Analysis of American History X Essay

In this assignment, I was ch completelyenged to flummox important historic and cultural fraternitys of the take up Ameri tolerate register X and analyze the important rhetorical of my findings. I went round choosing Ameri jakes register X by placing a analyse on Facebook listing out the depictions that I had any slight interest in carry oning for this assignment and American account statement X won by a landslide. I was literally slightlywhat disappointed, because I valued to do The X-Files, hardly this instant I chose to quiver to my promise and go with what ever so g boardbook won. I readed American archives X some years later its exempt in 1998. Although, I know I must lounge about hold of watched it some conviction after(prenominal) I got out of high school day because at the time of its release I was 12 years old and with the bill of violence in that convey I know I did non watch it with my p atomic number 18nts. From the little memory I had of the assume from the first off time, I could only a drive outdon that American floor X had a lot to do with freshned victory and racial contrariety, that Edward Norton played the lead role and that the fry who played in the first eradicator was his comrade and was all gr concur got up. I hesitated reflection the enter again for kinda sometime because I knew I would shoot to dedicate a solid twain hours of mental energy towards it.One could plead that I was to a capaciouser extent e trulyplace sound procrastinating however, I benefitted from having d wholeness so because future fork discussions provided a plantation for how I could written report the movie house. After reading much or less(prenominal) and discussing in class the topic of approaching a text organically, I decided to use that mentality and view the lead as objectively as non-object individual can. It is heavy to say whether it was that approach that ultimately direct to my findings in the call for, or if I would give discove ruby-red them anyway since it was my second time viewing the video. Every unmatchable can appreciate that after the second and third time of watching any scoot you begin to selection up on things you missed the first time. In either case, I put the video to be incredibly eyeball opening and I enjoyed having to research the taradiddle surrounding the make and, ultimately, the state of the country during what was my childhood. American History X is a film that depicts a traditional white family in the mid nineties, merely spotlights the 2 pals journeys into maturity.The video focuses on the older brother Derek, played by Edward Norton, and how Dereks Neo-Nazi associations in his spiritedness greatly influence his junior brother Danny, played by Edward Fur abundant. fuel by rage of his male pargonnts death, the film opens with a motion picture of Derek viciously killing three young dis colouring men who were attempting to steal his fathers truck. Derek is then sent to prison house for 3 years during which time his junior brother Danny begins to follow in Dereks footsteps with the Neo-Nazi brass instrument. The movie flips amongst down(p)-and-white ikons of the past and twist contexts of the present. The saturnine-and-white flash prickles attempt to illuminate Dannys perception of Dereks past life epoch intermittently presenting how Derek all oercame is his own hatred. The color scenes portray the present and highlight the cause the hatred has had on the faultless family. Overall, the movie critiques on non only the do of urban racialism and bigotry, but alike the how minds of young populate are so impressionable.The film nevertheless succeeds in creating a sense of sympathy for characters that are typically hated, Neo-Nazi racist skinheads, and paints them non as foolish, unenlightened racist bigots, but instead as misguided intelligent human beings. On the surface the film discusses r acialism, violence, and bigotry, but upon ambient examination I embed a deeper message indoors the film. Watching it a second time, I existingized that this film is really emphasizing the lack of unfavorable opineing skills in young passel, oddly in teenagers and young adults and how impressionable their minds are. Then, upon notwithstanding research related to those very topics it touches on in the film, I discovered that the thoughtl movie itself actually harbors an obscure produce of racial contrariety that was reflected in many an(prenominal) movies end-to-end the 1990s. Needless to say, even in at onces ball club we deal with these corresponding issues of racial discrimination and intolerance for other heaps beliefs.However, within the some juvenile years it has evolved to focus more(prenominal) on the gay, lesbian and trans sex association. History certainly can be seen as repeating itself as many of the lists that gays and lesbians chafe regarding their elegant rights and contrariety al some mirror the same arguments do back in the 1960s during the well-mannered right movement. Reverend Dr. Phil Snider made this connection so blatantly clear in his deliverance that went viral on YouTube that he gave in the beginning the Springfield City Council of molybdenum just a a few(prenominal) weeks ago. In his speech, Dr. Snider cleverly took quotes today from speeches given by white preachers in favor of racial segregation in the 1950 and 1960s and merely substituted select words and inserted gays and lesbians (Preacher Phil Snider Gives fire Gay Rights Speech). I teleph unmatchable the twist of his speech highlights the important issues regarding any micturate of racial discrimination and discrimination and they roughly certainly could be applied to the issues of racialism that America faced in the 1990s.The 1990s was saturated with debates over, court cases involving and numerous media outlets e extendicity on the iss ues of racism and favorable action. In May of 1992, Newsweek printed an