Jump to content

richardmurray

Boycott Amazon
  • Posts

    2,402
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    91

Status Updates posted by richardmurray

  1. now03.png

    Illustration by Sam Whitney/The New York Times

    Pedro Pascal and Jenna Ortega Shouldn’t Be Exceptions in Hollywood

    July 23, 2023

     

    By Arlene Dávila

    Ms. Dávila is the founding director of the Latinx Project at New York University.

    Corporate America’s treatment of Latinx people as a homogeneous monolithic group, instead of the diverse demographic it is, has for decades perpetuated stereotypes of Latino authenticity. These stereotypes have disproportionately depicted Latinos on TV and in movies as Spanish speakers that hailed from Latin America and shared a particular Latin “look.”

    In Hollywood, this narrative has reinforced the notion that we are a niche market that is separate from the mainstream, which could be served through the importation of programming that is cheaper to produce in Latin America over programming that is produced in the United States.

    That’s why it was exciting to see Jenna Ortega and Pedro Pascal make Emmy history this month. For the first time two Latino actors were nominated in the lead acting category in the same year, for the hit shows “Wednesday” and “The Last of Us.”

    Though Latinx people make up 19 percent of the U.S. population, they account for less than 5 percent of actors cast in speaking roles in the nation’s top-grossing films. Additionally, representation in the media industry as a whole stands at a mere 12 percent, with the majority of positions being service oriented, like cleaning services and security. These numbers have remained stagnant for decades, which is outrageous when you consider that they make up nearly half the population of Los Angeles County.

    Why has the media industry been so unwilling to acknowledge and address this growing demographic of potential viewers and consumers?

    Latinx creatives have told me that many executives in Hollywood don’t understand why they are outraged by how few Latinx people appear in films and television shows. After all, there is already a variety of streaming offerings from Latin America and Spain. But there is a profound difference between these markets.

    We wouldn’t mistake the experience of Indigenous Mexicans living in Mexico for the experience of a fifth-generation Chicana. This is why many in the industry are identifying as Latinx — a term that signals gender inclusivity and recognition of our racial and ethnic diversity — to call attention to a pattern of exclusion of Latinx writers and creators that are representing the U.S. experience.

    The globalization of Spanish language media has only widened the existing gaps between the robust development of movies and shows produced in Latin America and the limited opportunities for Latinx writers, directors and showrunners in the United States. In recent decades, Latin American media companies have benefited from investments from American streaming conglomerates like Netflix, the lower costs of producing and importing programming in Latin America and investments by governments in the region that support their film industries.

    While streaming platforms offer a wealth of series and films from Spain and Latin America, there is a lack of representation of stories written by Latinx people that reflect their experiences. While actors and writers from Latin America have had the opportunity to expand their résumés with credits from global serials produced by platforms like Netflix, am*zon and Max, Latinx actors and audiences have fewer roles to choose from. The leads cast in series like “Wednesday” and the “Last of Us” are rare exceptions.

    Research shows that in the United States, Latinx actors are often cast in the roles of lower-class characters, criminals or immigrants. The gap is wider still for Afro-Latinos. In shows produced in Latin America, the majority of actors cast as leads and heroines are blond and white, while darker-skinned actors are often relegated to secondary roles, housekeepers or criminals, if they are represented at all. Additionally, Latinx writers face extra barriers when entering a shrinking industry, as highlighted by the writers’ strike.

    The few productions that have been written or created by Latinx people and have represented our communities in real and personal ways have been canceled after a few seasons. When shows like “Gentefied,” “Vida” and the “Gordita Chronicles” were shut down despite positive reviews, writers and fans alike were left wondering why. In the age of streaming, algorithm-driven decisions make it difficult to determine what counts as success with transparency, especially when algorithms are biased against new content.

    Latinx audiences remain avid consumers of films, TV and other media, even if they don’t see themselves reflected. Some may question why media conglomerates should change and invest in original content and programming or cast Latinx actors and writers when the cheaper importation-based model is so profitable and seemingly successful. Yet they should evolve because those formulas have historically left Latinx audiences mostly untapped. There are generations of talented scriptwriters, producers and filmmakers who have been underutilized and countless rich stories and ideas that have yet to be told. Film and TV that represent the experience of Latinx communities in the United States enrich the media ecosystem by offering a more accurate representation of American demographics.

    Additionally, we must address the negative impacts of the media’s import-heavy formula for Latinx audiences, which limits opportunities and perpetuates the perception of Latinx people as foreigners rather than fellow Americans deserving equal visibility on television and movie screens.

    It’s worth noting that Latinx people are not the only group excluded by the globalization of streaming. That Ms. Ortega and Mr. Pascal received recognition raises the question of whether we have reached a crucial turning point. It’s worth considering how we can leverage the current SAG-AFTRA and W.G.A. strikes to also address issues of representation and investment in productions that will provide working opportunities for Latinx actors, writers and showrunners alongside matters of pay equity for media workers.

    Finally, it is time to consider the global appeal of entertainment featuring Latinx actors. I want to see more roles for actors like Ariana DeBose, the first Afro-Latina to win an Oscar, for a supporting role in “West Side Story,” and productions by filmmakers and MacArthur “genius grant” awardees Alex Rivera and Cristina Ibarra, among many other outstanding Latinx creatives.

    I often wonder what it would look like if Hollywood dared to recognize that Latinx talent is not an exception.

    Arlene Dávila, the founding director of the Latinx Project at New York University, is the author of “Latinx Art: Artists, Markets and Politics.”

     

    URL

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/23/opinion/latinos-hollywood-representation.html

     

    now04.png

    The recently released Barbie movie has provided an opportunity for a bipartisan coalition of commentators and elected officials to see value in its dissection.Credit...Kenny Holston/The New York Times, Gonzalo Fuentes/Reuters, Jim Wilson/The New York Times, Alex Brandon/Associated Press, Warner Bros. Pictures via Associated Press

     

    ‘Barbie’ Movie Gives Left and Right Another Battlefront, in Pink

    Political figures of all types grabbed for the legs of a doll-turned-movie-turned-cultural moment, with predictable results.

     

    By Matt Flegenheimer and Marc Tracy

     

    Last week, Representative Matt Gaetz and his wife, Ginger, arrived at a Washington reception for “Barbie” in matching pink, grinning in photos along the “pink carpet,” mingling among guests sipping pink cocktails, admiring a life-size pink toy box.

    They left with political ammunition.

    “The Barbie I grew up with was a representation of limitless possibilities, embracing diverse careers and feminine empowerment,” Mrs. Gaetz wrote on Twitter. “The 2023 Barbie movie, unfortunately, neglects to address any notion of faith or family, and tries to normalize the idea that men and women can’t collaborate positively (yuck).”

    When another account scolded Mr. Gaetz, the hard-right and perpetually stunt-seeking Florida congressman, for attending the event at all — citing the casting of a trans actor as a doctor Barbie — Mr. Gaetz replied with a culture-warring double feature.

    “If you let the trans stop you from seeing Margo Robbie,” he said, leaving the “T” off the first name of the film’s star, “the terrorists win.”

    The non-terroristic winners were many after the film’s estimated $155 million debut: Ms. Robbie and Greta Gerwig, the film’s director, finding an eager audience for their pink-hued feminist opus; the Warner Bros. marketing team, whose ubiquitous campaigns plainly paid off; the film industry itself, riding “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer” to its most culturally dominant weekend in years.

    But few outcomes were as nominally inexplicable (and probably inevitable) as the film’s instant utility to political actors and opportunists of all kinds. For a modern take on what was long a politically fraught emblem of toxic body image and reductive social norms, no choice was too small, no turn too ideology-affirming or apparently nefarious, for a bipartisan coalition of commentators and elected officials to see value in its dissection.

    “I have, like, pages and pages of notes,” Ben Shapiro, the popular conservative commentator, said in a lengthy video review, which began with him setting a doll aflame and did not grow more charitable. (He said his producers “dragged” him to the theater.)

    “I took a tequila shot every time Barbie said patriarchy … only just woke up,” wrote Elon Musk. (Mr. Shapiro, diligently but less colorfully, said he had counted the word “more than 10 times.”)

    “Here are 4 ways Barbie embraces California values,” the office of Gavin Newsom, the state’s Democratic governor, wrote in a thread hailing Barbie as a champion of climate activism, “hitting the roads in her electric vehicle,” and of destigmatizing mental health care.

    If there was a time in the culture when a giant summer film event was something of an American unifier — a moment to share over-buttered popcorn through big-budget shoot-’em-ups and sagas of insatiable sharks — that time is not 2023.

    And, as ever, the political class’s performative investment in “Barbie” — the outrage and the embrace — can seem mostly like a winking bit.

    What to make of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Democrat of Michigan, posting a Barbie meant to resemble herself beside the Instagram caption, “Come on Barbie, let’s go govern”?

    What does it mean, exactly, when Senator Raphael Warnock, Democrat of Georgia, says of himself, “This Ken is pushing to end maternal mortality”?

    Certainly, Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, has summoned practiced gravity in accusing “Barbie” of working to appease the Chinese. (Some Republicans have fixated on a scene that features a crudely drawn map that supposedly depicts the so-called nine-dash line, which indicates Chinese ownership of oceanic territory that is disputed under international law. Vietnam has banned showings of the movie in the country over that image.)

    “Obviously, the little girls that are going to see Barbie, none of them are going to have any idea what those dashes mean,” Mr. Cruz told Fox News. “This is really designed for the eyes of the Chinese censors, and they’re trying to kiss up to the Chinese Communist Party because they want to make money selling the movie.”

    The response on the right is not a one-off. For a generation of conservative personalities, weaned on Andrew Breitbart’s much-cited observation that “politics is downstream of culture,” Hollywood and other ostensibly liberal bastions are to be confronted head-on, lest their leanings ensnare young voters without a fight.

    Recent years have provided ample evidence, some on the right say, for a “go woke, go broke” view that progressivism is bad business. Last year’s apolitically patriotic “Top Gun: Maverick” was a smashing success, as was this year’s kid-friendly “The Super Mario Bros. Movie.” By contrast, critics on the right contended that Disney’s remake of “The Little Mermaid,” with its title character portrayed by the Black actress Halle Bailey, failed to match its producers’ hopes. (Of course, there is no way to trace exactly what determines any movie’s success or failure, and many observers adhere to the screenwriter William Goldman’s axiom: “Nobody knows anything.”)

    “Barbie” cannot be said to have gone broke. But its purported politics, conservatives have argued, did damage it by making it less entertaining — “a lecture,” in the words of The Federalist’s Rich Cromwell, “that self-identifies as a movie.”

    Kyle Smith, a reviewer at The Wall Street Journal, complained that the film “contains more swipes at ‘the patriarchy’ than a year’s worth of Ms. magazine.”

    The film seems at times (gentle spoiler alert) to be engaging with “the patriarchy” ironically, infusing it with knowing Southern California vapidity, décor that seems inspired by hair metal and a heavy emphasis on weight lifting and “brewskis.”

    When it comes time (less gentle spoiler alert) to reclaim Barbie Land, the Barbies distract the Kens by indulging their tendency for exaggerated gestures of malehood like playing acoustic guitar and insisting on showing a date “The Godfather” while talking over it.

    Mr. Shapiro has sounded unconvinced that the movie is broadly in on its own jokes.

    “The actual argument the movie is making is that if women enjoy men, it’s because they have been brainwashed by the patriarchy,” he said in his review.

    He called the film, with a straight face, two hours he will rue wasting as he sits on his deathbed.

    “The things I do,” he said, “for my audience.”

    Anjali Huynh contributed reporting.

    Matt Flegenheimer is a reporter covering national politics. He started at The Times in 2011 on the Metro desk covering transit, City Hall and campaigns. More about Matt Flegenheimer

    Marc Tracy is a reporter on the Culture desk. More about Marc Tracy

     

    ARTICLE URL

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/24/us/politics/barbie-movie-newsom-gaetz.html

  2. it's not all about tights and capes from shawn alleyne.jpg

    Concept: it's not all about tights and capes  
    Artist: shawn alleyne <<lines>> < Pyroglyphics Studio > OR < https://www.deviantart.com/pyroglyphics1 >   
    Prior post
    https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2387&type=status
    Shawn Alleyne post
    https://aalbc.com/tc/search/?q=shawn&quick=1&type=core_statuses_status&updated_after=any&sortby=newest

     

    Strange Fruit < a poem>

     

    Southern trees bear strange fruit,
    Blood on the leaves and blood at the root,
    Black bodies swinging in the Southern breeze,
    Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees. 
    Pastoral scene of the gallant South,
    The bulging eyes and twisted mouth,
    The scent of magnolias, sweet and fresh,
    Then the sudden smell of burning flesh. 
    Here is a fruit for the crows to pluck,
    For the rain to gather, for the wind to suck,
    For the sun to rot, for the trees to drop,
    Here is a strange and bitter crop.

     

    lyrics from  Abel Meeropol

     

    But no one sings the poem better than the great, legendary, Billie Holiday
    with accompanying trumpet from Charlie Shavers

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx_mOECjT_8

  3. dj ninja character design by shawn alleyne for heritagehiphop colors by thedadodesign.jpg

    Concept: dj ninja character design for heritagehiphop
    Artist: shawn alleyne <<lines>> < Pyroglyphics Studio > OR < https://www.deviantart.com/pyroglyphics1 >   thedadodesign <colors> 
    Prior post
    https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2379&type=status
    Shawn Alleyne post
    https://aalbc.com/tc/search/?q=shawn&quick=1&type=core_statuses_status&updated_after=any&sortby=newest

  4. Time to Break Up Hollywood
    Hollywood is trapped in a death spiral, with streaming giants struggling to profit while smothering the industry itself. Finally the writers stood up. But will it be enough?
    MATT STOLLER
    MAY 14, 2023

     

    Today I’m writing about the biggest Hollywood labor dispute in decades, as screenwriters enter their third week striking against streaming giants like Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Warner Bros, and Comcast. Far from a narrow conflict over money, this fight is existential, a question of whether America can be a place where stars are born and movies are made.

    As one striker put it < https://strikegeist.substack.com/p/daily-digest-why-this-strike-feels > , the strike is “about the whole corporate dominance of America.” 

    (The Ankler’s excellent Strikegeist < https://strikegeist.substack.com/ > newsletter is covering the strike, and I highly recommend it if you are interested in what’s going on day-to-day.) 

    Of America’s many inventions, reality TV does not rank as highly as, say, the semiconductor, the laser, the polio vaccine, or manned flight. But from Candid Camera in the 1940s to MTV’s The Real World in the early 1990s, the medium of reality TV has been as influential in its own way as rock music and hip hop. But today, it’s Great Britain, not America, creating many of the most popular reality shows

    Here are some of the shows that got their start in the U.K., and then were licensed for an American audience: American Idol, America’s Got Talent, X-Factor, Dancing with the Stars, Wife Swap, Undercover Boss, Super Nanny, Who Wants to be a Millionaire. And there are hundreds more. In the U.K, independent producers have increased their TV related revenues from £1.5 billion in 2004 to more than £2.6 billion in 2017.

    What happened? Put simply, governments changed laws so that independent producers gained bargaining leverage in the U.K., and lost it in the U.S.

