Friday, February 27, 2015

John Legend's Legendary Speech

Last week's Oscar's have the media world spinning; there is so much talk about the performances, winners, speeches, dresses, and more. I even wrote another blog post that focuses on the racist comment about a celebrity's hair. In this post, I'd like to focus on the powerful and moving acceptance speech of John Legend, one of the writers and singers of "Glory," the Oscar-winning song written for the movie "Selma."

In his acceptance speech for the award for Best Original Song, Legend brought national attention to the fact that the United States is "the most incarcerated country in the world." He goes on to state that "There are more black men under correctional control today than were under slavery in 1850." And he's right. In 1850, there were 872,924 African American men of 16 years or older enslaved in the today, there are about 1.68 million African American men under correctional control. (Remind anyone of Billy Dee's interpretation of the Prison Industrial Complex?)
Common and John Legend accepting the award for Best Original Song
United States. In the United States

Like his song "Glory," Legend's acceptance speech brought a very important and increasingly prevelent issue to national attention. (I wrote another blog post about "Glory" and its relevance to the United States today; please check it out if you don't know a lot about the song and would like to understand how it is still relevant today.) Although the song was written for a movie about events that took place 50 years ago, it's lyrics are still very relevant today. Similarly, although slavery is part of our nation's past, we see that an extension of it lives on in the incarceration of African American men. What Legend doesn't mention is how we might fix this problem of the overwhelming incarceration rate of African American men in the United States. (We talked about it a little in class while discussing the Prison Industrial Complex.) There is so much to consider when thinking about how we might fix this problem. First, how did this problem come about, and why? Why is the incarceration rate of African Americans increasing at such an alarming rate?

A Strong Mane

Last week, 43 million people tuned in to watch this years Academy Awards, or the Oscars. Although the primary focus of the night is obviously to honor the best in the movie world, there is always talk about what celebrities are wearing. This year, Fashion Police "correspondent" Giuliana Rancic commented on 18-year-old Zendaya Coleman's hair, stating that star "probably smells like patchouli oil or weed." Wow.

Despite the blatantly racist and offensive nature of Rancic's comment, Zendaya Coleman commented with eloquance and pride. Take a look at her full response to the Rancic's comment below, along with how amazing Zendaya looked:
Zendaya Coleman at this year's Oscar's





















Don't feel like you have to read the entire response, but it very enlightening. Zendaya focuses on the fact that the fact that young African American girls must smell like weed is a huge stereotype, then goes on to name many successful, powerful, African Americans that sport dreadlocs. She then goes on to say what locs mean to her, that they are a "symbol of strength and beauty." Lastly, Zendaya stated that "some people should listen to India Arie's 'I Am Not My Hair.'"

Her response, while eloquent and enlightening, was also very true and much needed. The fact that she was able to bring up so many important issues, such as stereotyping and labeling people because of their hair, to such a large scale audience, will hopefully bring about much needed change and coversation about important issues. Society needs to confront these issues and stop stereotyping and  judging people based on a physical feature, based on their race. We need to change the way we view young women of color, and people of color in general.

How can we make this change?

Friday, February 13, 2015

Beyonce's "Glory"

At this year's Grammy's on February 8th, "Queen Bey" (Beyonce) herself performed her rendition of "Take My Hand, Precious Lord," which would seque into Common and John Legend's original song "Glory" from the new movie Selma, a film about Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s march in Selma, Alabama and the civil rights movement. If you haven't already, take a look at Beyonce's performance at this year's Grammy's below:

While obviously an outstanding and breathtaking performance- both vocally and visually- Beyonce's performance at this year's Grammy's was also a statement. Why did an oh-so-popular African-American singer perform a gospel song, followed by two more African-American musicians performing their new song from a movie about the civil rights movement? 

This is not pure coincidence. Both of these Grammy performances and the movie Selma seemed to happen at just the right time: just look at what's going on around the country lately. In the words of Common, "I looked at Ferguson and saw what was going on, and knew that it wasn't far from what was happening during the civil rights movement. We wanted this song to be inspirational. We wanted it to have pain, but also hope." "Glory" has recently become a sort of anthem for social justice and a rallying cry throughout the country. Common and John Legend are using this song to parallel the civil rights movement and Selma to what is happening in our country today. Common states that he and Legend tried to capture the horror and reality of the civil rights movement, but also wanted to "make it present." In a song for a movie about a march that took place almost fifty years in the past, the writers are making explicit parallels to events in our country today. And here I thought the struggle for civil justice was over; I thought the civil rights movement was a success. 

