Analysis of American History X Essay

In this assignment, I was challenged to find distinguished diachronic and cultural connections of the word picture the Statesn score X and analyze the important rhetorical of my findings. I went nearly choosing Ameri sack register X by placing a poll on Facebook listing out the icons that I had all slight interest in meeting for this assignment and American Hi invention X won by a landslide. I was truly roundwhat disappointed, because I cute to do The X-Files, still I chose to stick to my promise and go with what ever so text won. I watched American write up X some long clock c ruseridge holder later its release in 1998. Although, I lie with I must turn out watched it sometime aft(prenominal) I got out of higher(prenominal)(prenominal) trail because at the time of its release I was 12 years old and with the amount of violence in that film I know I did non watch it with my p arents. From the little memory I had of the film from the first time, I could only recal l that American History X had a lot to do with white supremacy and racial contrariety, that Edward Norton play the work role and that the kid who played in the first Terminator was his chum and was all grown up. I hesitated watching the film again for sort of sometime because I knew I would need to dedicate a solid two hours of mental energy towards it.One could moot that I was unless expert procrastinating however, I benefitted from having done so because future class discussions provided a foundation for how I could study the film. After reading about and discussing in class the topic of approaching a text organically, I unflinching to implement that mentality and view the film as objectively as non-object individual can. It is difficult to say whether it was that approach that ultimately led to my findings in the film, or if I would afford discovered them everyway since it was my second time viewing the film. E reallyone can appreciate that after the second and third time of watching each film you begin to pick up on things you missed the first time. In all case, I found the word picture to be incredibly eye opening and I enjoyed having to research the memorial surrounding the film and, ultimately, the state of the nation during what was my childhood. American History X is a film that depicts a conventional white family in the mid(prenominal) mid-nineties, barely spotlights the two chum salmons journeys into maturity.The pictorial matter focuses on the older brother Derek, played by Edward Norton, and how Dereks Neo-Nazi associations in his bread and butter greatly influence his new-fangleder brother Danny, played by Edward Furlong. Fueled by rage of his laminitiss death, the film opens with a painting of Derek brutally killing trine young pitch-dark men who were attempting to steal his set outs truck. Derek is thus sent to prison for 3 years during which time his younger brother Danny begins to follow in Dereks footsteps with the Neo-Nazi organization. The flick flips between pitch-dark-and-white faces of the past(a) and color scenes of the present. The saturnine-and-white flashbacks attempt to illuminate Dannys perception of Dereks past life time intermittently presenting how Derek overcame is his own hatred. The color scenes deliver the present and highlight the effects the hatred has had on the correct family. Overall, the movie critiques on non only the effects of ur toss racism and bigotry, scarcely excessively the how minds of young peck are so impressionable.The film counterbalance succeeds in creating a sense of sympathy for characters that are typically hated, Neo-Nazi racialist skinheads, and paints them not as foolish, uneducated racist bigots, but instead as misguided intelligent human beings. On the surface the film discusses racism, violence, and bigotry, but upon closer examination I found a deeper contentedness inwardly the film. Watching it a second time, I realized that this film is sincerely emphasizing the lack of critical thinking skills in young people, curiously in teenagers and young adults and how impressionable their minds are. Then, upon further research related to those very topics it touches on in the film, I discovered that the entire movie itself actually harbors an obscure diverseness of racism that was reflected in legion(predicate) movies throughout the 1990s. needless to say, even in todays ordination we deal with these comparable issues of racism and intolerance for other peoples beliefs.However, within the almost recent years it has evolved to focus more on the gay, lesbian and transgender community. History certainly can be seen as repeating itself as many of the arguments that gays and lesbians make regarding their civil rights and discrimination almost mirror the same arguments do back in the mid- half a dozenties during the civil right movement. Reverend Dr. Phil Snider make this connection so blatantly clear in hi s bringing that went viral on YouTube that he gave before the Springfield City Council of Missouri right a fewer weeks ago. In his speech, Dr. Snider cleverly took quotes directly 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 Interesting Gay Rights saving). I think the twist of his speech highlights the main issues regarding any form of racism and discrimination and they most certainly could be applied to the issues of racism that America faced in the 1990s.The 1990s was saturated with debates over, court cases involving and many media outlets centering on the issues of racism and favorable action. In May of 1992, Newsweek printed an denomination entitled The Crossroads of Shattered Dreams that summarized the conflicts of racism in the early 90s stating, whites get off that plausive action is unfairblacks respond that it was unfair fo r them to be greedy of opportunities by 300 years of slavery and discrimination. That same year, the verdict of Rodney pansys case outraged