    Let’s start with the U.K. In the early 2000s, the British government embarked on a strategy to grow its independent production industry. It facilitated something called the “Terms of Trade,” < https://cmpa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Appendix-C-Oliver-Ohlbaum-Associates-2018-The-impact-of-the-UK-te...-1.pdf > a broadcaster code of conduct to remedy the bargaining asymmetry between dominant broadcasters and independent producers. This pact required four big public channels in the UK - BBC1, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 - to commission < https://www.smallscreenbigdebate.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/221955/annex-2-statement-future-of-public-service-media.pdf > 25% of their production from independent producers, and to allow those producers to retain copyrights from their work they could license abroad. 

    This was a soft break-up of the industry along vertical lines, and it made the U.K a great place to do business. As the CEO of the firm that makes American Idol, The X Factor, and Britain's Got Talent said, "There is no other country where you have these terms of trade. In the UK, it's brilliant!" In 2010, independents held 50% of the market, beating in-house network programming. Exports of British content exploded.

    In the U.S., by contrast, legal changes over the last thirty years stripped independent producers of their bargaining power with distributors, diminishing the ability to create great products. In 2019, I laid it out in one of my first newsletter issues, titled The Slow Death of Hollywood < https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/the-slow-death-of-hollywood > , explaining why weirdly themed movies like Back to the Future became smash hits in the 1980s, and why that wouldn’t happen today. 

    In 1985, theater owners had more choices about what content to sell, and could decide to distribute content that was well-liked and popular without assuming a massive barrage of marketing would force them to stock the most popular stuff immediately. So they could afford to show different movies, experiment, and then bring in the popular ones over time. The industry was more decentralized. Stars, directors and writers with good track records, studios, distributors, movie theaters, critics, and moviegoers shared power.

    [This market structure harkens] back to bitter battles in the 1930s and 1940s between New Deal antitrust attorneys and studio heads, which culminated in the Paramount Decrees of 1948 < https://www.justice.gov/atr/paramount-decree-review >  and the end of the autocratic so-called ‘Studio System.’ These decrees forced studios to sell their theaters, and prevented them from engaging in tying and bundling practices to force theater owners to take their films. New Hollywood, with countercultural stars like Jack Nicholson, emerged in the 1960s to revamp the industry. In 1985, weird popular movies like Back to the Future took advantage of this open market structure. 

    A similar situation existed in the television industry, which was broken apart in 1970 by Richard Nixon’s FCC with Financial Interest and Syndication Rules (‘fin-syn’) < https://www.csmonitor.com/1991/0404/finsyn.html > , and a related rule called the Prime-Time Access Rule (PTAR). These rules blocked TV networks from distributing their own content in prime time, opening the market for TV content to third party producers who would take more creative risks. The Cosby Show, Seinfeld, The Mary Tyler Moore Show, and All in the Family were some of the results of this policy choice to open up the TV market. 

    Both the Paramount Decrees and the Fin-syn rules were designed to eliminate conflicts of interest by splitting the studio from the distribution. Studios had to create high quality work, and if they didn’t, distributors could choose to sell someone else’s art.

    The rules structured a profitable and high-quality industry, with different kinds of TV shows and movies. Media was a series of markets, from movie theaters and prime time TV, to hundreds of local TV networks for syndication, to video tapes and DVDs, to foreign markets. Creators experimented, while audiences ruled with their preferences. Hollywood is a politically left-wing place, but conservative religious hits, like The Passion of the Christ, got into theaters, and sold tickets.

    In the 1980s, antitrust enforcers, influenced by Chicago School scholars like Robert Bork, became far more tolerant of concentration economy-wide. This legal revolution had significant implications for movies. In 1995, the top five movie chains owned a third of U.S. theaters, with the biggest, Carmike, owning < https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/07/business/media/amc-biggest-movie-theater-chain.html> around 2,500. By 2016, the top five held over 53% of the movie theaters in the country, with the largest, AMC, owning 8,380. 

    This consolidation changed movies. In the late 1990s, giant new multiplexes “jolted the Hollywood power structure,” < https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB885343258697290000 > as theater operators played the biggest hits on several screens at once. Films began to do most of their business in the first few weeks, so well-branded tent pole movies with strong IP - aka Marvel-style movies - displaced word of mouth. As Adam Mastroianni noted with this chart, movies, along with much of pop culture, became an oligopoly. < https://www.experimental-history.com/p/pop-culture-has-become-an-oligopoly?s=r

    now03.png

    The Clinton administration enacted another legal change by ending fin-syn rules, causing a merger boom of content and distribution. Immediately, for instance, Castle Rock Entertainment, the production company behind shows like Seinfeld, sold out to Turner Broadcasting, which in turn sold out to Time Warner. Disney bought ABC, and then rolled-up a series of rivals < https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/its-time-to-break-up-disney-part >  to acquire large amounts of well-known intellectual property - like Marvel and Star Wars. 

    Then came streaming, which wasn’t very important at first. Prior to 2010, the major studios sold movies to theaters, and TV shows to cable and TV networks. Several sold to Netflix, which they saw as just another distributor. But in 2010, the Obama administration approved the merger of NBC and Comcast, a further erosion of the vertical separation at the heart of the Paramount Decrees and the fin-syn rules.

    Technological innovation happens along the legal framework it is born into, so streaming, which could have decentralized had it happened in another era, did the opposite.

    When Comcast bought NBC, Netflix, then a minor player, feared it would lose access to content from studios. So it began buying its own movies and shows, combining distribution and production as the first studio-streamer. Apple and am*zon, for whom Hollywood revenues were a rounding error, eventually entered the business. Netflix, Apple, and am*zon put pressure on the traditional studios, who were judged based on profit and loss. Studios realized Wall Street was valuing Netflix stock more highly as a ‘tech’ company. They wanted in on that as well. All except Sony followed Netflix and became studio-streamers.

    But something wasn’t right with the streaming model Netflix introduced. There was no way to know ratings or box office take, since Netflix held its own data without third party auditors. Its then-CEO, Reed Hastings, pretended Netflix used its data to scientifically know what users wanted. But that wasn’t true. (See “The Algorithm is a Lie.” < https://entertainment.substack.com/p/the-algorithm-is-a-lie?s=w > ) Netflix was just overpaying for content, and losing money to acquire market share, a technique known as predatory pricing (that used to be illegal until the Supreme Court de facto legalized < https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/509/209/ > it in 1993.) 

    Netflix’s model was an attack on the bargain between creators and studios at the heart of the industry. This bargain is that everyone who makes movies or shows - production houses, studios, writers, actors, or directors - split the profits from any individual piece of content, profits generated by selling movies or shows into actual markets. Producers, for instance, often retained the intellectual property of a show, and licensed it. Traditional labor compensation packages, known as ‘residuals,’ are based on theatrical releases, or what ratings TV shows achieved when broadcast. Additionally, both categories might qualify for additional compensation through syndication or DVD sales, foreign market sales, and sometimes streaming. (It’s why the cast of Friends is still making millions of dollars a year even today.)

    When Netflix sought to fully integrate the production and distribution, this bargain broke down, because there were no markets or prices to use to value anything. Netflix paid creators an upfront fee, and then that content was on Netflix, with no opportunity to syndicate or sell it elsewhere. Beyond breaking down price signals, Netflix wouldn’t even tell creators how their shows did in terms of ratings. It also refused to allow American production houses to retain IP. Other studios copied Netflix, upending the labor model for content. No one knew what anything was worth.

    The lack of market signals screwed up the industry because markets, as it turns out, have an important function in Hollywood. They represent a feedback loop to the studios, telling executives the preferences of the audience, based on whether the audience (or advertisers) are willing to pay. The tacky way to understand this dynamic is that when a movie did well at the box office, other studios would often copy that kind of movie, in hopes of appealing to the large audience that saw the original. But what happens when you can’t get distribution for mid-market movies because the few theater chain owners don’t want it? What happens when there are no TV ratings because it’s all streamed? What happens when, as happened during the pandemic, there is no box office?

    Obviously, at some level, people are still paying money in the form of subscription fees. But decisions for what to make happen about individual pieces of content are difficult without this feedback from the audience. A creative executive can’t, after all, green light a streaming service, they can only green light a movie or TV show.

     

    When pricing went away, when customers were simply paying a subscription fee every month instead of buying tickets or DVDs, executives had no way to know what to make or how to value anything. As just one example, in 2021, Warner Brothers put their whole slate of films onto their streaming service at the same time as they went into theaters, revealing how executives were mis-pricing their products. Another illustration of a deep structural problem with the industry is that bankable movie stars, the most important commodity in Hollywood, are aging, because you can’t break new stars.

    In an attempt to monopolize, studio-streamers accidentally transformed a high-wage, high-profit business into a low-wage low-profit commodified one. For a time, this decline in industry health wasn’t obvious. Netflix had told Wall Street a story that its overall goal was to get customers locked in, and this convinced the street to give the capital to make lots of content regardless of profit. Other studios followed, overpaying for content in the hopes of being the last man standing, in the era of what was known as “Peak TV.” < https://slate.com/culture/2023/03/peak-tv-over-golden-age-hbo-streaming.html >  As Discovery board member John Malone put it < https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/john-malone-talks-streaming-wars-1235264416/ > , “Everyone went for this mad Oklahoma land rush of streaming … That was a fool’s errand.” 

    The lock-in was a mirage, as consumers switched services to find content they wanted to watch. No one, as it turns out, wanted a streaming service, they wanted individual shows and movies. Vertically integrated streaming services, contrasted with markets where consumers pay for what they want, aren’t very profitable. HBO, Peacock, and Paramount all lost money < https://www.vox.com/recode/2023/1/5/23539590/streaming-losses-netflix-hbo-peter-kafka-media-column >  in the first three quarters of 2022, and this year, Disney’s streaming services raised prices < https://deadline.com/2023/05/disney-pulling-content-off-streaming-in-strategic-rethink-1235362374/ > and removed content, and still can’t make a penny. 

    Most of the consolidation discussed so far is vertical, where studios and distributors combined. But throughout this period, traditional mergers, where rivals bought rivals, also continued. In 2019, Disney bought Fox, shrinking the number of major studios into a narrower oligopoly (and cutting the output of films < https://theankler.com/p/the-disney-fox-deal-whos-right?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=15657&post_id=97369692&isFreemail=false> ). Last year, Discovery bought Time Warner, combining two big buyers of reality TV. 

    Consolidation, combining both production and distribution, and shrinking the number of studios, led to budget cuts. For writers, this meant smaller writer rooms, shorter seasons, and worse terms. Writer pay fell by 14% over < https://www.wcvb.com/article/what-do-striking-hollywood-writers-want/43791834 > the last five years, with sweatshop conditions < https://theankler.com/p/showrunner-crisis-its-a-sweatshop > even for those with the most creative control, the showrunners. Others felt it too; independent TV production houses, such as firms who create reality TV shows, struggled. They no longer have any choice but to sell to one of a few studio-streamers. Streamers demanded the intellectual property of anything they bought, which meant independent production houses began working as contract players for a fee, almost like chicken farmers or gig workers. There was no point in creating something great, since all the upside went to the streaming giants. 

    Nothing in Hollywood, in other words, is working now that the underlying pricing system has been reduced in importance. The studio-streamers aren’t making money, the workers aren’t getting compensated like they used to, and the cultural relevance of Hollywood is declining. (And that last point is very weird, because Hollywood should have been able to take advantage of the remarkable telecommunications revolution of the last thirty years, but hasn’t.)

    This industry-wide collapse is at the heart of the writers strike that’s taking place right now, ever since the industry contract with screenwriters expired at the beginning of the month. What the Writer’s Guild of America (WGA) wants, is a fix to the devastation vertical integration has wrought on the industry. Their official demands are more money, access to data on how their shows do, as well as also minimum staffing requirements for shows and better lengths of employment for writers. To add to the pressure, over the next few months, the Director’s Guild and the Screen Actors Guild will also be renegotiating < https://abc7.com/hollywood-writers-strike-los-angeles-guild-of-america-directors/13229141/#:~:text=The Writers Guild of America's,Editor in Chief Cynthia Littleton. > their contracts. 

    Some of the WGA demands address the power imbalance more directly than others. More residuals is a standard labor demand, while better data on streaming would actually ameliorate industry structure. Minimum staffing requirements are a bit more controversial, according to The Ankler’s Richard Rushfield. But fundamentally, the problem the writers face is much bigger than an unfair deal. It is in fact the same problem that everyone - writers, actors, directors, producers, crew members, and executives - all face; the industry itself is badly structured, and there is no political leadership < https://theankler.com/p/rushfield-the-very-bad-choices-that > among studio CEOs to address the dysfunction.

    Most in Hollywood feel in their gut the dysfunction, and the proof is in the support unions are showing one another. Believe it or not, labor solidarity in the industry is rare. During the 2007 writers strike, for instance, Teamsters would drive past picket lines and give the strikers the middle finger. Two weeks ago, however, Teamster leader Lindsay Dougherty told < https://strikegeist.substack.com/p/rushfield-day-3-netflix-bears-the >  writers at a strike rally, “If you put up a line, the trucks will fucking stop... The only way we’re gonna beat these mother fuckers is if we do it together."

    It’s not just unions. Agents are pitching in, even though agents and writers had been at war relatively recently. And the producers are backing the writers as well, quietly. One strike captain told Elaine Low that “they’ve received boxes of doughnuts from producers who refused to share their names,” but that “the anonymous drive-by doughnuts were well received.” It’s remarkable that producers are afraid to have their names associated with a strike they support, but in a sense, the fear is the point.

    Even the Wall Street financiers themselves see the problem, in the form of stagnating share prices. From their point of view, however, the problem isn’t that studio-streamers are too powerful, but that they are too weak. As media tycoon John Malone last year told the New York Times, studios, especially smaller ones, don’t have enough pricing power, and will ”inevitably have to combine in order to try and become profitable.” This view is near-consensus in the C-Suite; former WarnerMedia CEO Jason Kilar recently wrote in the WSJ < https://www.wsj.com/articles/jason-kilar-chaotic-streaming-wars-11670177734 > , he expects there will only be two or three studios remaining after another merger wave, and a bevy of billionaires from Comcast and Discovery are all planning < https://puck.news/lazard-fears-nbcu-c-suite-tea-leaves/?_cio_id=f6c60604e79a01a8c408&utm_campaign=The+Daily+Courant+-+LEADS+(5%2F1%2F23)&utm_content=The+Daily+Courant+-+LEADS+(5%2F1%2F23)&utm_medium=email_action&utm_source=customer.io > for the “inevitable” merger of NBC and Warner Bros. Discovery. And am*zon is reportedly interested < https://nypost.com/2023/03/28/am*zon-reportedly-interested-in-buying-amc-entertainment/ >

     in buying the AMC theater chain.

    In other words, rather than returning the industry to profitability by separating out distribution and studios once again, the goal is to further consolidate Hollywood to squeeze pricing power out of consumers and creators.

    And that’s why this fight is existential. For the strikers, the problem is how to negotiate a deal providing a reasonable living making commercially viable TV shows and movies. For the studio-streamers, however, preserving a domestic creative industry is fundamentally unimportant. Their problem is a lack of pricing power, aka too much competition among relatively undifferentiated streaming services who must bid against each for both talent and audience. Their way out is to drive a hard bargain, while trying to engineer another set of mergers.