dodgeicle entit guide The crossroads of Shattered Dreams that summarized the conflicts of racism in the early 90s stating, whites charge that affirmative action is unsporting macabres respond that it was unfair for them to be starved of opportunities by 300 years of thralldom and discrimination. That same year, the verdict of Rodney Kings case outraged the black community and sparked riots lasting six days with over 2,000 people injured and 55 people killed (Riots Erupt in Los Angeles). In edge of 1996, the three white law school candidates charged that they were unfairly discriminated against and rejected for enthral into the school for less qualified minorities in the famous case Hopwood v. Texas Law instruct (Hopwood v. University Texas Law initiate). unsloped prior to the release of American History X in 1998, atomic number 20 enacted Proposition 209, which revise the states constitution to ban preferential treatment of any persons ground on race or gender in humanity sector education, employment, and spying (Parker). only of these enormously impactful events and numerous others do oftentimes of the discrimination that occurred in the 1990s. In fact, sociological research confirms discrimination is more often the result of organizational practices that have unwilling effects or predispositions cerebrate to social stereotypes and does not so frequently stem from individual prejudices (Tomaskovic-Devey). Nevertheless, the culmination of these types of incidents led to a demand for Hollywood to headline positive characters of color (Hughey 549). Producers and handlers felt embrace to make-up for their own history of racist film do and, consequently, this also gave rise to the development of a veiled type of racism within films referred to by Hughey himself as the cinethetic racism(550).Cinethetic racism in the 1990s was typically found in films that have a black ch aracter whose purpose in the film is to support the white protagonist. Typically this black character, coined the witching(prenominal) black by Hughey, was pictured as the voice of reason, or having some other type wisdom, within the film and who selflessly helps the white character carry through his goals. These films rest on friendly, helpful, bend-over-backwards black characters that do not seek to change their own impoverished status, but instead attest a primordial, hard-wired desire to use their charming power to correct the wrongs in a white world (Hughey 556). The fantasy explicit in this quote is clearly homely in the film American History X during the many scenes of Derek in prison take oning in the laundry means with Lamont, a friendly black captive who attempts to befriend him. Eventually Derek is able let down his guard and the future interactions between them usually consist of Lamont humorously explaining how things work within the prison.There is one scene , however, that does approximately contradict this concept of a charming Negro and, instead, causes Derek to catch a form of wrong. This contradiction is depicted in the scene of Lamont and Derek working in the laundry room and Derek very genuinely asks Lamont why he is in prison. Lamont explains how he was sentenced for assault on a law military officer because he accidently dropped a TV on the officers foot that he was exhausting to steal. Derek initially resists and jokingly asks Lamont to tell the truth, but Lamont insists that he did not assault the police officer and only dropped the TV on the officers foot. This is the pivotal split second within the movie that shows Dereks guilt and sympathy for the first time towards a black person.I think this is the close important scene end-to-end the entire film because it gives the audience exactly what they indispensability they want to see Derek experience this epiphany and for him to blemish how he has perpetuated discrim ination against black people. just now it does not take very long for the film to revert right back into the traditional cinethetic racist ways. In Dereks last interaction with Lamont, the audience learns that during Dereks stay within prison Lamont was protect him from further beatings and rape after Derek chose to no longer affiliate with the Neo-Nazis within the prison. That scene ultimately preserves the concept of the magic Negro and that black people have this underlie desire to serve to the inescapably of white people. I liken this idea of cinethetic racism to what actors refer to the subtext of a paw.Normally, the subtext refers to the underlying motives of a p machinationicular character, but this concept of cinethetic racism is like the subtext of an entire film. Of superior critical concern is how sorcerous Negro films advantageously brim up white supremacist and normative orders musical composition ostensibly posturing as an profane challenge to them (Hughey 55 3). On the surface it appears to be a film that tries to defeat racism, but ironically at that place are unavowed agendas that all in all go against the moral of this story. Just as magic Negros are a disguised form of racism found in American films in the 1990s, there were also disguised forms of racism acquittance on politically throughout the nation, more specifically in calcium.During the 1990s, racism and obliging rights disputes were approaching the heights they reached in the civil rights era of the 1960s. However, after many decades of affirmative action policies attempting to right the wrongs minorities faced and with calcium experiencing an economic downturn, many whites became less broad(a) of minorities receiving preferential treatment through affirmative action programs (Alvarez). Now the whites are claiming they were discriminated against in a form of reverse discrimination. What I find so interesting more or less the idea of reverse discrimination is that it im plies that discrimination only naturally goes in one direction whites against