priest support]

1 hour ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

If you cannot forgive old movies, probably best you avoid watching them, reading old books, talking to old people, reading history, and thinking about things you're unfamiliar with, uncomfortable with, or are new to you.  Maybe some bubble wrap to snuggle in.

Nice reply. Makes a point with just a dash of sarcasm, but not an obnoxious amount.

[Cancer]

I think you have to be able to examine and discuss works from an earlier era, explicitly including aspects of them which are now considered reprehensible, making due accounting for things which are now way out of bounds.  If you don't do that, then subsequent people will lose the ability to recognize those attitudes now deemed reprehensible, and they will arise again with new vigor.  In short, you will be empowering those attitudes you profess to despise.  I think a great deal of the polarization we have now in the US is in fact partly due to the wish to forget, to put old bigotries behind us, and it omits the fact that those bigotries spring back to virulence from those fetid corners where they've hidden when people stop remembering what evils they spawned.

 

Consider it a form of vaccination.

 

I ask my students from time to time if they know what a "necktie party" is.  The few that do look at me with shock, and they are unhappy when I tell them that choosing to overlook that part of our cultural heritage means that we're doomed to repeat it.

[Tech priest support]

You know the thing about blazing saddles was it was an anti racist movie and mostly white people were portrayed badly. Stupid ignorant, weak, corrupt, evil, etc.

 

Bart (clevon little) was brave, dashing, handsome, intelligent, witty, friendly, kind, forgiving, heroic, etc. In the end the townfolk learned and came to see him as a hero.

 

 

 

 

[mrinku]

I think everyone has to make their own call. I'm with Cygnia about Cosby etc. It saddens me greatly in particlar that Rolf Harris, who I loved as a kid is in that unwatchable group too.

 

As far as stuff like sexism and racism in historical context, well sometimes that needs to be there or you're compromising the historical context and at least you can find counter-examples where it's shown to be wrong. Wartime racism propaganda is probably more extreme, since the gloves were deliberately off... all Germans as jackbooted, sadistic Huns is almost as bad as all Japanese as buck toothed, bespeckled, suicidal fanatics. The difference there is that the former was a more recent (WW1) target of racism. Africans, Asians and Jews in particular had it rough for much longer. 

 

There was a telling sequence recently in New Super-Man where Kong Kenan was mystically taken to Detective Comics #1 and sees Slam Bradley beating up a bunch of "yellow skinned goblins" for fun, which he finds funny. The scales are then lifted from his eyes and he is horrified to see the "goblins" are Chinese. I found that great writing - as a millennial from China, Kong has no context for that particular obsolete stereotype and couldn't recognise it.

[Cassandra]

1 minute ago, mrinku said:

I think everyone has to make their own call. I'm with Cygnia about Cosby etc. It saddens me greatly in particlar that Rolf Harris, who I loved as a kid is in that unwatchable group too.

 

As far as stuff like sexism and racism in historical context, well sometimes that needs to be there or you're compromising the historical context and at least you can find counter-examples where it's shown to be wrong. Wartime racism propaganda is probably more extreme, since the gloves were deliberately off... all Germans as jackbooted, sadistic Huns is almost as bad as all Japanese as buck toothed, bespeckled, suicidal fanatics. The difference there is that the former was a more recent (WW1) target of racism. Africans, Asians and Jews in particular had it rough for much longer. 

 

There was a telling sequence recently in New Super-Man where Kong Kenan was mystically taken to Detective Comics #1 and sees Slam Bradley beating up a bunch of "yellow skinned goblins" for fun, which he finds funny. The scales are then lifted from his eyes and he is horrified to see the "goblins" are Chinese. I found that great writing - as a millennial from China, Kong has no context for that particular obsolete stereotype and couldn't recognise it.

 

Let's see.  The Nazis systematically murdered Six Million Jews in Concentration Camps, but we made them look Cruel and Sadistic in movies.

 

We made Japanese look bad in comics, but they killed 100,000 Chinese Civilians in The Rape of Nanking, many of them women and children.  Oh, and lets not forget the Bataan Death March.

 

I would say that the comics didn't even come close to showing the evil of the Axis.