    As the Entertainment Strategy Guy notes < https://entertainmentstrategyguy.com/2023/05/09/sending-a-strategy-postcard-from-strike-land/> , and as the reality TV imports from the U.K. show, there is now production capacity all over the world, and shows and movies are regularly imported into the U.S. The South Korean show Squid Game was the most popular show on Netflix, ever. This CNBC headline says it all: “‘Squid Game’ success shines a light on how cheap it is to make TV shows outside the U.S.”  < https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/16/netflixs-squid-game-success-shines-light-on-international-discounts.html > As unimaginable as it might be to think of Hollywood itself disappearing, why couldn’t TV and movies just be one more industry the U.S. outsources? 

    In other words, this strike is more than just a problem for the writers, it’s about whether the U.S. wants to have the capacity to make commercially viable movies and television shows. If we do, then we’ll need a real political coalition to break up the studio-streamers.

    It’s a good moment to have this conversation, because the strike has focused everyone in Hollywood on problems in the industry. Different stakeholders in the industry are going to have to build a political argument for a revival of some form of the fin-syn or Paramount Decrees. We need Congressional hearings, and industry commissions with recommendations. It could be a Terms of Trade type arrangement so producers get to keep IP, or it could be something else. But it will have to split the industry giants so they are either distributors or studios, but not both. Markets have to exist again. I don’t know how to address consolidated theater chains, but that’s a problem as well.

    Finally, I would note that this strike is just one of a series of battles over who controls our media systems. There are of course many legislative proposals and antitrust suits to address social media and big tech, but it goes far beyond that. Last year, for instance, the Biden antitrust division blocked < https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/book-publishing-mega-merger-blocked > a merger of Penguin and Simon & Schuster, foiling consolidation in books. At academic publishing monopolist Elsevier, 40 scientists just resigned < https://www.salon.com/2023/05/10/elsevier-editor-resignation-neuroimage/ > from editorial positions at a journal on brain imaging to protest the “greed” of their publisher. 

    There is also anger in the national security world, and on the right, over this problem. Congressman Mike Gallagher, from the Special Select Committee on China, led a delegation < https://deadline.com/2023/04/disney-china-bob-iger-mike-gallagher-interview-1235322443/ > to Hollywood to meet with CEOs about Chinese influence in the industry (which is another consequence of consolidation). There’s a public fight between Tucker Carlson and Fox News, which is about media control as well. Carlson was fired, and was subjected < https://www.axios.com/2023/05/07/fox-news-tucker-carlson > to a non-compete agreement to block him from creating a rival. And who else is fighting with studio giant Disney? That would be Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, and at some level this conservative anger is with corporate power. Maybe a ‘break up Hollywood studios’ battle cry would have some pull with them. 

    America is a fractured society, but the truth is, most of us have something in common. We love storytelling, and we don’t want a small group telling us what stories we can tell one another. A coalition is possible to save this magnificent art form. When push comes to shove, very few Americans, in Hollywood or elsewhere, are happy “about the whole corporate dominance of America.”

     

     

    ARTICLE URL
    https://open.substack.com/pub/mattstoller/p/can-a-writers-strike-save-hollywood?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

     

    THE IMPACT OF TERMS OF TRADE ON THE UK's TELEVISION CONTENT PRODUCTION SECTOR

    end101.png

    end102.png

    end103.png

    end104.png

    end105.png

    end106.png

    end107.png

    end108.png

    end109.png

    end110.png

    end111.png

    end112.png

    end113.png

    end114.png

    end115.png

    end116.png

    end117.png

    end118.png

    end119.png

     

    PRODUCING PUBLIC SERVICE MEDIA CONTENT
     

    end201.png

    end202.png

    end203.png

    end204.png

    end205.png

    end206.png

    end207.png

    end208.png

    end209.png

    end210.png

    end211.png

    end212.png

    end213.png

    end214.png

    end215.png

    end216.png

    end217.png

    end218.png

    end219.png

    end220.png

    end221.png

    end222.png

    end223.png

    end224.png

    end225.png

    end226.png

    end227.png

    end228.png

    end229.png

    end230.png

     

  5.  

    now06.jpg

    My comment elsewhere

     

    right but while the truth, after all of that abuse, and the many changes that came with it, who do the Black folks descended from that want to be? I comprehend the post but the question going forward is what do the people descended from that pain, as well as earlier happy days or some happy days in between want to be?

     

    In amendment

     

    One of the problems with many abused groups is their abuse is usually collective, but unlike ancient times or earlier times, in modernity  their escape from abuse doesn't have to be and usually isn't.  That is the trick of the usa, one of the gifts of the british empire that created it, which itself brewed from its own creation from the roman empire that made western europe. You may subjugate an entire people brutally, but if you allow a trickle betterment, that can have the effect of keeping the subjugated group unmotivated for radical violent change. To be blunt, whether in the asian or african or american continent, the idea of individual growth is massive in black people's communities. Black people will talk communal growth heavily in advertising ways, but when you get down to function or results, most talk about individual growth. 

    Yes, the question is, can a group of people grow through individual growth? 

    The obvious answer is yes. nothing is impossible. 

    What is the prosequence of such actions? Nonviolence. The biggest problem with any abused people is the fear of violence to those who abused. Again, the ira was a very small percentage of irish people, most irish people were too afraid to attack the english.  If an abused  community proclaims internally that their best way forward is individual growth then mass violence is deterred and that satisfies the fear in the abused group.

    What is the consequence of such actions? Lost people. The reality is, and the proof is everywhere black people live in humanity at this point: africa/asia/europe/america , the consequence of individual growth as a collective action in the black community was and will be the annihilation of many  black peoples. Is Tulsa white people's fault? Yes , the violence is white people's fault. But who told black people non blacks can be trusted? who told black people non blacks will not attack black happiness? And the answer to both questions is black people themselves. The same people who tout individual growth also tout communal foolishness. why? for individual growth. If the community acts open, this allows for individuals in the community to grow. 

  6. A Photomanipulation contest, I used three warrior women images from my creativity and a simple metal colored circle for xena's chakram, don't have a story though
    https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/Photomanip-Entry-972177279

     

  7.  

    First act, a set of educators, i think college are helping a colleague leave but they all have an affinity to this colleague, a curiosity about his nature. I concur with Bixby, real human beings are not alarmist and in this select case, all of these are seasoned educators used to slowly thinking about something, so they wouldn't call the cops or paddy wagon immediately. 

    Why did I not guess the black leather jacket would call someone from outside first. I thought it would be billingly's character the physics or chemistry professor.

    Second act, a female teacher loves him, reminds me of that twilight zone , Long Live Walter JAmeson, by the dead early Charles Beaumont, but extended.

    I love Crude demonstration , hilarious, I am not superman. Loving Tony Todd's acting. 

    27:34 first seeing the ocean

    28:42 he studied with the buddha, and i loved the earlier birth of the vampire myth

    29:06 the first betrayal of character, leather jacket should had considered he think of being outed. Considering he called someone he is either biding time or betraying himself.

    29:38 ahh well done, he was expecting, 

    30:31 i wish i had been here from the beginning, I concur:) 

    32:16 he survived the bubonic plague, typhoid , smallpox

    32:53 good point, being immortal in a cage isn't desired

    33:33 black leather is wrong, common sense isn't insulted by an immortal being, common sense accepts tthe unique is plausible even if it can't not be explained.

    35:19 true Tony todd, but time is also the most precious thing in existence.

    35:52 exactly, the second is a human construct. an algorithmic truth, not assessed from nature.

    36:27 funny moment. slow movie but for those who like to overthink and like dialog fun

    37:21 is he lucky? that is the point of the story

    39:41 exactly, he is outside most of humanity yet still human, a minority of one

    41:46 I love that he didn't go into his past wives or children by the invasive psychiatrist

    42:50 good point, the one great chaotic moment is the "immortal man" chose to even do this. I comprehend the writer's point. It is a random idea in one of many lives. But I must admit, my long lived characters wouldn't do this, unless they wish to be caught or have their cycle of lives undone.

    43:07 he didn't think of these people's feelings before he told them ahhh, i disagree bixby.

    43:37 the psychiatrist, white haired is trying to pull off a guilt trip, i bet he was diagnosed to die soon

    44:50 ahh i knew it was a tragedy, the psychiatrist wife died yesterday
    I love it, permit me to be infantile by myself. 

    46:58 my first wedding :) funny charades

    47:54 this movie clearly couldn't make it in theaters.

    48:48 love his answer to 1292 ad

    50:04 funny, about the primitive tribe in new guinea:)

    51:03 the older woman is a hard core christian

    51:47 no way skipping the biblical figure, and now he wants to call it a night, this is what you get when you ask those who study knowledge about a person who has lived longer than common

    53:10 he is jesus hahaha! 

    53:24 sit down edith, i know 

    54:16 yes, sit down edith, lovely honesity from the biologist about his kin

    54:41 tony todd, modern, that's good:)

    55:29 ahh he is espousing the old belief that jesus learned buddhist ways. it makes sense historically in one way. Buddhism is older than the roman empire, and from the travelers, who were common at that time, labeled magi, who traveled freely in the roman empire because of the might of the roman empire... ok.

    56:41 exactly, Tony Todd, christianity was born from the multiracial roman empire. 

    58:26 good point, buddha /jesus/the christian god, may not be happy 

    59:04 you can tell this was written on bixby's deathbed, a great mortuary story. I wonder what I will write in my last moments.

    59:35 hhahaha, the psychiatrist came back:) haha soul saved:) 

    1:00:00 nice bridge, we don't need to reintroduce the old topics for the psychiatrist, his shame on leaving.

    1:00:53 great joke, nothing unusual in the path of the psychiatrist until the day he met a caveman who thought himself jesus

    1:01:46 piety is the mistake they bring to the lessons haha, he is on a roll, Bixby is enjoying himself in his last days

    1:03:10 thank you biologist, people make to light the influence of drugs, no, if he is taking a drug it isn't making him go up or down be violent or peaceful, it isn't changing him at all

    1:04:20 thank you tony todd, i don't blame you, stay calm and relax.

    1:04:55 exactly, psychiatrist, or the modern mythologies of MLKjr or Adolf Hitler

    1:07:42 Its funny , in a group called african american literary book club, do you know how many black members suggest the usa will be forever? why is that? why is it, black people who knows kemet has all other human communities by thousands of years will be bested by the usa? what are blacks in the usa afraid of?.... 

    1:08:20 how do you know?  I don't smell it. 
    exactly, you know when it will rain , all humans do. 

    1:09:20 etymology, this does happen. words matter.

    1:10:25 good acting, they are all trapped by this story of their colleague

    1:11:00 if edith says you aren't jesus one more time

    1:11:56 edith have broken down , the psychiatrist had to shed light

    1:12:49 the psychiatrist is wrong, he doesn't demand the truth, he demands the lie to keep peace

    1:13:44 he is bluffing, well done, he is giving them safety

    1:14:22 easy tonny todd:) he want to kill him

    1:15:44 it ends safe, well done bixby, he lets the thinkers get off easy

    1:16:25 exactly , the woman who lives him is right. 

    1:17:59 edith knows. she will leave it

    1:18:14 Tony Todd, a latitude in what we call reality... anything is possible
    I am going to watch star trek. and yes, good move tony todd
    Drop me a line whenever

    1:19:34 the psychiatrist found out
    easy psychiatrist , the break down. ahh well done, Bixby, ahh the psychiatrist was a man he knew. 

    1;21:45 exactly, he never saw his own child again.

    1:22:34 yes, let her decide

    hahaha, great hook, who knows, let the viewer decide.

    IN CONCLUSION
    Ok, this movie was fun, but not for the general audience. Alittle careless of him, but that is part of John's humanity, humans even long living one's will make mistakes. 
    I know this is an aside, but i love the credits , they are large enough to see and slow enough to follow, many movies have very uncaring or cheap credits.

    I say, this is a well constructed example of someone long lived revealing themselves in a paraspontaneous way.

    Just thoughtfulness.

    I didn't time index from the begining cause I was watching it side relatives , we do those things in our home, but I am glad my relatives went to watch other things as I could write more specifically and i forgot some points early on:) 

    1. Troy

      Troy

      Wow that was some report.  
       

      i just brought a book which included a short story by Bixby

    2. richardmurray

      richardmurray

      @Troy thank you, I am used to this, when I read books or listen to music or watch movies I am paying this kind of attention, part of it is how I was raised with art, my two black parents didn't blockade any art from me but also showed interest so it taught me to treat all art that way, while on the other side, as an artists always trying to learn, I want to see if I can decipher messages ideas and how they are executed in the work. 

       

      enjoy the book and definitely share your thoughts:) 

  8. now04.png

     

    NATO Isn’t What It Says It Is
    By Grey Anderson and Thomas Meaney

    Mr. Anderson is the editor of “Natopolitanism: The Atlantic Alliance Since the Cold War,” to which Mr. Meaney is a contributor.

    NATO leaders convening this week in Vilnius, Lithuania, have every reason to toast their success.

    Only four years ago, on the eve of another summit, the organization looked to be in low water; in the words of President Emmanuel Macron of France, it was undergoing nothing short of “brain death.” Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the situation has been transformed. As NATO plans to welcome Sweden into its ranks — Finland became a full-fledged member in April — and dispatch troops to reinforce its eastern flank, European Union allies are finally making good on long-deferred promises to increase military spending. Public opinion has followed suit. If Russia sought to divide Europe, President Biden could plausibly declare last spring that it had instead fully “NATO-ized” the continent.

    This turnabout has understandably energized the alliance’s supporters. The statement of purpose from Jens Stoltenberg, its secretary general, that “the strength of NATO is the best possible tool we have to maintain peace and security” has never had more loyal adherents. Even critics of the organization — such as China hawks who see it as a distraction from the real threat in East Asia and restrainers who would prefer that Washington refocus on diplomatic solutions and problems at home — concede that NATO’s purpose is primarily the defense of Europe.

    But NATO, from its origins, was never primarily concerned with aggregating military power. Fielding 100 divisions at its Cold War height, a small fraction of Warsaw Pact manpower, the organization could not be counted on to repel a Soviet invasion and even the continent’s nuclear weapons were under Washington’s control. Rather, it set out to bind Western Europe to a far vaster project of a U.S.-led world order, in which American protection served as a lever to obtain concessions on other issues, like trade and monetary policy. In that mission, it has proved remarkably successful.

    Many observers expected NATO to close shop after the collapse of its Cold War rival. But in the decade after 1989, the organization truly came into its own. NATO acted as a ratings agency for the European Union in Eastern Europe, declaring countries secure for development and investment. The organization pushed would-be partners to adhere to a liberal, pro-market creed, according to which — as President Bill Clinton’s national security adviser put it — “the pursuit of democratic institutions, the expansion of free markets” and “the promotion of collective security” marched in lock step. European military professionals and reform-minded elites formed a willing constituency, their campaigns boosted by NATO’s information apparatus.

    When European populations proved too stubborn, or undesirably swayed by socialist or nationalist sentiments, Atlantic integration proceeded all the same. The Czech Republic was a telling case. Faced with a likely “no” vote in a referendum on joining the alliance in 1997, the secretary general and top NATO officials saw to it that the government in Prague simply dispense with the exercise; the country joined two years later. The new century brought more of the same, with an appropriate shift in emphasis. Coinciding with the global war on terrorism, the “big bang” expansion of 2004 — in which seven countries acceded — saw counterterrorism supersede democracy and human rights in alliance rhetoric. Stress on the need for liberalization and public sector reforms remained a constant.