minorities. And, furthermore, that there will unendingly be a certain direct of racism, as if to suggest that there is a threshold for which it is wel count, but also that it is the responsibleness of the majority, white people, to keep it in check. but the moment any form of racism or discrimination is felt against whites, it is completely intolerable and demands political action. It was the supporters of Proposition 209 that debated that contemporary affirmative action programs led public employers and universities to reject applicants because of their race, and that Proposition 209 would return us to the fundamentals of our democracy, as summarized in an article capturing the main(prenominal) arguments of Proposition 209 entitled Prohibition Against Discrimination.With in the same article it preached, let us not perpetuate the myth that minorities and women cannot contest without special prefer encesvote for fairness not favoritism. The fairness of Proposition 209 has been hotly debatably ever since it was enacted in 1997, but I think the dinner party scene with Derek and his father in American History X most succinctly sums up the mindset of the many supporters of Proposition 209. The scene opens with a dinner table conversation between Derek and his father just about the material he is development for his English class. His father than gestatees his distaste for much(prenominal) material with the following monologue in all this stuff about making everything catch its not as leisurely as it looksyou gotta trade in great books for black books now? You gotta question these things Derek. We are not just talking about books here, were talking about my mull over. I got two blacks guys on my squad now that got their jobs over a couple of white guys who actually scored higher on the test. Does that make sense? They got their job because they were black not because they we re the best? Americas about if you do your best you get the jobnot this affirmative blacktion crap.its nigger bullshit.This dinner scene dead exemplifies the concept that 1) the moment whites feel they are being discriminated they instantly raise the red flag and 2) that discrimination is more often the result of organizational practices that have unintentional effects and does not so a lot stem from individual prejudices, as I stated earlier.Another aspect that I find so interesting about American History X was how writer David McKenna was able to pull directly from real life situations to add dialogue into this screenplay. McKenna and Edward Norton actually rewrote a portion of the script quoting from regulator Pete Wilsons speech advocating Proposition 209 in 1995 (Goldstein). More importantly, it was used in a scene where Derek is trying to energize a group of young skin heads before they vandalize a grocery investment company owned by minorities. I find it so ironic that th e character of a racist Neo-Nazi was reciting actual words from a speech promoting the removal of affirmative actions polices that were, allegedly, mean to reduce discrimination and increase equality. When I discovered this tidbit of information I was completely blown away. I had no idea how closely this movie reflected real problems going on in association in the 1990s. McKennas use of Pete Wilsons speech is clearly an example of art reflecting reality, but Pete Wilsons speech was not the only source from reality in which McKenna got his inspiration.McKenna grew up in Southern calcium, where the film story takes place, and ad hominemly witnessed bigotry and racism (Bruce). From his encounters and elongated research, McKenna decided that the point he tried to make in the script is that a person is not natural a racistMcKenna precious an consummate portrayal of how good kids from good families can get so terribly disordered (Bruce). Personally, I think McKenna succeeded in hav ing that be the main message of the film the impressionability of a young mind and that all behaviors are learned.The film simultaneously follows Dereks procreation and how he becomes snarly in the Neo-Nazi organization and how his involvement with that group greatly influenced his younger brother Danny. The dinner scene I detailed above is the key scene from McKennas screenplay that supports the idea that racism is a learned behavior stemmed from outside(a) organizational practices. However, despite how well have the movie was and the numerous nominations Edward Norton received for his performance, that is not the authorized message the director think.Tony Kaye was the director of American History X and, ironically, he also turned out to be a major competing persuasive embrace throughout the entire film making process. Kaye battled with directors, producers, writer David McKenna and Edward Norton himself claiming that New Line motion picture never acknowledgeed him to crea te his vision of the film going as far as to take out full scallywag ads in trade magazines bashing the film and even requested to have his name remove from the film entirely and replaced with the pseudonym Humpy Dumpty (Goldstein). In a statement made briefly after the films release, Kaye skined that Edward Norton redact a majority of the film in order to increase his screen time in the film and that the producers did not allow Kaye an opportunity to present a black voice to provide depth and parallelism to the film and furthered that he wanted the film to be an homage to free speech and responsibility (Leinberger).I think the main reason why Kayes authorized vision never made it to the film was because it clashed so a great deal with McKennas original message. McKenna wrote the film based off of his personal experience witnessing acts of racisms in Southern California in throughout the late mid-eighties and early 1990s. Whereas, Kaye is not only much older than McKenna, but grew up in United Kingdom and had only been nutriment in the United states for a few years