the black community and sparked riots come throughing six days with over 2,000 people injured and 55 people killed (Riots bankrupt in Los Angeles). In March of 1996, the three white law school candidates charged that they were unfairly discriminated against and rejected for entrance into the school for less satis eventory minorities in the famous case Hopwood v. Texas Law schooldays (Hopwood v. University Texas Law School). Just prior to the release of American History X in 1998, California enacted Proposition 209, which amended the states constitution to ban preferential treatment of any persons based on race or gender in humans sector education, employment, and contracting (Parker).All of these staggeringly impactful events and numerous others shaped more than of the discrimination that occurred in the 1990s. In fact, sociological rese arch confirms discrimination is more often the sequel of organizational practices that have unintentional effects or predispositions linked to social stereotypes and does not so much stem from individual prejudices (Tomaskovic-Devey). Nevertheless, the culmination of these types of incidents led to a require for Hollywood to headline positive characters of color (Hughey 549). Producers and directors felt pressure to be for their own history of racist filmmaking and, consequently, this in any case 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 character whose purpose in the film is to alimentation the white protagonist. Typically this black character, coined the wizardly black by Hughey, was en sighted as the voice of reason, or having some other type wisdom, within the film and who selflessly helps the white character achieve his goals. These films rest on friendly, helpful, bend-over-backwards black characters that do not seek to change their own innocent status, but instead exhibit a primordial, hard-wired desire to use their magic power to correct the wrongs in a white world (Hughey 556). The judgment expressed in this quote is clearly evident in the film American History X during the many scenes of Derek in prison running(a) in the laundry room 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 somewhat contradict this model of a magical Negro and, instead, causes Derek to watch a form of guilt. 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 h e was sentenced for assault on a constabulary officer because he accidently dropped a TV on the officers foot that he was trying 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 moment within the movie that shows Dereks guilt and sympathy for the first time towards a black person.I think this is the most important scene throughout the entire film because it gives the audience exactly what they want they want to see Derek experience this epiphany and for him to recognize how he has perpetuated discrimination against black people. But it does not event very long for the film to revert right back into the traditional cinethetic racist ways. In Dereks stand up interaction with Lamont, the audience learns that during Dereks stay within prison Lamont was protecting him from further beatings and rape after Derek chose to no longer a ffiliate with the Neo-Nazis within the prison. That scene ultimately maintain the concept of the magical Negro and that black people have this underlie desire to serve to the needs of white people. I liken this mood of cinethetic racism to what actors refer to the subtext of a script.Normally, the subtext refers to the underlying motives of a particular character, but this concept of cinethetic racism is like the subtext of an entire film. Of greatest critical tinge is how magical Negro films advantageously shore up white supremacist and normative orders while ostensibly posturing as an irreverent challenge to them (Hughey 553). On the surface it appears to be a film that tries to defeat racism, but ironically there are hidden agendas that completely go against the moral of this story. Just as magical Negros are a disguised form of racism found in American films in the 1990s, there were alike disguised forms of racism sacking on politically throughout the nation, more specifi cally in California.During the 1990s, racism and civil 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 California experiencing an economic downturn, many whites became less tolerant of minorities receiving preferential treatment through affirmative action programs (Alvarez). Now the whites are claiming they were discriminated against in a form of revolutionize discrimination. What I find so interesting about the musical theme of abolish discrimination is that it implies that discrimination only naturally goes in one attention whites against minorities. And, furthermore, that there will always be a certain direct of racism, as if to suggest that there is a threshold for which it is accep bow, but also that it is the responsibility of the legal age, white people, to keep it in check.Yet the moment any form of racism or discrimination is felt against whites, it is completely impossible and demands political action. It was the supporters of Proposition 209 that argued that current 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 term capturing the main arguments of Proposition 209 entitled Prohibition Against discrepancy.With in the same article it preached, let us not perpetuate the myth that minorities and women cannot compete without spare preferencesvote 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 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 about the material he is nur ture for his English class. His father than expresses his distaste for such material with the following monologueAll this stuff about making everything equal its not as easy 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 blood line. 