    In the realm of defense, the alliance was not as advertised. For decades, the United States has been the chief provider of weapons, logistics, air bases and battle plans. The war in Ukraine, for all the talk of Europe stepping up, has left that asymmetry essentially untouched. Tellingly, the scale of U.S. military aid — $47 billion over the first year of the conflict — is more than double that offered by European Union countries combined. European spending pledges may also turn out to be less impressive than they appear. More than a year after the German government publicized the creation of a special $110 billion fund for its armed forces, the bulk of the credits remain unused. In the meantime, German military commanders have said that they lack sufficient munitions for more than two days of high-intensity combat.

    Whatever the levels of expenditure, it is remarkable how little military capability Europeans get for the outlays involved. Lack of coordination, as much as penny-pinching, hamstrings Europe’s ability to ensure its own security. By forbidding duplication of existing capabilities and prodding allies to accept niche roles, NATO has stymied the emergence of any semiautonomous European force capable of independent action. As for defense procurement, common standards for interoperability, coupled with the sheer size of the U.S. military-industrial sector and bureaucratic impediments in Brussels, favor American firms at the expense of their European competitors. The alliance, paradoxically, appears to have weakened allies’ ability to defend themselves.

    Yet the paradox is only superficial. In fact, NATO is working exactly as it was designed by postwar U.S. planners, drawing Europe into a dependency on American power that reduces its room for maneuver. Far from a costly charity program, NATO secures American influence in Europe on the cheap. U.S. contributions to NATO and other security assistance programs in Europe account for a tiny fraction of the Pentagon’s annual budget — less than 6 percent by a recent estimate. And the war has only strengthened America’s hand. Before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, roughly half of European military spending went to American manufacturers. Surging demand has exacerbated this tendency as buyers rush to acquire tanks, combat aircraft and other weapons systems, locking into costly, multiyear contracts. Europe may be remilitarizing, but America is reaping the rewards.

    In Ukraine, the pattern is clear. Washington will provide the military security, and its corporations will benefit from a bonanza of European armament orders, while Europeans will shoulder the cost of postwar reconstruction — something Germany is better poised to accomplish than the buildup of its military. The war also serves as a dress rehearsal for U.S. confrontation with China, in which European support cannot be so easily counted on. Limiting Beijing’s access to strategic technologies and promoting American industry are hardly European priorities, and severing European and Chinese trade is still difficult to imagine. Yet already there are signs that NATO is making headway in getting Europe to follow its lead in the theater. On the eve of a visit to Washington at the end of June, Germany’s defense minister duly advertised his awareness of “European responsibility for the Indo-Pacific” and the importance of “the rules-based international order” in the South China Sea.

    No matter their ascendance, Atlanticists fret over support for the organization being undermined by disinformation and cybermeddling. They needn’t worry. Contested throughout the Cold War, NATO remained a subject of controversy into the 1990s, when the disappearance of its adversary encouraged thoughts of a new European security architecture. Today, dissent is less audible than ever before.

    Left parties in Europe, historically critical of militarism and American power, have overwhelmingly enlisted in the defense of the West: The trajectory of the German Greens, from fierce opponents of nuclear weapons to a party seemingly willing to risk atomic war, is a particularly vivid illustration. Stateside, criticism of NATO focuses on the risks of overextending U.S. treaty obligations, not their underlying justification. The most successful alliance in history, gathering in celebration of itself, need not wait for its 75th anniversary next year to uncork the champagne.

     

    Article Link

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/11/opinion/nato-summit-vilnius-europe.html

     

    I WROTE A LETTER TO NY TIMES IN REPLY TO THIS OP-ED

     

    If NATO isn't what it says it is, then Putin's leadership of Russia is mischaracterized. Did as leader of Russia he initiated the current war in Ukraine? yes. But was this unwise for Russia? no. Based on the op-ed's words, Russia will never be an appropriate NATO member as a nuclear power, while the actions of NATO members or Europe West of Russia based on the article are clearly prepared and wanting to be modern satraps <tributary states of the Persian empire> of the USA. And to the future, the Pax Statian has a countdown or conditional , either the condition that Ukraine is a buffer between the militaries of the USA + Russia will end or a countdown to violence will begin as NATO has no where to grow. 

     

    IN  AMENDMENT

     

    Putin argued that the USA is trying to close around Russia, this opinion piece essentially says, through the will of Europe west of Rusia, Putin is 100% correct and sequentially it is in Russia's interest to stake a claim before Russia is totally surrounded and becomes a satrap of Europe west of Russia while Europe west of russia is a satrap of the usa. 

     

     

     

  9. remix of tantric sex piece by shawn alleyne with tommy shelton for colors.jpg

    Concept: remix of tantric sex piece
    Artist: shawn alleyne <<lines>> < Pyroglyphics Studio > OR < https://www.deviantart.com/pyroglyphics1 >    tommy shelton <colors>
    Prior post
    https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2309&type=status
    Shawn Alleyne post
    https://aalbc.com/tc/search/?q=shawn&quick=1&type=core_statuses_status&updated_after=any&sortby=newest
     

    Black and White version, only shawn alleyne

    remix of tantric sex piece by shawn alleyne.jpg

     

  10. Malenga Mulendema 

    Creator of Supa Team 4

     

    My Reply to her replies to the questions posed to Malenga Mulendema

    0:12 What is the project that you pitched to the Story Lab?
    Triggerfish is a firm in south africa, I think white owned, that was given opportunity by netflix to be an animation studio for their animation project in africa. 
    Triggerish invited artist from africa, gardless of phenotype, to submit and Malenga was selected. 
    her pitchline is four black teenage girls saving the world on a budget, not a premise I will think of but ok.

    0:30 Why did you chose that story?
    Well, as always I have a problem when people don't speak properly. She said, as a girl she liked watching cartoons absent stating all the cartoons were made outside africa. Araciality in assessing the genesis of art is a sin. Yes, a black girl from Zambia, didn't see cartoons made by black people or zambians  or involve black characters cause most cartoons in the market were made by whites of european or asian descent who made characters that are white of european or asian descent. No artist has to consider all groups in humanity in their art. 
    I am happy she has the opportunity to have her creative vision. The four different types of young females will definitely attract an audience. She wants characters that showcase how the majority in the african continent, under governments that do not promote industry aside a wealthy minority that accept the usa/european imposed system of being a king in all but name  happily to evade responsibility to their larger community how they utilize their wealthy, have to figure out how to use resources that are scarce or foreign to come up with solutions. 

    0:53 Why do you think your project was chosen?
    Oh my fellow artists, very few have the honesty to admit, pure luck. She talks about how her story stayed true to something or has universal themes. hogwash, she got lucky. She was the only story triggerfish saw that stayed true to something or had universal themes, hogwash. She got lucky. Why do artists throughout history keep suggesting commercial opportunity is based on creative merit. It isn't. She was selected because she got lucky. ... I am hapyp for her luck, and hope she gets luckier, but all this, commercial meritocracy crap I hear many artists utter all the time is a lie. Creative assessment has artistic merits. Commercial opportunity is a thing of luck.

    1:10 Describe the process once accepted in Story Lab?
    Funny how Walt Disney was fired from the firm he worked at that stole his character and he decided to start his own firm and do as he pleased, and he got lucky and succeeded. While now, people from Disney are guiding people all over the world on how to get into animation without telling them to start their own business and create as long as you can, hopefully getting lucky.

    1:43 How did the Project evolve during development?
    It is called preproduction. But she is correct, the word refinement is best. Though remember, producers can demand things, ala Kevin Smith and the pitch to superman.

    2:06 What was your main challenge during development?
    The fact that she felt she didn't believe she belonged explains one thing, she never would had started her own animation studio or tried to make animations like walt disney who started the walt disney company. 
    Not believing in yourself is devastating for any artist.

    2:32 What was your main takeaway from the development process?
    Well, she says you can always make better, but I don't like that language. 
    Is any artists fully satisfied with a finished work? no. Butsaying you can always make better suggest a project is never finished, this isn't true. 
    I prefer to say, I can always gain experience, not make things better. As you gain experience you grow.

    2:47 Any advice for anyone wanting to create an animated series?
    The one answer that showed wisdom from beginning to end, make the show you want to see.

    3:07 Where are you now with the project?
    3:21 What are the next steps?

    This interview is behind. Supa Team 4 is coming out July 20th 2023
    say Congrats folks!!

     

     

     

    TRANSCRIPT
     

    0:00

    [Music]

    0:06

    my name is Mulenga me and Emma and

    0:08

    America from Lusaka Zambia

    0:13

    okay so the product has admitted to

    0:15

    trigger 50-lap competition is code my

    0:17

    Mac a super foe and it's an animated TV

    0:20

    series set in Lusaka Zambia about 4

    0:22

    African girls who are recruited to a

    0:24

    former secret agents low-budget

    0:26

    operation so basically they are saving

    0:28

    the world but on a budget

    0:32

    if the growing up I used to love to

    0:34

    watch a lot of cartoons so I'd never see

    0:36

    myself represented in any way so in my

    0:38

    Mackay super 4 I get to see myself on

    0:41

    screen and I get to see my city or the

    0:43

    context that I live in represented in a

    0:45

    way only cartoons can and this show also

    0:47

    shows how Africans are resourceful or

    0:51

    innovative

    0:55

    okay I think this show was selected

    0:58

    because it does a good balance of

    1:00

    staying true to what specific to to the

    1:02

    store in terms of the carat and the

    1:03

    location but it still has those

    1:05

    universal themes that anybody anywhere

    1:06

    in the world can relate

    1:12

    so why is the project

    1:14

    cept it in two-story lab I got the

    1:16

    opportunity to go to triggerfish and

    1:17

    attend the workshop so we had Pilar

    1:19

    lissandra a screenwriting consultant who

    1:21

    took us into different topics on spin

    1:25

    writing and we also had worked a

    1:28

    workshop with Aaron rose from Disney who

    1:30

    basically just told us a lot of

    1:31

    information about how to bring an

    1:33

    animated TV series to screen as I got

    1:36

    the opportunity to go to Disney World

    1:37

    and learn from different different

    1:39

    departments about bringing an animated

    1:40

    TV series to screen

    1:44

    so the project didn't change in a major

    1:48

    way but what happened is a lot of things

    1:50

    we're refined in the concept the

    1:51

    characters the story itself and and the

    1:56

    episodes that were written as well were

    1:57

    also refined so the overall project has

    2:00

    just been going through like a series of

    2:02

    refining

    2:06

    so my main challenge during the

    2:09

    development process was convincing

    2:11

    myself that I sort of belonged to this

    2:13

    animation world because it was very new

    2:15

    to me but I relied on the fact that at

    2:18

    least I understood story and story felt

    2:21

    like the foundation to everything so

    2:22

    every time I felt like I was going into

    2:25

    a panic I just remembered that okay I

    2:27

    have an understanding of story and

    2:28

    everything felt a little bit easier

    2:34

    my main takeaway from the development

    2:36

    process is that you can always you know

    2:39

    make your story better and you can

    2:41

    always make your characters better so

    2:43

    just keep working at at your story your

    2:45

    concept and your characters

    2:50

    my advice to anybody trying to create an

    2:53

    animated TV series is to create a TV

    2:55

    series that you yourself want to see

    2:57

    because once you think of something that

    2:59

    you want to see you in television you

    3:01

    become more invested and more

    3:02

    enthusiastic about about the story and

    3:05

    the show itself

    3:09

    so at the moment we are reworking the

    3:12

    pitch Bible and trying to get a pile of

    3:15

    script done and also we're trying to

    3:17

    create an animatic for the project

    3:23

    at the moment we've signed development

    3:26

    deal with kake entertainment a global

    3:28

    distributor and licensing agent and we

    3:31

    have deal with the major broadcaster

    3:34

    [Music]

    English (auto-generated)

    AllFrom Triggerfish Animation StudioAnimated filmsRelatedRecently uploadedWatched

  11. Artistic Truth

     

    I have said constantly that instead of complaining about what others create, just create yourself. But this goes into the realm of the battle between commerciality side creativity in the artistic environment in the fiscal capitalistic world in modernity.

    While I have always adhered to what my fellow artists said below. I also comprehend the challenge. that he dismisses unfairly. The problem with many people in fiscal capitalism is not that they don't have anything to say, but they want to say something that will generate money  ,and that is where the creative is subdued by the statistics of commerce. 

    All know, even if they don't say, to create art from your soul will not provide the highest probability to make money and all artists need money in a fiscal capitalistic world to eat. Nothing is impossible but making money in art is not about the artists but the viewers/listeners/readers. 

    The creative side is controlled by the artists. The commercial side is controlled by the entire scale of financiers : from kings with a commission to the peasant who sees something for free. 

    Create folks but accept that what you create may not be financially profitable, no matter how many people like it. 

     

     

     

     

     

  12. The Labors of Judasa is a history in the Chronicle of The Four King in the Tarikh Rohoregens. No one has a complete Tarikh Rohoregens, but recently this Incomplete Labors of Judasa in the Chronicle of The Four King was discovered.
    https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/An-Incomplete-Labors-of-Judasa-970676145
    Audiobook  

    https://www.kobo.com/audiobook/an-incomplete-labors-of-judasa-from-a-griot&nbsp;

     

    A Runic Remnant Of The Labors Of Judasa
    Colored 
    https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/Orc-Tofusenshi-Dtiys-2023-Color-970678947
    Coloring
    https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/orc-tofusenshi-dtiys-2023-blackandwhite-970678468
    Cento
    https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/An-Incomplete-Labors-of-Judasa-Cento-970677156

     

    Video Excerpts - the same on different platforms

     

    TUMBLR

    https://www.tumblr.com/richardmurrayhumblr/722147665118380032/the-labors-of-judasa-is-a-history-in-the-chronicle

     

    TikTok

    @richardmurraytiktok The Labors of Judasa is a history in the Chronicle of The Four King in the Tarikh Rohoregens. No one has a complete Tarikh Rohoregens, but recently this Incomplete Labors of Judasa in the Chronicle of The Four King was discovered. https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/An-Incomplete-Labors-of-Judasa-970676145 Audiobook https://www.kobo.com/us/en/audiobook/an-incomplete-labors-of-judasa-from-a-griot A Runic Remnant Of The Labors Of Judasa Colored https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/Orc-Tofusenshi-Dtiys-2023-Color-970678947 Coloring https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/orc-tofusenshi-dtiys-2023-blackandwhite-970678468 Cento https://www.deviantart.com/hddeviant/art/An-Incomplete-Labors-of-Judasa-Cento-970677156 #rmtja #rmaalbc #kobo #audiobook #richardmurray #black #artist #poetry #calligraphy ♬ original sound - richardmurraytiktok

     

    Youtube

     

     

     

  13. The PAwnbroker

    Happy Birthday Brock Peters, that voice. In this film, he plays a homosexual black illegal fiscal capitalist

     

  14. Sammy Davis Interview

     

     