before he got involved in the film at all, and, therefore, did not quite have the same outlook for the script (Topel).It should also be storied that this was Kayes first feature film and his previous directing experience came from extensive work with TV commercials and music videos (Goldstein). And while McKenna himself may not have been directly involved during the filming process, as most writers are not, I think Edward Norton and the producers all believed in and followed McKennas vision because of how much it related to the struggles that America was facing at that time. This is not to suggest that Kayes vision for the film was wrong, but that producers have to consider what the audience wants and expects to see.From studying American History X, I have learned how racism evolved in a very quaint fashion. As racism, specifically towards black people, became less and less accepted by whites over the last 150 years, certain segments of society seemed to find ways to continue a small, but undeniable level of racism since it was no longer socially acceptable among the general population to outwardly express it with for instance, lynching. racism and discrimination has certainly come a long way over the last sixty years, but it has definitely not been eradicated. In fact, some would argue that now whites are beginning to experience a type of reverse discrimination due unforeseen effects from affirmative action programs.In regards to American films however, one would have to sit down in person with directors and producers of 1990s films to determine if they intentionally created these magical Negro characters in order to perpetuate racism. Aside from the fact that it is highly unconvincing that anyone would ever openly admit to that, I personally think that cinethetic racism and the magical Negro were just an unintended minute of a religious cult that was going on throughout Hollywood at the time, the fad being to have black people portray certain qualities of wisdom and magical powers within films.In either case, it is very curious that a movie such as America History X meets the qualifications for cinethetic racism. In my opinion, for a film that was intended to enlighten the audience of the problem of racism in America, yet ultimately perpetuated a veiled version of it, could no more flawlessly fit into this concept of cinethetic racism. Also, the argument of whether or not reality reflects art or if art reflects reality is just as frustrating to argue as whether the chicken or the egg came first. plainly in the case for this film, I would contend that American History X, art, is reflecting reality. In fact, the notion behind cinethetic racism and the magical Negro tie in so neatly with the arguments for Proposition 209 and Gov. Pete Wilsons speech that it is just uncanny. With a closer look into both, one can see that each packet th eir own masked form of racism veiled as though whites are helping minorities. Art was imitating the subversive racism that was occurring in reality.As an actor myself, I think it is unfortunate for director Tony Kaye that, for whatever reason, he was not able to get his original vision of the film produced. I think because of the numerous racially historic events that were occurring the 1990s that producing a movie which refer on the freedom of speech just about racism as Kaye originally intended, was the last thing any audience wanted to watch in a theatre. All in all, I think film did a fabulous job spotlight historical events and attitudes going on throughout society during the 1990s, despite the fact that the film may be perpetuating racism at a subversive level.Works CitedAmerican History X. Dir. Tony Kaye. Perf. Edward Norton and Edward Furlong. New Line Cinemas, 1998. convey.Alvarez, R. Michael, and Lisa G. Bedolla. The variety Against Affirmative Action in California R acism, Economics, and Proposition 209. maintain Politics and insurance Quarterly 4.1 (2004) 1-17. Sage Publications, Inc. Web. 21 Oct. 2012.Bruce, David. Racism in America=Hating Others. American History X A Hollywood saviour Film Review. HollywoodJesus.com, n. d. Web. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Goldstein, Patrick. Courting Trouble. Edward Norton knowledge Page. N.p., 13 1998. Web. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Hopwood v. University of Texas Law School. Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2012 .Hughey, Matthew W. White Redemption and Black Stereotypes in Magical Negro Films. Social Problems 56.3 (2009) 543-77. www.jstor.org. University of California Press, 2009. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Leinberger, Gisela. Film coach Tony Kaye Makes contestation at Berlins Brandenberg Gate Director of American History X Speaks to Films Issues. PR News Wire. N.p., n. d. Web. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Parker, Beth H. The Impact of Proposition 209 on E ducation, fight and Contracting. ERA Prop 209 Impact. Equal Rights Advocates, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2012. . Preacher Phil Snider Gives Interesting Gay Rights Speech. Perf. Rev. Dr. Phil Snider. Www.YouTube.com. YouTube, 13 Aug. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Prohibition Against Discrimination or Preferential Treatment by State and Other Public Entities. Initiative constitutional Amendment.. Californias 1996 General pick Web Site . N.p., n. d. Web. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Riots have a fit in Los Angeles. 2012. The History Channel website. Oct 21 2012 . Tomaskovic-Devey, Donald, and Patricia Warren. Explaining and Eliminating Racial Profiling. Contexts. American Sociological Association, 2009. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. .Topel, Fred. Interview with Lake of Fire Filmmaker Tony Kaye. About.com Oct 21 2012.Whitaker, Mark. A Crisis Of Shattered Dreams. Newsweek. 5 1991 1. Web. 19 Oct. 2012..