Both Beyonce's rendition of "Take My Hand, Precious Lord" and Common and John Legend's performance of their song "Glory," along with the impecible timing of the movie Selma, are a cry for change. It seems to me that these Grammy performances (and Selma, for that matter), were projected to such a large-scale audience for a reason: to bring civil rights issues to national attention once again, so that we cannot forget what has happened in places like Ferguson in the past months, and what is still happening. 

To what extent do we see parallels to the civil rights movement today? Have things truly changed?

The Story the Director Tells: "American Sniper" Review

The new movie American Sniper is the true story of Navy SEAL Chris Kyle's four complete tours of duty in Iraq. The film, directed by Clint Eastwood, is based off of Chris Kyle's autobiography by the same name. The story focuses on Kyle's experience during his tours and the effect the war has on his relationship with his family and the psychological problems he faces after returning home. Overall, I found American Sniper to be both a heartwarming story how a family dealt with the inevitable struggles of a military family and a heartbreaking tale of the psychological damages of war.

Diving a little deeper into the politics of the film, however, I can't help but wonder to what extent the film represents Eastwood's views on war and not Kyle's. Though the film follows the basic plot of Kyle's book and clearly aims to portray him realistically as much as possible, I found that the underlying messages about war largely contradicted the messages I got while reading Kyle's autobiography.

Director Clint Eastwood is largely anti-war and anti-violence. In his own words, he was "against going into the war in Iraq." He has also stated that he was against many other wars the US fought in; Eastwood believes that war is "intrinsically destructive to warriors." These political views are seen in American Sniper. For instance, high-ranking military officials are portrayed as out-of-touch with what goes on on the battle field, as asking all the wrong questions, and plainly unknowledgeable about the details of what soldiers go through, what should be done in battle, etc. This reverence of the warrior and unaccepting portrayal of commanding officers reflects Eastwood's opinions on war; not Kyle's. In fact, after reading Chris Kyle's autobiography, my understanding of his views on war is that it is good and necessary to protect our country and our people.
Chris Kyle and wife, Taya

          Bradley Cooper as Chris Kyle


While I felt that Eastwood's attitude toward war- not Kyle's- were evident in the film, I truly feel that Bradley Cooper's portrayal of Chris Kyle was true-to-heart and accurate, as were the director's decisions on how to portray Kyle. In other words, I feel that this aspect of the film truly honored Chris Kyle's autobiography- his own words and feelings. For example, there is a scene in the movie where Kyle meets with a psychologist at a hospital for war veterans. He tells the doctor that he only regrets that he could not save more of his men. In his autobiography, Kyle emphasizes this fact: he did not regret killing so many enemies, only that he could not save more Americans. Overall, American Sniper was an accurate portrayal of Navy SEAL Chris Kyle's journey as a soldier, father, husband, and veteran. 

Tuesday, February 3, 2015

"911, I'd Like to Order a Pizza"

The Super Bowl is more than just the annual National Football League championship game- it is a trademark of American culture, and arguably a favorite day of the year for many. Aside from the obvious reason people watch the Super Bowl- to see the football game- millions of people tune in to the game to watch the most talked-about commercials of the year.

One of the most memorable commerials from this year's game, Super Bowl XLIX, was the anti-domestic violence PSA which showed a torn-up house with no one inside. There was a voice-over of a 911 call in which the woman talking to the 911 operator seemed to be ordering a pizza. In reality, she was in need of professional help and couldn't say why because her abusive boyfriend was in the room. (Yes, this is a true story.) I cannot adequately explain this ad in words, so please read the transcript of the actual 911 call or watch the actual video below:



On the surface, this seems like an incredibly powerful PSA against a very important and relevant problem, and it is. If we dig a little deeper, though, we realize that the NFL is trying to change it's image; we all know how often NFL players have been charged with domestic abuse as of late. Doesn't it seem ironic that the NFL has decided this year to pair with "No More," an organization against domestic violence, and to air a very expensive PSA against abuse, after all the bad press with NFL players being abusive this year? While I completely support anti-domestic abuse organizations and realize that this public service announcement sends a very important message to the nation, doesn't it also say something about the NFL's motives? Why did they feel the need to play this ad at this Superbowl? 

Additionally, this anti-domestic violence PSA is claimed to be a part of their new anti-domestic violence initiative. However, this ad was aired as part of the air-time that the NFL automatically receives to promote their organization: "The donation comes from NFL's own advertising time—time it gets during the Super Bowl no matter what—which means this is essentially the league taking a brief reprieve from directly promoting itself." 

The NFL has aired an extremely powerful and moving PSA that I truly hope will help Americans realize the severity of the domestic abuse problem. However, if we truly dig a little deeper, we see what this ad does for the NFL, and realize that there was probably an alternative motive for this video.