    TRANSCRIPT

    0:00
    4 scene 22 take 33 psalm 22.
    0:13
    damn
    0:16
    [Music]
    0:28
    went into the army
    0:31
    you know that that horrible
    0:34
    that was my first taste really of racism
    0:37
    you know ever because I never been
    0:40
    exposed to it being in Show Business you
    0:41
    know
    0:42
    you know you'd run into the average bit
    0:44
    of it but not them not enough to to
    0:45
    upset you or anything you know or not
    0:48
    even to be aware because I'm in show
    0:49
    business so I wasn't aware of it and as
    0:51
    a kid being in Show Business you I
    0:53
    didn't learn until later the about why
    0:55
    we slept in bus stations and why we had
    0:57
    to go to the police and say where's
    0:58
    there
    0:59
    a colored family that you can stay with
    1:01
    because you couldn't get in the hotels
    1:02
    and things like that you couldn't eat in
    1:04
    this restaurant
    1:05
    but there was a very close fraternity
    1:08
    between most of the black and white
    1:11
    performers at that time
    1:13
    uh that doesn't exist today what were
    1:17
    some specific examples when you started
    1:20
    first getting the message
    1:21
    well I think the the first real thing
    1:23
    that I got was in the Army when I you
    1:25
    know and I was in basic training and I
    1:28
    hadn't even gone to basic training I
    1:29
    went in San Francisco we went to the
    1:31
    Presidio Monterey and the third day I
    1:33
    was standing in line and this is before
    1:36
    um desegregation came in the Army you
    1:38
    know uh and I'm standing in line and at
    1:42
    the at this place where there was black
    1:43
    and white soldiers and the cat said you
    1:46
    know
    1:47
    where I come from [ __ ] you know
    1:48
    staring in the back or they they ain't
    1:50
    here I forget the exact line now and I
    1:53
    had my my duffel bag and I'm a duffel
    1:56
    bag but you know the thing like use the
    1:57
    carry of Shaving equipment in and I just
    1:59
    sundied him you know
    2:01
    and knocked him down and had cut his lip
    2:04
    and he's bleeding from the lid and he
    2:06
    said
    2:08
    okay you knock me down but you still a
    2:09
    [ __ ]
    2:12
    and that laid with me you know because
    2:14
    that that's that's so
    2:17
    so venomous it really is you know that
    2:20
    that's the kind of cat that you ain't
    2:22
    gonna never reach
    2:23
    were there some points at which you
    2:26
    during that time when you had a lot of
    2:29
    pressures on you almost lost confidence
    2:31
    in yourself
    2:33
    oh well I that happened to me but not
    2:35
    until I made it really because you know
    2:37
    when you when you're hungry and you're
    2:39
    trying to get there that's one thing
    2:41
    because you've got that ambition that
    2:43
    feeds on and you keep crawling on your
    2:46
    ambition to get there I got there until
    2:48
    I lost control of everything
    2:51
    sense of values uh
    2:53
    now I've got the doll so wound up
    2:56
    there was no relaxing there was there
    2:58
    was no being aware of anything first of
    3:00
    all there was not much to be aware of
    3:01
    anyway in those days
    3:04
    but I mean the nominal awareness that
    3:06
    wasn't there I was just wrapped up in me
    3:09
    then then I got scared because I started
    3:12
    to lose what I thought was the basic
    3:14
    human instinct that I had had
    3:17
    and I got too phony I did oh I did it
    3:19
    all man I invented some
    3:21
    the ones that in the book I invented
    3:23
    some other problems you know but
    3:26
    I you know again to relate to what you
    3:29
    are I said today and I look back 25
    3:32
    years ago and I say wow I don't think I
    3:35
    my head would be where it is now if I
    3:38
    had not gone through that
    3:40
    25 years ago all the mistakes being on
    3:43
    all the time
    3:45
    emulating in truth emulating the white
    3:48
    stars not trying to get my own identity
    3:52
    but because that that was the kick then
    3:54
    you know that's what you had to do so I
    3:58
    decided if you got to do it then I'd do
    3:59
    it better than anybody else had ever
    4:00
    done it
    4:01
    you know in other words when I started
    4:03
    to do Impressions and all of that kind
    4:04
    of stuff relating to a theatrical thing
    4:06
    being on Broadway and Mr Wonderful you
    4:09
    know I wanted to do all that because I
    4:11
    figured if Donald O'Connor can do it man
    4:13
    I'm gonna do it
    4:14
    so in other words I was becoming a black
    4:17
    Donald O'Connor a black Mickey Rooney
    4:19
    instead of becoming a black Sammy Davis
    4:21
    what about the Rat Pack era you and
    4:25
    Sinatra and let me light a cigarette and
    4:27
    I'll tell you okay
    4:32
    I keep thinking uh just a few days
    4:36
    [Music]
    4:38
    no longer will it be anything happening
    4:40
    like it should be the one traffic ticket
    4:42
    that's the first step to maybe in 20
    4:44
    years is not to legalize it right now
    4:46
    when they legalized marijuana
    4:50
    but I'm just comedically I'm thinking
    4:52
    when they legalize it they will be back
    4:55
    to commercials again
    4:59
    [Music]
    5:13
    [Music]
    5:18
    [Music]
    5:30
    and plus but the most important thing is
    5:32
    you'd never be able to run through the
    5:34
    forest
    5:41
    thank you
    5:43
    what about the Rat Pack era
    5:49
    was that a part of your mistakes
    5:51
    well let me tell you about let me tell
    5:53
    you about the Sinatra thing
    5:56
    uh
    5:57
    if it hadn't been for Frank Sinatra
    6:00
    I don't I would have never been in films
    6:02
    really
    6:03
    because he gave me uh
    6:07
    he gave me a an opportunity
    6:09
    in three pictures
    6:13
    based upon the fact that there was
    6:14
    nothing to do really except the fact
    6:16
    that it we got the job because we were
    6:17
    all friends and buddies and it was based
    6:19
    upon a camaraderie that we had as a
    6:22
    bunch of guys as performers that Frank
    6:24
    said why don't we do all do a picture
    6:26
    together
    6:27
    but he so he helped my career
    6:29
    tremendously again my own personal
    6:32
    involvement being such that I became so
    6:35
    involved with that lifestyle
    6:38
    that again I found myself submerging
    6:41
    into a lifestyle that I could not equate
    6:43
    with after you'd leave the party you
    6:45
    come home and you're going to
    6:47
    and you say wow man it sure was nice to
    6:49
    be in the company of all them big names
    6:50
    and the movie star
    6:52
    but there was no
    6:54
    on one hand I I loved being with my
    6:57
    friends
    6:58
    but it was submerging me as a human
    7:00
    being I think as I analyze it now
    7:03
    and there were Beautiful Moments during
    7:05
    that period of the 60s the early 60s and
    7:08
    there was some frightening moments I
    7:09
    remember walking on the stage at the
    7:11
    Democratic Convention and being booed by
    7:13
    the southern contingent you know
    7:16
    because they had no business the only
    7:17
    reason they booed me was because I was
    7:19
    married to a white woman you know to put
    7:21
    it right where it's at that's why they
    7:22
    boom boom hits how dare you be married
    7:25
    to a white woman you know
    7:27
    but it was
    7:28
    a part of conversation privately and
    7:31
    publicly is that uh you were married to
    7:33
    a white woman how do you feel about that
    7:36
    how would you advise a young black
    7:38
    person your son about marrying a white
    7:41
    woman
    7:42
    I think a person should marry who they
    7:43
    want to marry man
    7:45
    I think that you can be committed to
    7:47
    your people to the cause whatever you
    7:49
    whatever the terminology you want to use
    7:51
    doesn't matter matter who you're married
    7:53
    to if you fall in love you fall in love
    7:55
    if you're if you're getting I don't
    7:57
    think anyone gets married has children
    7:59
    and the rest
    8:00
    to do a three cheating job you know
    8:03
    and uh
    8:05
    to me
    8:07
    I feel no thing about it I really don't
    8:11
    I really don't feel anything about that
    8:13
    because I think that's so damn private
    8:16
    man
    8:16
    that has to do with what I want a cat to
    8:19
    do if it's a brother on the corner
    8:20
    whatever it is look at me and say what
    8:23
    did you do today to help
    8:24
    don't talk about my private life
    8:27
    that's mine that if you know if I want
    8:30
    to marry a dog that's my life
    8:33
    this is the point whatever I had I paid
    8:35
    my dues to get it
    8:38
    and I mean pay them
    8:40
    in every way you want to talk about but
    8:43
    what I'm but that's professionally
    8:45
    that's as a human being on a
    8:47
    professional level but as a human being
    8:48
    period I tell my kids Harry who you want
    8:52
    to marry
    8:53
    now I know this sure as I'm sitting on
    8:55
    this floor man whole bunch of brothers
    8:58
    and sisters don't like me there's a
    9:00
    whole bunch of white people that don't
    9:01
    like me why do you feel there's a group
    9:03
    of brothers and sisters who don't like
    9:05
    you because there was a whole bunch of
    9:07
    brothers and sisters that didn't like
    9:08
    Jesus Christ that's why
    9:11
    and ain't nobody ever been put on this
    9:12
    Earth that everybody liked
    9:14
    they don't kill Martin Luther King the
    9:16
    only thing he kept singing was we shall
    9:17
    overcome and love and peace killed him
    9:19
    wiped him out killed Malcolm
    9:23
    wiped out everybody man don't you
    9:25
    understand and some cat hired three
    9:29
    black cats to wipe out the man who was
    9:31
    the mother of our time and when they
    9:33
    killed him he had a half a church full
    9:35
    of people it wasn't like it was packed
    9:37
    and jammed because already he was losing
    9:42
    and he says it himself if you read his
    9:44
    works that there's a whole bunch of
    9:46
    [ __ ] that don't like me black folks
    9:48
    like me but not the [ __ ]
    9:51
    which is true and three black cat three
    9:55
    [ __ ] knocked him off
    9:57
    paid by white establishment that's my
    9:59
    feeling and I will feel this as long as
    10:01
    I live
    10:02
    and it was afterwards at the the
    10:04
    Resurgence of this man and suddenly we
    10:07
    became aware of all the things that he
    10:08
    was saying because as long as doesn't it
    10:12
    strike you funny that as long as
    10:16
    Malcolm was preaching separatism
    10:20
    as long as he was preaching such
    10:23
    vehemence he never got hurt at all it
    10:26
    was when he came back from Mecca and he
    10:28
    said we must all live together we must
    10:29
    we must ask black people do our thing
    10:31
    but we must all live on this Earth as
    10:34
    one blah blah that's when he started
    10:36
    getting his house bombed
    10:38
    he got wiped out months later
    10:40
    same thing with King as long as King was
    10:42
    hitting the March as they put him in
    10:44
    jail that was it as soon as he started
    10:45
    talking about Vietnam
    10:47
    and the workers and this that and the
    10:49
    other getting out of his field of
    10:52
    reference
    10:53
    really
    10:55
    heavy too heavy for somebody wipe him
    10:57
    out
    10:59
    you know and it's frightening to me so
    11:01
    that's why I say a lot of people will
    11:03
    not like any performer and you try to
    11:06
    relate
    11:07
    as far I'm not talking about relating in
    11:09
    terms of oh hi bra and do the Fist and
    11:12
    whatever it is and hey man right on I'm
    11:14
    not talking about the words I'm talking
    11:15
    about in your heart relating to what the
    11:17
    problems are
    11:18
    but the society in which we live in
    11:19
    today it has gotten to a point where you
    11:21
    cannot do that anymore based upon the
    11:24
    fact that I must do what I feel
    11:26
    if I feel that I I want to help in this
    11:29
    area I try to do it and I try to do it
    11:31
    Sans publicity not based upon the fear
    11:34
    that I have for my job
    11:36
    but I think that sometimes if I want to
    11:38
    help some brothers who are in trouble my
    11:40
    lending my name to it defeats the very
    11:44
    purpose that they're trying to achieve
    11:48
    but money is money
    11:50
    heart is heart you should lend your
    11:52
    heart and your money you ain't got the
    11:54
    money
    11:56
    then lend this lend your body man to it
    11:59
    you know but I'm talking about I think
    12:01
    that if the performer can be used
    12:05
    than he should be used
    12:08
    to put my obligation into black positive
    12:11
    things I'm not talking about National
    12:12
    organizations it can be something that's
    12:14
    happening on the corner a project that
    12:16
    because I found out and Walter Mason can
    12:19
    tell you we found out that you go into a
    12:22
    town
    12:23
    and sometimes it's as little as a
    12:25
    hundred dollars because you go to an
    12:28
    area where this where where some
    12:30
    projects are and they got a recreation
    12:31
    center ain't got no pool table ain't got
    12:33
    no records to play so the kids don't go
    12:35
    there they hang on the car right
    12:37
    Jesus you walk in and you look around
    12:40
    and you say hey well I know I get a pool
    12:42
    table and I know I can get the record
    12:44
    player and I'll get reprise at that time
    12:47
    or my own company to send records you're
    12:50
    in a privileged situation first of all
    12:52
    uh I can't help but make an analogy
    12:54
    between yourself and lean a horn
    12:55
    I mean the two of you are for lack of a
    12:58
    better phrase are superstars are using
    13:00
    to some extent your sense of commitment
    13:04
    you uh you're evolving a new sense of
    13:06
    self and most importantly like you're
    13:09
    going in front of the nation and you're
    13:11
    saying I'm Black and I'm Proud and I'm
    13:13
    relating to my people
    13:15
    I'm not going to use anybody's name but
    13:17
    I'm sure you won't but where are the
    13:19
    heads of a lot of the black Superstars
    13:21
    we don't see them like we see you in
    13:23
    Philadelphia with the street gangs we
    13:25
    don't see them saying what Lena said in
    13:28
    terms of what's happened to her well I I
    13:30
    think
    13:32
    I think the phonies
    13:34
    that's what I think and the bitter irony
    13:37
    of it all is
    13:39
    that
    13:40
    again I have to sit by man and watch
    13:44
    these people be lauded by our brothers
    13:46
    and sisters in the streets
    13:49
    and they and the brothers and sisters
    13:50
    must be aware
    13:52
    that they ain't doing nothing
    13:54
    but it took me a long time to get there
    13:55
    maybe they maybe my brother brothers and
    13:57
    sisters who are superstars need that
    13:58
    kind of time and there are many who say
    14:00
    I don't want to get involved in it
    14:02
    but I don't know how you cannot get
    14:04
    involved in it because they are first of
    14:06
    all black and they are committed
    14:08
    whether they want to be committed or not
    14:10
    the very nature of the skin commits you
    14:12
    I don't read a script that I don't weigh
    14:15
    and say I wonder what the brother and
    14:17
    the con is going to think about this
    14:20
    how can I change it if it's wrong
    14:23
    because the black performer again has
    14:25
    that obligation
    14:27
    that we are black performers
    14:30
    and so therefore I'm not talking about
    14:32
    you gonna come out every time man and do
    14:35
    a number because like on Laugh-In
    14:38
    you know I do jokes but somewhere along
    14:41
    the line I've got to relate to what's
    14:43
    really happening
    14:44
    somewhere so that the brother who's
    14:47
    watching me who may not necessarily buy
    14:49
    my records
    14:50
    may not go to my movies may not come to
    14:53
    the Copa the Sands Hotel lassimi will
    14:56
    say yeah
    14:58
    in a bar or in his house yeah
    15:01
    that's all that's my thanks but the
    15:04
    black audience
    15:06
    owes that black performer an obligation
    15:08
    of watching and supporting him unless he
    15:10
    turns out to be really the rat of all
    15:13
    time
    15:15
    but I mean when I say rap I mean he's
    15:17
    not doing anything he's doing things
    15:19
    that embarrass the the black population
    15:23
    now I know a lot of people don't like
    15:24
    flips doing the the Deacon I've heard a
    15:27
    lot of talk about it Geraldine Geraldine
    15:29
    they don't like uh I now my personal
    15:32
    things I think geraldine's funny I feel
    15:34
    a little funny about the deacon
    15:36
    because I think that's going back to
    15:37
    something that's so deeply rooted in
    15:39
    black people
    15:40
    religiously you know that I think that
    15:43
    that does this to me but I think it's
    15:45
    still funny because I'm looking at it
    15:46
    again through one eye that looks
    15:49
    in two directions first as a performer
    15:52
    is it funny is it clever secondly as a
    15:55
    man we're trying to relate to the cat on
    15:57
    the corner again you understand what I
    15:58
    mean because first and foremost I'm a
    16:01
    performer that's all I've ever done all
    16:02
    my life
    16:03
    so I know he's got to weigh it but what
    16:06
    do you do
    16:07
    you've got to have the support of your
    16:09
    people
    16:10
    but geez I just love saying that number
    16:13
    one variety show in the country now and
    16:16
    start in by a black man who is very very
    16:20
    funny but Amos and Andy was funny don't
    16:24
    do that to me don't do that
    16:27
    and Geraldine is funny and uh the Deacon
    16:31
    is funny but can you move forward you
    16:33
    know at at the level of the struggle we
    16:36
    are for Liberation yeah you know came
    16:38
    before to continually uh entertain white
    16:41
    people with shows produced by white men
    16:44
    with a frame of reference of what we are
    16:46
    I mean that's not defining ourselves and
    16:49
    the role of the Entertainer
    16:51
    to some extent has to accommodate that
    16:54
    relevant I think that the Amos Amanda
    16:56
    was funny I was embarrassed by it I
    16:58
    signed the letters too you know but I I
    17:00
    say that I think at this point now we've
    17:02
    got more stars than we've ever had
    17:04
    before that I can afford the luxury
    17:07
    because in place of Geraldine and then
    17:10
    place a Flip Wilson I have Don Knotts
    17:14
    since you both guess no baby I was out
    17:17
    of town you know I haven't had a chance
    17:19
    to live a boat here okay so what you
    17:21
    think of the terrible cat dead man
    17:27
    we are like
    17:29
    in one sense limited because we will
    17:33
    never have the audience of a commercial
    17:36
    Channel but do you want that audience
    17:38
    I'd like to have that audience on the
    17:40
    other hand if getting that audience
    17:43
    necessitated compromising our principles
    17:46
    I know they have ten Brothers
    17:48
    out of the 200 million people in this
    17:51
    country watch this show yeah then they
    17:53
    have the 200 million people in this
    17:55
    country watch the show even because I
    17:57
    think being irrelevant is
    17:58
    counterproductive you know and and that
    18:00
    brings me to the next point
    18:02
    uh you have a show
    18:05
    that
    18:06
    folded
    18:09
    and that's when I think like what you
    18:13
    said you were in another era
    18:15
    you're being very kind yeah
    18:18
    I was a stone rock and you could be for
    18:21
    free yeah what would you do I mean I
    18:24
    don't know but I would I tell you what I
    18:26
    wouldn't do or maybe by that you can get
    18:28
    a clue I certainly wouldn't do nothing
    18:29
    more than I'm doing as an entertainer
    18:31
    today in other words I ain't gonna let
    18:33
    them change me last time out I let him
    18:35
    put me in suits I couldn't smoke I
    18:37
    couldn't say what I wanted to say and
    18:39
    though I put a lot of people to work and
    18:40
    I did a lot of things and all of that
    18:42
    and I changed a lot of policies at NBC
    18:44
    you know when they catch and went yeah
    18:47
    because you know I walked into the
    18:48
    publicity office one day I didn't see no
    18:49
    black people I said I don't understand
    18:50
    this it looks like the Lilies of the
    18:52
    white Fields you know and that was it
    18:54
    and the guy went oh he's very bitter and
    18:56
    I went well the hell with it I am very
    18:58
    bitter if I got it I gotta surround
    18:59
    myself with people that I know of and
    19:01
    we've got capable brothers and sisters
    19:02
    to do it now you go up there and be
    19:04
    seeing it's packed and jammed and the
    19:05
    executives are there you know but the
    19:07
    only thing that they are
    19:11
    you know
    19:15
    the most relevant thing I think I was
    19:18
    able to do was near the end of the
    19:20
    series I did a sketch
    19:21
    with nipsy Russell
    19:24
    about how brothers treat Brothers
    19:27
    and I did a very Bourgeois cat going in
    19:29
    to apply for a job right
    19:31
    and very Bourgeois with the three button
    19:33
    code as soon as he found out it was a
    19:35
    brother
    19:36
    he took his head on each other
    19:39
    right and the cat's baggies to send him
    19:41
    in and the cat walked in he said damn
    19:43
    hey babe that ain't the way he walked in
    19:46
    the White Secretary was there seeing he
    19:47
    said I'm I'm here for the job and I like
    19:50
    to apply I've been okayed and I went
    19:51
    through the IBM machines blah blah blah
    19:54
    talked very problem as soon as he went
    19:55
    in there instead of identifying and
    19:57
    saying Hey I want a groove it is to see
    19:59
    you in this position he didn't do that
    20:00
    he just put his feet up on the desert
    20:02
    dead go ahead and sign that
    20:05
    you know I'm straight
    20:08
    you know and suddenly here's the brother
    20:10
    sitting there trying to do something and
    20:12
    he is not protected and it was a funny
    20:13
    sketch and we loved doing it I got such
    20:16
    complaints from NBC you would not
    20:18
    believe and we never were to do another
    20:19
    one because I think we went through a
    20:21
    period where we were just pleased to see
    20:23
    a black guy there
    20:25
    yeah
    20:26
    there we are
    20:28
    there we are we in there because we
    20:30
    needed that at that period now we've got
    20:32
    to go on
    20:33
    further
    20:35
    you know what I mean and it's not just
    20:37
    seeing the black cat there anymore
    20:39
    you know it's like the guys I will
    20:42
    believe till I die that when the
    20:44
    pressure came on the Madison Avenue and
    20:46
    they said you got to put black people
    20:47
    into commercials they said we'll show
    20:50
    them black people in a commercial so
    20:51
    they put them in the commercials where
    20:53
    black people look ludicrous in
    20:56
    you know because everybody has a white
    20:58
    neighbor
    20:59
    you very rarely see two black women
    21:02
    talking
    21:03
    and if they're black women talking
    21:05
    they're not the sisters
    21:08
    it's Bourgeois middle class you know
    21:11
    straight hair no dues never a dude ever
    21:14
    never do you know can't look like Gloria
    21:16
    Foster no chance you know you must look
    21:19
    like you know the old days of of tan
    21:22
    confessions you know and that's it
    21:24
    and I look and I say it on the stage
    21:26
    sometimes I say it's ridiculous because
    21:29
    it doesn't relate to anything
    21:35
    you wearing a free Angela button have
    21:37
    you had any reaction from other people
    21:39
    as a result of wearing that button well
    21:41
    that was a fan of mine
    21:43
    in the restaurant and uh
    21:46
    was at the risk around the airport and
    21:48
    the guy walked up and asked my autograph
    21:50
    and he was white and he said Jay the
    21:53
    wife gets a big kick out of here when is
    21:55
    he on the laughing and all that sign us
    21:59
    for the kitties you know and I signed it
    22:01
    and he said I was wondering if and he
    22:03
    started staring at the button and I was
    22:04
    wearing you know this but and he was
    22:06
    going like this and he kept saying I was
    22:08
    I was and he was trying to focus on it
    22:10
    because I I was blowing his bubble
    22:13
    because they have
    22:15
    an image of me I guess of another kind
    22:18
    my involvement with Angela is again the
    22:22
    Injustice of it all
    22:24
    uh her political beliefs you know are
    22:26
    her own
    22:28
    I don't share her political beliefs I
    22:30
    share her blackness
    22:32
    and I share the Injustice to any black
    22:35
    person and there's no way that she's
    22:36
    going to get the right kind of trial we
    22:38
    know that
    22:39
    it's stacked against it
    22:41
    uh they made her the Most Wanted woman
    22:44
    since uh Bonnie of Bonnie and Clyde and
    22:49
    I think that if a guy like myself wears
    22:51
    a button
    22:52
    that's letting somebody in that crowd
    22:54
    that I go around with know where my
    22:55
    head's at
    22:57
    you're now married to a sister
    22:59
    is she I didn't I didn't know that
    23:04
    [Music]
    23:09
    [Applause]
    23:13
    [Music]
    23:18
    and it's so groovy and so nice I've been
    23:21
    in the hospital five times
    23:22
    [Music]
    23:24
    [Applause]
    23:30
    I think he's trying to tell me so
    23:34
    I'm absolutely
    23:36
    you know flabbergasted by the by the
    23:39
    fact that we as a people almost without
    23:42
    the underground which they keep saying
    23:44
    we've got and everything else around the
    23:46
    ground as a soul underground you know
    23:48
    don't take no trains or nothing this
    23:51
    something happens it's it's the same
    23:53
    thing compared to
    23:54
    as soon as downtown gets the dance we've
    23:57
    gone on to another one and nobody ever
    24:00
    told us that they got it and we didn't
    24:03
    care about it but when they get funky
    24:04
    chicken we're into something else
    24:06
    uh there's something else you know it's
    24:08
    the thing that we have that ain't no
    24:09
    other people got in the world
    24:12
    it's that immediate eye to eye contact
    24:15
    that says
    24:17
    jamf
    24:19
    horse that says
    24:21
    yeah
    24:23
    that's that same thing again that one
    24:25
    word yeah
    24:27
    and you know and it's not followed by
    24:29
    he's down right on but really just yeah
    24:33
    you feel that we can solve our problem
    24:34
    by having some type of army or some type
    24:38
    of violent confrontation with whites
    24:41
    no
    24:43
    you know ain't no way you can put poor
    24:45
    Cadillacs against the tank
    24:48
    two Rusty raises
    24:50
    you know against an M1
    24:52
    and the flame throw against a bottle of
    24:55
    Coca-Cola with a rag in it ain't no way
    24:57
    you can do that
    25:01
    how is it that you're free enough uh to
    25:04
    talk the way you're talking and be an
    25:06
    Entertainer
    25:07
    because you know
    25:09
    the rationale is that if I'm black and
    25:11
    an Entertainer I can't be too involved
    25:13
    with black causes and survive in an
    25:16
    industry controlled basically by white
    25:18
    people how are you free enough let's say
    25:20
    to come on black journal and relate to
    25:22
    the brothers and sisters the Way You Are
    25:24
    but I I think
    25:27
    that it's called
    25:29
    a respect for one's opinion
    25:31
    because I've had too many white people
    25:33
    talk to me and say I
    25:35
    I don't like what you said on the David
    25:36
    Frost show about something such a thing
    25:39
    well you but you shared a lot of guts to
    25:41
    say it
    25:44
    and the other point is which is very
    25:46
    very good man
    25:48
    I really don't care I don't give it
    25:52
    when I say this is a racist society in
    25:55
    which we live in everybody knows it is
    25:58
    that ain't no that ain't no big big
    26:00
    statement to make it maybe it's shocking
    26:03
    to hear it from someone that you just
    26:04
    watched the night before on laughing uh
    26:07
    but it is man I can't say well how can
    26:10
    you say that white and black say this to
    26:11
    me how can you say that man you got it
    26:13
    made I said I Got It Made because I had
    26:15
    to fight all of that but I then owe an
    26:17
    obligation to my brothers and my sisters
    26:19
    to let them know
    26:21
    that it existed then it still exists now
    26:24
    and I've been here for 40 years you know
    26:27
    I've got the house I've got a wife I've
    26:29
    got children I've got success
    26:32
    and now it is time for me to try in
    26:36
    every way feasible
    26:38
    to help
    26:39
    the plight of my people
    26:41
    and to gain our freedom because I'm see
    26:45
    the fallacy is man and let's let me say
    26:47
    this and and I really mean it from the
    26:49
    bottom of my heart
    26:50
    money don't make you free
    26:52
    popularity don't make you free
    26:55
    don't you know that
    26:58
    you know sure I live in Beverly Hills
    27:00
    but I'm Shackled by the same things that
    27:01
    happen to the brother and Watts
    27:06
    I've had my bosses say to me
    27:09
    cats that I work for
    27:11
    who you know really basically give me a
    27:15
    Jack Entrada will say to me Sam geez
    27:17
    that was a little heavy statement you
    27:19
    said on that I said but it's true ain't
    27:20
    it Jack he said yeah I know it's true
    27:22
    but I said Butcher and that's the end of
    27:24
    that
    27:25
    I mean that man and my cousin did I say
    27:29
    it like it is man I've been the last
    27:31
    five years
    27:33
    go away
    27:39
    thank you
    27:40
    because he's got to respect me it's like
    27:42
    when a brother comes to me and says but
    27:43
    man you're a Jew
    27:45
    you know I look at him and say what's
    27:46
    your religion and he says I'm a Baptist
    27:49
    or I don't have one or I'm a Muslim I
    27:51
    said well our religion is blackness
    27:55
    because if we ever get to the point
    27:57
    where we started talking about he's a
    27:58
    black Jew he's a black Catholic he's a
    28:00
    black Baptist he's a black Muslim really
    28:03
    saved for the titles that the papers put
    28:04
    on people then we're in trouble our real
    28:07
    religion and the thing that connects us
    28:08
    all is our blackness
    28:10
    the religion of Blackness that's it
    28:13
    God
    28:15
    [Music]
    28:17
    [Applause]
    28:18
    [Music]
    28:19
    [Applause]
    28:22
    [Music]
    28:23
    [Applause]
     