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 were the beaver? Americas about if you do your best you get the jobnot this affirmative blacktion crap.its nigger bullshit.This dinner scene perfectly exemplifies the concept that 1) the moment whites feel they are being discriminated they at present raise the red flag and 2) that discrimination is more often the result of organizational practices that have unintentional effects and does not so much stem from individual prejudi ces, as I stated earlier.Another human face 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 store have by minorities. I find it so ironic that the character of a racist Neo-Nazi was reciting actual words from a speech promoting the removal of affirmative actions polices that were, allegedly, intended to reduce discrimination and increase equality. When I discovered this choice morsel of information I was completely blown away. I had no idea how closely this movie reflected real problems going on in society in the 1990s. McKennas use of Pete Wilsons speech is clearly an compositors case of art reflecting reality, but Pete Wilsons speech was not the only come from reality in which McKenna got his inspiration.McKenna grew up in southerly California, where the film story takes place, and personally witnessed bigotry and racism (Bruce). From his encounters and extensive research, McKenna decided that the point he tried to make in the script is that a person is not born a racistMcKenna wanted an accurate portrayal of how unspoilt kids from good families can get so terribly lost (Bruce). Personally, I think McKenna succeeded in having that be the main message of the film the impressionability of a young mind and that all behaviors are knowledgeable.The film simultaneously follows Dereks upbringing and how he becomes involved 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 organizational practices. However, despite how healthful received the movie was and the numerous nominations Edward Norton received for his performance, that is not the sea captain message the director intended.Tony Kaye was the director of American History X and, ironically, he also turned out to be a major competing persuasive extort throughout the entire film making process. Kaye battled with directors, producers, writer David McKenna and Edward Norton himself claiming that New origination Cinema never allowed him to create his vision of the film going as far as to take out full page ads in trade magazines bashing the film and even requested to have his name outback(a) from the film entirely and replaced with the pseudonym Humpy Dumpty (Goldstein). In a statement do shortly after the films release, Kaye sleep withed that Edward Norton edited a majority of the film in order to increase his screen time in the film and that the producer s did not allow Kaye an opportunity to present a black voice to provide depth and balance 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 cowcatcher vision never made it to the film was because it clashed so much 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 1980s and early 1990s. Whereas, Kaye is not only much older than McKenna, but grew up in linked Kingdom and had only been living 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 noted that this was Kayes first feature film and his anterior directing experience came from extensive work with TV commercials and music videos (Goldstein). And while McKenna himself may not have been directly invo lved 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 peculiar 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 experie nce a type of invalidate discrimination due unforeseen effects from affirmative action programs.In regards to American films however, one would have to sit down personally 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 unlikely that anyone would ever openly conduct to that, I personally think that cinethetic racism and the magical Negro were just an unintended consequence of a fad 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 square away 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 wimp or the egg came first. But 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 share their own masked form of racism veiled as though whites are helping minorities. Art was imitating the incendiary racism that was occurring in reality.As an actor myself, I think it is untoward 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 centered on the freedom of speech aroun d 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 set off historical events and attitudes going on throughout society during the 1990s, despite the fact that the film may be perpetuating racism at a incitive level.Works CitedAmerican History X. Dir. Tony Kaye. Perf. Edward Norton and Edward Furlong. New Line Cinemas, 1998. Film.Alvarez, R. Michael, and Lisa G. Bedolla. The Revolution Against approbative Action in California Racism, Economics, and Proposition 209. State Politics and insurance policy Quarterly 4.1 (2004) 1-17. Sage populaceations, Inc. blade. 21 Oct. 2012.Bruce, David. Racism in America=Hating Others. American History X A Hollywood Jesus Film Review. HollywoodJesus.com, n. d. Web. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Goldstein, Patrick. Courting Trouble. Edward Norton Information Page. N.p., 13 1998. Web. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Hopwood v. University of Texas Law School. cyclopaedia Brit annica. 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 theater director Tony Kaye Makes Statement 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 violation of Proposition 209 on Education, Employment 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 Election Web Site . N.p., n. d. Web. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. . Riots erupt 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 film maker Tony Kaye. About.com Oct 21 2012.Whitaker, Mark. A Crisis Of Shattered Dreams. Newsweek. 5 1991 1. Web. 19 Oct. 2012..