[Hermit]

13 minutes ago, Tech priest support said:

You know the thing about blazing saddles was it was an anti racist movie and mostly white people were portrayed badly. Stupid ignorant, weak, corrupt, evil, etc.

 

Bart (clevon little) was brave, dashing, handsome, intelligent, witty, friendly, kind, forgiving, heroic, etc. In the end the townfolk learned and came to see him as a hero.

 

 

 

 

Yup. Like I said, Racism in that movie is portrayed as idiotic, and the racists as idiots. As they should be.

[mrinku]

9 minutes ago, Cassandra said:

 

Let's see.  The Nazis systematically murdered Six Million Jews in Concentration Camps, but we made them look Cruel and Sadistic in movies.

 

We made Japanese look bad in comics, but they killed 100,000 Chinese Civilians in The Rape of Nanking, many of them women and children.  Oh, and lets not forget the Bataan Death March.

 

I would say that the comics didn't even come close to showing the evil of the Axis.

 

Cassandra, the jackbooted Hun thing was invented in World War One, well before all that. And while aggressors, the Germans weren't notably more brutal than the Allies in that war. It was all propaganda.

 

As far as the Japanese goes, that was just the standard Asian stereotype dusted off and applied.  Are you saying that war crimes justify depicting Asians as yellow monkeys? Slam Bradley was beating up Chinese in America.

 

WW2 IS a special case, because unusually, one side was particularly bad. 

[Cassandra]

Just now, mrinku said:

 

Cassandra, the jackbooted Hun thing was invented in World War One, well before all that. And while aggressors, the Germans weren't notably more brutal than the Allies in that war. It was all propaganda.

 

As far as the Japanese goes, that was just the standard Asian stereotype dusted off and applied.  Are you saying that war crimes justify depicting Asians as yellow monkeys?

 

WW2 IS a special case, because unusually, one side was particularly bad. 

 

Germans has imperial ambitions as far back as the 1870s.  You can ask the French all about that.  They build the High Seas Fleet so they could usurp England and it's Empire.

 

After they were defeated in the First World War and even before Hitler came to power the Germans created the political science of Geopolitics.   They plotted and planned for the day when they were be on the march, first to take over Europe, and then leverage that to control of Eurasian, believing control of the "World Island" would give them control of 7/10s the Industry and 7/8s the Population of the world.

 

The Japanese are Imperialist Men who desired to "Bring the Eight Corners of the World Under One Roof."  They were the worst colonial power in Asia by all accounts.  The desire to remove the European powers out of Asian was not an attempt to liberate these areas but to take them over themselves. 

 

The Japanese had a saying.  "The Travelers shame can be brushed off."  Which means anything they did outside of the Home Island didn't matter.

 

Evil is evil.  What someone looks like on the outside is superficial.

[mrinku]

6 minutes ago, Cassandra said:

 

Germans has imperial ambitions as far back as the 1870s.  You can ask the French all about that.  They build the High Seas Fleet so they could usurp England and it's Empire.

 

 

Hmm? You mean when the French declared war on Prussia in 1871?

[Cassandra]

Just now, mrinku said:

 

 

Hmm? You mean when the French declared war on Prussia in 1871?

 

Like the Prussian didn't force the issue and put the French into a position they had to declare war, and then trap the French army so easily.

[mrinku]

You've got to keep things in context. Bismarck wanted to reunify Germany (which the wars of religion had broken up, followed by French conquest under Napoleon) and restore them to a world power.

 

In the 19th century, that meant Colonial Imperialism, so yeah, Germany had Imperial ambitions. They were playing catchup with Britain, France, Russia, Turkey, Austria, Spain, Portugal and The Netherlands. Japan fell into that trap as well, but had less options, so went for what it could in Asia. Italy had a go as well.

 

I'm not excusing any of the colonial powers, any more than I take sides in the Thirty Years' War. It's just what it was. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

If you don't do that, then subsequent people will lose the ability to recognize those attitudes now deemed reprehensible, and they will arise again with new vigor. 

 

And then, there's always the chance that you may find a forgotten virtue or a cultural strength that has been lost, as not all in the past is awful and not all in the present is superior.