  15. The Problem in the USA/France/China/Brazil/Nigeria/Russia/Ukraine/Italy/South Africa or most governments in humanity  is the spread of the advertised dysfunctional universalism of the USA. I repeat the advertised dysfunctional universalism of the USA.  The USA has peddled since it was created a universalism that  doesn't exist while  has no honest attempt at implementation anywhere in humanity, including in the USA. 

    The question is what are governments afraid of? the truth, that humans being are free to hate or dislike equal to love or like. The question is, what are populaces afraid of ? IT is clear many  white people of france have never embraced the non white or non european. Why are they afraid to say it publicly? We tell children to accept themselves, why do we adults have such a problem doing it? Accepting yourself and publicly expressing yourself allows others to know how they truly stand. In parallel, what are non europeans or statians< of the usa> afraid of? IF you know someone doesn't like you but offers you an opportunity better than in your own environment, well... accept both parts of the equation? Live in the white community, go to harvard, but also accept the white children harassing your non white child, accept harvard resisting you as much as possible. I will even use a current film media reference, and say , consequences. Accept the prosequences folks, but also the consequences. Don't complain about you knew walking in.  You don't want those consequences chooe another road, with different consequences, all roads have both.

     

    ARTICLE

    Shooting, riots in France show U.S. is not alone in struggles with racism, police brutality
    World Jul 1, 2023 8:29 PM EDT
    A police killing caught on video. Protests and rioting fueled by long-simmering tensions over law enforcement treatment of minorities. Demands for accountability.

    The events in France following the death of a 17-year-old shot by police in a Paris suburb are drawing parallels to the racial reckoning in the U.S. spurred by the killings of George Floyd and other people of color at the hands of law enforcement.

    Despite the differences between the two countries’ cultures, police forces and communities, the shooting in France and the outcry that erupted there this week laid bare how the U.S. is not alone in its struggles with systemic racism and police brutality.

    “These are things that happen when you’re French but with foreign roots. We’re not considered French, and they only look at the color of our skin, where we come from, even if we were born in France,” said Tracy Ladji, an activist with SOS Racisme. “Racism within the police kills, and way too many of them embrace far-right ideas so … this has to stop.”

    In an editorial published this week, the French newspaper Le Monde wrote that the recent events “are reminiscent” of Floyd’s 2020 killing by a white Minneapolis police officer that spurred months of unrest in the U.S. and internationally, including in Paris.

    “This act was committed by a law enforcement officer, was filmed and broadcast almost live and involved an emblematic representative of a socially discriminated category,” the newspaper wrote.

    The French teen, identified only as Nahel, was shot during a traffic stop Tuesday in the Paris suburb of Nanterre. Video showed two officers at the window of the car, one with his gun pointed at the driver. As the teenager pulled forward, the officer fired once through the windshield.

    Nahel’s grandmother, who was not identified by name, told Algerian television Ennahar TV that her family has roots in Algeria.

    Preliminary charges of voluntary homicide were filed against the officer accused of pulling the trigger, though that has done little to quell the rioting that has spread across the country and led to hundreds of arrests. The officer said he feared he and his colleague or someone else could be hit by the car as Nahel attempted to flee, a prosecutor has said.

    Officials have not disclosed the race of the officer. His lawyer said he did what he thought was necessary in the moment. Speaking on French TV channel BFMTV, the lawyer said the officer is “devastated,” adding that “he really didn’t want to kill.”

    Nahel’s mother, identified only as Mounia M., told France 5 television she’s not angry at the police in general. She’s angry at the officer who killed her only child.

    “He saw an Arab-looking little kid. He wanted to take his life,” she said.

    Police shootings in France are significantly less common than in the U.S. but have been on the rise since 2017. Several experts believe that correlates with a law loosening restrictions on when officers can use lethal force against drivers after a series of terrorist attacks using vehicles.

    Officers can shoot at a vehicle when a driver fails to comply with an order and when a driver’s actions are likely to endanger their lives or those of others. French police have also been regularly criticized for their violent tactics.

    Unlike the U.S., France does not keep any data on race and ethnicity as part of its doctrine of colorblind universalism — an approach purporting to see everyone as equal citizens. Critics say that doctrine has masked generations of systemic racism.

     

    URL

    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/shooting-riots-in-france-show-u-s-is-not-alone-in-struggles-with-racism-police-brutality

     

    TWO QUESTIONS OF INDEPENDENCE SIDE PHENOTYPE

     

    If the colonies did not win against the british empire does chattel slavery in the usa end? I give my opinion

    https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/10381-the-4th-of-july-2023-celebrations-why-should-we-celebrate /?do=findComment&comment=61613

     

    Many Black people who succeed in the USA suggest they are pragmatic while black people who don't succeed are not, but I don't concur to that.  I think all are pragmatic the key is in what way.
    https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/10358-dosers-and-being-african/?do=findComment&comment=61612

     

     

     

  16. My thoughts to the article below

     

    I quote < “The other show is kind of mean and too grown up for me.”
     > 

    her son said a show is to grown up for him:)  How does a child know what  defines grown up when many grown up don't. Know if he would had said what his mother will not like,that shows honesty.

    I quote < what does it say that it is so much easier for my son to find wonderfully crafted television shows and films featuring talking animals than it is to find shows about kids who look like him? >
    It says that Black people with money aren't willing to spend their money to make cartoons for black people. It says that Black people had less money in the past and white people financed cartoons to be made for white people, which is perfectly acceptable. It says that Black parents need to focus on books with rearing their  kids as a ton of content has existed that has human black characters. It says white people around the world who may be asian or muslim or latino is a larger market and satisfactory. It says Black people need to tell their children they are willing to suck a white persons penis or lick a white persons vagina for opportunities but opportunities are not meant to be shared or made universal. It says that Black people from black countries like Uganda didn't use their control to make media in Uganda or other black countries that black people globally need. 

    I quote < “But where are the cartoons, Mom?” he asked. “And why does the story have to be so sad with people dying?” > 
    What the author of the article the black mom was unwilling to simply say is white people wrote most of the films, live action or television, that she cites and sequentially, their themes. But, again, a Black one percent exist, they are billionaires or millionaires. She needs to tell her son, rich black people aren't spending their money on financing black cartoons. That is why ? and asking non blacks to make media for black people is unwarranted, and non blacks don't have to care about blacks. 

    I quote < Where are the happy carefree storylines for young Black kids that white kids get? Where is the diversity of storyline and personality and genre representation that white kids get? > 
    Pick up a book, they are out there.  And again where are the black rich. Where is Oprah's money? where is Tyler Perry's studios? 

    I quote < I find it very telling that the first animated Disney movie featuring a Black woman main character and the first animated Disney movie to feature a Black man character as leads are written in such a way that both of these main characters spend a large part of their respective films in bodies that are neither Black nor even human. > 
    Yes, White people finance media for white people. As DW Griffith said, when the NAACP boycotted Birth of a nation, anyone can make whatever film they want. The NAACP wouldn't spend money on making a film as a rebuttal as if teh white jews who financed the organization would do that. But, Oscar Mischeux made films in reply. So where are the Oscar Micheaux Black directors. Comprehend, Spike Lee tells similar stories of Blac plight than disney so...

    I quote < What does it say to Black kids watching when the world’s biggest children’s entertainment company cannot give them even one animated film that features a Black person that stays a Black person throughout? What does this say about Blackness to kids who are not Black? About whose life is being portrayed as mattering? And whose does not? > 
    It says to Black kids their Black parents are stupid telling them white people will change by black merit. It says to Black kids  their Black parents don't have the power, money isn't always power, to provide them with what they need. It tells non Black kids how impotent the black community is wherever they live, which is the truth. It tells non black kids to make sure they emphasize their non black community so that it isn't like the impotent black community. It says to Black kids their black parents are lying when they talk about a human family. All humans are human but that does mean all humans are family and that is ok. 

    I quote  < When will Disney make a film with Black characters played by Black characters? Why is this so damn hard? > 
    Maybe never and that is ok. Disney was started by a white artists as an independent company. So when will Black artists who are fortunate enough to get financing for films do likewise. Black people did create BET which was a black owned media outlet but sold it to whites. So, why complain about Disney? when Oscar Micheaux proved independent movies can be made. B.E.T. proves Black people with money undercut their own community. Disney is not obliged to give concern to black people. Why are Black people with money financing what the Black community need so damn hard? It isn't like Black people with money only send people to traditional black colleges so...

    I quote < Or does Disney’s refusal to create an animated movie with Black characters who stay Black characters go beyond these three films that traffic in stereotypes and erasure and speak to larger institutional issues regarding perceptions of Blackness that behoove attention? > 
    Institutional issues? no. Disney is a white owned firm that is free to sell to all phenotypes. If non whites absorb or dream of disney , they are the fools. Don't blame disney for black people pushing disney on black children or not rearing black children better, better meaning to media that has black created content, which has always existed.

    I quote < It matters, where imagination begins in the mind. It matters whether that mind can imagine full Black personhood, or if that imagination is still constrained by unconscious bias and internalized stereotypes.> 
    Yes this is true, but film is a collective project which starts with the financier and white people have more money or power than blacks and are not beholden to satisfy black needs. Black people can take care of ourselves and if our leaders: black people with money or influence, are unwilling to lead positively or lead negatively, well such is life.

    I quote< There are a few future things in the works that I am hopeful about. Disney is set to premiere Ironheart on Disney+ in the near future, and is creating a TV show featuring Princess Tiana in 2023 with (hopefully) an eye to a less stereotypical portrayal than the earlier film. The Disney partnership with South African film company Kugali to produce Iwaju in 2022 looks promising as long as it doesn’t turn into a repeat of the single representation story, and diasporic wars where African, Afro European, and Black American creatives are pitted against each other.  > 
    Well to be fair to Black people. White tribes have wars with each other. Black tribes have wars with each other as well. And to be blunt, because Black communities the world over usually lack power, and have to beg from whites, we tend to have bitter fights cause all the communities are based on begging.

    I quote < In the meantime, my son has stopped asking to watch television. He told me the other day that he understands why I have always avoided TV and read to him instead. It is not just the wonder of imagination and language that books rather than TV provide. It is not just the vibrant storylines that inspire his own creations. As my Black son looks at his bookshelves he can see row after row of books whose covers shine with characters who look like him, whose pages are full of joyful stories about characters who look like him living their lives in full Black joy instead of the shapeshifting and death embedded into so much of mainstream American television entertainment engaging with Blackness for kids.

    My son knows now, like many Black kids in America do, that if you try to look for yourself onscreen all you will see is erasure, sometimes stereotype. He knows to look for himself on the page instead. You can find some beautiful things there, if you try. > 
    In my view, this passage should had been the whole article. All this about what white man isn't doing for Black people is for me worthless. Yes, Whites don't like Blacks. Blacks don't like Whites. And just because the financially wealthiest Black people are reared to cater to whites doesn't mean the financially poorest Black people want to. 
     

    now04.jpg

     

    Disney's Disembodied Black Characters

    March 23, 2021   •   By Hope Wabuke

     

    ONCE A YEAR, from the first year of middle school until I graduated from high school, my orchestra would board the yellow school district buses along with our instruments and drive the 45-minute winding route through the San Gabriel mountains from Arcadia to Anaheim, California, to perform at Disneyland. After 30 minutes of rehearsal and another 30-minute performance, we were given free rein to wander the park until closing, when the busses would drive us home.

    I knew even then that what we had was not usual; it was a privilege to experience what we experienced growing up in that tiny southern California town, miles and years away from the tiny black and white missionary TV screen in Uganda where my parents had first spied the Disney movies that had made them imagine America a wonderful, magical place. 

    What we had in Arcadia, home to one of the top public school districts in the state, were the perks that went along with that education. But what we also had to go along with it — being one of the first Black families to move to that city, and usually the only Black student in my class — was the racism: being followed in stores, ordered to pay before dining in restaurants, being told we were the color of “poop” by teachers, and never seeing anyone who looked like us in the books we read in school. This is the Black experience in America when your hardworking Black parents are determined to get you the best education they can. It’s an abundance of opportunity, but only if you learn to survive within the boundaries of acceptable racism.

    ¤


    My wealthy non-Black classmates loved wandering around the grounds of Disneyland, a place they were familiar with from regular family visits throughout the year. I was not. With the price tag at $100 per person, my family of eight people had been to Disneyland only once — with family friends from out of town when they came to visit. To prepare for the $1,000 excursion, my father had put our family on a budget for half a year, and we had packed backpacks full of lunch and dinner. We were warned there would be no souvenirs so we shouldn’t even try it.

    As someone unaccustomed to its scope, Disneyland was big and overwhelming for me. But as performers in the student orchestra — both guests and employees, to some extent — we were privy to the back lots and back entrances of the park that regular visitors didn’t see — the backstage bones of the glossy stages and rides, the stacked up piles of recycled parts of shuttered amusements and worn-out characters. We were forbidden to take pictures here — it was not public Disney; it did not hold the myth of Disney perfection and magic. But I liked thinking that we alone had this secret knowledge of a place that was familiar to so many. We were part of the select few who saw what was denied public view.

    Once, I was told this same story about the man himself, Walt Disney: the reason that most of  the candid photos of Walt Disney throughout the park showed his fingers shaped in a V was because he smoked cigarettes and didn’t want to be seen doing so. But this private truth did not align with his desired public image; the cigarettes had to be airbrushed out.

    ¤


    In the middle of last summer, trying to understand the new balance of homeschooling and remote working in the pandemic, I gave in to my seven-year-old’s requests and let him have half an hour of screen time in the evenings. But being a Black parent who was once a Black girl and well aware of the horrific absence and equally horrific stereotypical and token representations of Blackness on television that I have seen, I told him that he could only watch a TV show if it had a main character who looked like him. Within that guideline, he could choose whatever age-appropriate show he wanted. He wanted cartoons, and so he began his search with those constraints. But within five minutes, he came to me in tears. We had subscriptions to am*zon Prime and Netflix, and he had searched both for Black characters in kids shows. He had found nothing.

    I sat down, pulled him onto my lap and cuddled him until his tears eased. When he was soothed enough, I picked the remote up from the floor and typed in “Black kids cartoons” on Netflix. The only thing that came up was Motown Magic, which he had already seen. I tried “African American kids cartoons.” Nothing else. “Black kids shows,” “African American kids shows” had nothing else in his age range, but a couple of live action shows aimed at the tween and teenage crowd.  I tried am*zon Prime, which was even more of a desert. Searches there brought up Orphan Black and Black Mirror instead.

    My son was growing impatient. “Mommy, isn’t there anything?” he called, tears eased and now bouncing on his trampoline. “Not yet,” I called back, scrolling through endless titles of movies without any Black characters in them. And then I recalled a passing conversation about the launch of Disney Plus with a fellow mom friend.

    “Doc McStuffins!” I exclaimed loudly, remembering the patron saint of Black parents everywhere, as I ordered Disney Plus. Among the little Black girl doctor and her talking toys, my son was happy for most of the year. I thanked God for Chris Nee, McStuffins’s wonderful creator, every day of 2020. And then, just in time for winter break, he asked for something else.

    “Did you finish Doc McStuffins?” I asked.

    “No, I just want to watch something else for a while,” he said. But we couldn’t find any other cartoon show on Disney Plus that featured Black kids as main characters. So we watched an episode of Vampirina, another of Nee’s creations, this one about a vampire family living amongst human neighbors in contemporary Philadelphia. But I was uneasy at the danger made cute, uneasy with Nee’s portrayal of the mythical bloodsucking vampire-as-monster-as-outsider equated to the outsiderness of the Black girl as outsider.

    Networks are so proud of each of their few Black kids shows, it seems, that they forget two things:

     

    That kids will watch the show and then want to watch something else.

     

    That Black kids have a diversity of tastes, and, beyond that, they grow up. One show can’t appeal to all Black kids from age three to 16. And why should we expect it to, even if it could?

     


    Searching further on Disney, we found Moana, which my son watched because Moana was brownish like him he said, and Elena of Avalor because she was also kind of brownish and went to school with a brownish kid who looked kind of like him.  

    But nothing else.

    “What about these ones? I said, selecting the 2009 animated feature The Princess and The Frog and The Proud Family.

    “I already looked, Mom. The girl isn’t really there; she’s a green frog most of the time,” he sighed. “The other show is kind of mean and too grown up for me.”

    I searched and searched the network. Nothing. Finally, I had an idea.

    “Animals!” I exclaimed. “You can watch a show if there are animals.”

    My son’s face brightened. He returned to Netflix and selected Octonauts, a delightful show about animals from diverse regions of the world who work together to help other animals, teaching science along the way. Then there were Puffin Rock and Peppa Pig. And, of course, the entire Disney collection of talking animal content. The animal cartoons were fascinating and endless in their diversity and skillful edutainment. My son has yet to run out of new animal show options on the streaming services we have.

    But I wonder: what does it say that it is so much easier for my son to find wonderfully crafted television shows and films featuring talking animals than it is to find shows about kids who look like him?

    ¤


    Last fall, when the studios and networks rolled out their kids holiday fare, it was more of the same: the absence of Blackness. The most promising of the offerings was Netflix’s Jingle Jangle, which is quite lovely and which my son enjoyed. He appreciated the live action musical magic in the tradition of Disney’s own Mary Poppins.

    “But where are the cartoons, Mom?” he asked. “And why does the story have to be so sad with people dying?”

    I thought about my son’s questions. I had no answers, only the same questions about entertainment for Black adults, and the saturation of images of Black pain rather than Black joy. The heaviness I feel in my soul when yet another studio markets its slave film (or other narrative of historical Black oppression) as the “Black movie” release of the year is the same heaviness in my son’s soul at these kid’s movies that traffic in Black sadness and Black death.

    True, films like Netflix’s Jingle Jangle and Disney’s The Lion King and the Princess and the Frog are in line with the loss-of-parent narrative that’s part of the blueprint for this kind of children’s storytelling, harkening all the way back to Disney’s Golden Age. But the impact of that loss-of-parent narrative resonates much more loudly when looking at animated Disney films with Black content because of the very small number of animated films and television that feature Black protagonists at all.

    You see, all animated Disney films featuring Black protagonists have either a dead parent or the death of the protagonist as a plot point; however, there are many animated Disney films with non-Black characters where parents and protagonists escape this deathly trope simply because of the sheer numbers of Disney films made with non-Black protagonists. This lack of representation creates a single story of Blackness, predicated on death and sadness.

    And, because of history, because of the way race and power work in a society where we are already saturated with images of Black death and anti-Black violence — consider how many times the deaths of unarmed Black children like Tamir Rice and unarmed Black men like Eric Garner and George Floyd were replayed across media channels versus the genteel blurring out of the death of Ashli Babbitt, the white woman insurrectionist who died while storming the Capitol in January 2021 — the death of Black parents in Disney films operates in a much different way than the death of non-Black parents in Disney films. Simply put: for every death of non-Black parents depicted in Disney films like Frozen, there are many, many other Disney films with non-Black protagonists in which the parents do not die, in which death is not a major plot point; in which the non-Black characters are allowed happiness and joy. And when that death does occur, it is not amplified in the real world by the media’s disregard for the sanctity of Black life.

    Where are the happy carefree storylines for young Black kids that white kids get? Where is the diversity of storyline and personality and genre representation that white kids get? Whiteness gets multiplicity — of storyline, genre, medium, a multiplicity of films and television shows that speak to a multiplicity of age ranges and interests — all represented by white characters. Snow White. Cinderella. Beauty and the Beast. 101 Dalmatians. The Flight of the Navigator. E.T.. How to Tame Your Dragon. My Little Pony: Equestria Girls. The Incredibles. Kim Possible. WildKrats. Toy Story. Frozen. Frozen II. Inside Out. Tangled. Brave. Sarah and Duck. Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. Peter Pan. Pete’s Dragon. Alice in Wonderland. Sleeping Beauty. The Little Mermaid. The Sword in the Stone. Robin Hood. The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. Pete’s Dragon. James and the Giant Peach. Hercules. Doug’s First Movie. Recess: School’s Out. Return to Neverland. Treasure Planet. Meet the Robinsons. Enchanted. Tinkerbell and the Great Fairy Rescue. The Cat in the Hat. Sofia the First. Boss Baby. Masha and the Bear. Johnny Test. The Lorax. Dennis the Menace. Ben and Charlie’s Little Kingdom. The Magic School Bus. And on and on.

    Blackness gets Doc McStuffins.

    ¤


    My freshman year of high school, our annual performance at Disneyland coincided with a live recording session of a Disney film soundtrack. Because we were members of one of the best high school orchestras in the state, the staff said, we were to be given a special treat: a walk-through of the recording soundstages. Quiet, in the audience, we stood and watched the musicians’ bows rising and falling across their strings in unison. Onscreen, the young lion I would come to know as Simba was roaring his pain at the death of his father. I would, of course, also come to know the film as The Lion King, Disney’s first modern foray — however anthropomorphized — into engaging with Black culture on the big screen. The Disney orchestra soared. So did I.

    The story, of course, since it engages with Blackness in some way, was about family disintegration and death. But still, I remember the crackling energy pervading my childhood home in the days preceding the film’s release, the excitement of going to see it in the theatre with my whole family, so starved for representations of Blackness, let alone Africa in film. I remember my African parents’ happiness and pride in seeing something like home shining across the screen.

    The hunger for representations of Blackness in Disney films was not just felt in my family, but in families across the world. To date, The Lion King is the highest grossing traditionally animated Disney movie of all time. But back in 1994, Disney couldn’t imagine that this success could be repeated by making more Black stories, perhaps even with people, rather than animals. Instead, the studio just made more Lion King. We have seen The Lion King as Broadway musical, as a touring production, as a television show, as a live action remake starring the voices — but never the Black bodies of course — of the nation’s most iconic and brilliant Black performers.

    Indeed, it would be another 15 years before Disney made another feature based on Black culture — and the first Disney film ostensibly to revolve around actual Black characters. But Tiana, Disney’s first Black animated protagonist, would be onscreen for just about 40 minutes. More shockingly, she would be drawn as a Black woman for just 17 of those minutes. Most of the time, as you probably know, Tiana is a frog.

    ¤


    Some of us, like I am, are old enough to remember the public call for a Black Disney princess throughout the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s that pushed a reluctant Disney into making The Princess and The Frog in the first place. However, the representations of Blackness in Princess Tiana’s world were problematic from the beginning. Set in the 1920s South — the height of the Jazz Age, but also Jim Crow — Princess Tiana, accounts of that time report, was originally conceived as a servant character with strong echoes of slavery in characterization and naming. Indeed, her original name “Maddy” sounded very close to the Mammy slave stereotype applied to Black women.

    Although Tiana’s character was rewritten as a waitress rather than a servant, this original vision is still evident in the opening scenes of the film, when Tiana’s mother pays little attention to her daughter and focuses all her attention and dialogue in caring for Tiana’s white girl friend. Here, too, in this opening, Tiana’s white girl friend is introduced before Tiana and dominates the first scenes of the film with verbosity and energy. Tiana is silent and ignored in the background.

    The dynamic is clear: here is the centering of the white character and the depiction of Tiana’s mother acting as a mammy character to the white child, while ignoring her own — a stereotype of Black motherhood that was set during Jim Crow but has roots embedded in American slavery.

    But it is not just the opening racial dynamics and cinematic choices of the film that sets Tiana’s portrayal differently than any of Disney’s other non-Black princesses, or even main characters. Nor, again, is it just the fact that the Black body of Princess Tiana appears so little in her film: 17 minutes out of the film’s 98 minute runtime.

    It is that so much of Tiana’s film is created through a white gaze that looks to diminish, rather than celebrate the beauty of Black womanhood, or even Blackness in general. Instead of the expected cute and cuddly Disney animal character that always accompanies a Disney hero, there is only the worst of the buck-toothed minstrel stereotypes in the firefly that adopts Tiana; instead of a magical and charming fairy godmother there is only the worst stereotypes of the bugaboo African witch doctor; and everywhere, everywhere is the ridiculing of the Black body with the obsessive attention to all the characters’ overexaggerated buttocks, a stereotype used to portray Blackness since Saartje Bartmaan was kidnapped from South Africa and exhibited onstage in European zoos in order for white audiences to gawk at her physiology. It’s not just a question, in other words, of Tiana’s relative visibility as a Black princess; it’s about the whole swamp she’s got to wade through in order to be seen at all.

    ¤


    Soul, Disney’s ethnic animated kid’s film for this winter season, is unique among animated Disney movies in that the central characters are adults rather than children, with children sprinkled sparingly throughout the film. Also of note is the much more adult subject matter of the film: the inciting incident of the narrative is that the main character dies. Soul follows what happens after that death. More typical is the message of the film: the classic cinematic stereotype of the Black male character desperately trying to save the life of a white woman, the character 22 played by Tina Fey, to the point that the Black man sacrifices his “life” doing so. And the other message of Soul? Accept that you are going to die and don’t try to fight your fate. Yet neither of these themes seem particularly uplifting to children in the style of the Disney brand that exists when dealing with non-Black characters.

    Like The Princess and The Frog, Soul begins as a promising premise showcasing some brilliant Black actors. However, like Princess Tiana, Soul’s Joe Gardner is immediately characterized by a burning desire to work. Even the character’s last name is a type of job. Tiana and Joe, unlike other non-Black Disney characters who are given other motivations — falling in love, self-discovery, or saving the world — are only represented by the labor their Black bodies can provide, another stereotype of Blackness.

    But the most damaging representation is this: like The Princess and The Frog’s Black protagonist, Soul’s Black lead spends a good deal of the movie not in a Black body, but represented as a blue ghost object without the Black ethnic facial features that characterize the him when in his physical form. And then, Joe Gardner’s Black body is inhabited by 22, the spirit of the character voiced by white actress Tina Fey. Joe, on the other hand, is put in the body of a cat. In other words, the Black body is colonized by whiteness while the Black character’s “soul” is put into the body of an animal — because it’s Disney and Black people are only equal to animals — before eventually choosing to sacrifice his life for 22, the white woman.

    I find it very telling that the first animated Disney movie featuring a Black woman main character and the first animated Disney movie to feature a Black man character as leads are written in such a way that both of these main characters spend a large part of their respective films in bodies that are neither Black nor even human.

    Green, blue — Disney has no problem with characters that are different colors, it seems, as long as that color is not brown.

    ¤


    What does it say to Black kids watching when the world’s biggest children’s entertainment company cannot give them even one animated film that features a Black person that stays a Black person throughout? What does this say about Blackness to kids who are not Black? About whose life is being portrayed as mattering? And whose does not?

    This is how bias and harmful stereotypes are created and perpetuated in society. This is how whiteness protects whiteness and thus a system of white supremacy through media representation: by normalizing itself as human and othering Blackness through erasure and dehumanization. Whether conscious or unconscious, this bias and adherence to white supremacy and Black erasure and dehumanization is real and damaging.

    And no matter how much I try, I still cannot understand why Disney — a groundbreaking company predicated on reveling in the imagination, a company whose creative products are so well-known for their tremendous ability to invest animals with human characteristics and deep wells of pathos in order to center intimate storytelling against epic themes — does nothing but relegate Black characters to animals and objects, mining stories of Black suffering and death when Black kids deal with enough violence, often based on race, in the real world.

    When will Disney make a film with Black characters played by Black characters? Why is this so damn hard?

    ¤


    In 1937, Walt Disney Animation Studios released its first full-length animated film: Snow White. As the film’s cost grew to $1.5 million over its three-year production period, Walt Disney mortgaged his house to put up the remaining financing. His financial gamble worked: Snow White was an artistic and commercial success. Disney’s groundbreaking form of storytelling captured the hearts and imagination of children and adults alike and grossed $8 million in revenue at the box office, the most money ever made by a film up to that time. Snow White was quickly followed by Pinocchio, Fantasia, Dumbo, and Bambi, the films now known as Disney’s Golden Age.

    One of the cornerstones of the Disney entertainment phenomenon is the understanding of how an irrepressible visual imagination and sonic landscape are vital in creating lush children’s entertainment that draws viewers in and has them humming songs from the films afterwards. By the mid 1940s, the Walt Disney team had perfected this structure, setting a bar that has led the industry for decades.

    Simply put, Disney stories and Disney songs are iconic in our culture.

    So as we think about questions of representation, this includes looking not just at how few films with Black characters are made by Disney, but also looking behind the camera at the creative team. Who are the creatives involved in these projects? The writers and composers trusted to create for the Disney brand?

    For Soul, the sonic landscape of the film was created by the wonderfully talented Trent Reznor, best known for his band Nine Inch Nails, who, along with Atticus Ross, composed the score. Black American musician Jon Batiste was brought on to provide the singing “voice” of Joe Gardner’s piano, the same way the luminous Anika Noni Rose was the “voice” of Princess Tiana. This was considered progress from The Lion King’s casting of white American actor Jonathan Taylor Thomas to play the young version of the Simba, the African hero, and white American actor Mathew Broderick to play the adult version. White American actress Moira Kelly was the voice of Nala, the female African lion who is Simba’s love interest.

    As with Soul, for The Princess and The Frog, Disney again tapped another white male composer to head the team in Randy Newman. And for The Lion King, we remember Elton John’s and Hans Zimmer’s glorious soundtrack, an art object in its own right.

    These artists are brilliant. That is unquestionable.

    The question is this: Despite the stunning reputations and work of these white composers, with all the Black jazz and soul musicians out there; with the invention of rock, country and jazz music by Black artists, the erasure of Blackness and co-option by whites of the first two art forms; with the financial imbalance in which white artists and labels took advantage of Black artists, whether predatory contracts in the 1960s and 1970s or Black soul musician Lady A getting her name stolen by the band formerly known as Lady Antebellum this past year; with this history of marginalization of Black creatives and in this political climate, doesn’t this sonic whitewashing just seem like there is so much potential for diverse representation, wasted?

    Or does Disney’s refusal to create an animated movie with Black characters who stay Black characters go beyond these three films that traffic in stereotypes and erasure and speak to larger institutional issues regarding perceptions of Blackness that behoove attention?

    One wonders: if the very accomplished white writing team of John Musker and Ron Clements, who after criticism about their treatment of race in the film, brought on the gifted Black writer Rob Edwards to help pen The Princess and The Frog, had also included a Black woman on the script about the first Black woman Disney protagonist, or an eye that valued Black woman the same way white women are valued in our society, would we perhaps have seen a less stereotypical representation of the first Black Disney princess that was more in line with the value and care shown to the other lighter-skinned Disney princesses in the Disney story canon, for example? Or, if the creators had thought as intentionally about Blackness before creating this story as they did with the creation of Moana’s Oceanic Story Trust, could there have been a different result as well? Or if a Black creator had been allowed to imagine Tiana and her world from the ground up, rather than slapping a Black perspective on the film as a hasty afterthought — a quick fix band-aid to solve the racist undertones of the film when the problems were not just skin deep?

    And if Soul, too, had also begun with a Black writer creating a storyline rather than white screenwriters Pete Doctor and Mike Jones again bringing on a Black American writer (this time Kemp Powers) two years into the project to add authenticity and perspective of character to a fundamentally problematic idea, could Soul have been a more positive representation of Blackness without unconscious bias and stereotypes?

    It matters, where imagination begins in the mind. It matters whether that mind can imagine full Black personhood, or if that imagination is still constrained by unconscious bias and internalized stereotypes.

    “We quickly came across this idea of a story about a soul who doesn’t want to die meeting a soul that doesn’t want to live,” said Mike Jones in an interview with Awards Daily from February 2021. “I think the very first version, he was an actor, and he had gotten his big break on Broadway. He was going to play Willy Loman in Death of a Salesman, and we thought that was just so clever but we just didn’t feel it. As soon as we came up with the idea that he should be a jazz musician, the idea of wrapping jazz and the improvisational nature of jazz was just so electric that we decided to make him a jazz musician. And let’s make him a middle school band teacher who aspires to something greater. That naturally led to the idea that he should be a middle-aged Black man, and that’s when we brought Kemp Powers in.”

    Because of the complexity of the Black experience in America, stories that may read as neutral with a white main character can become, like Soul, problematic when the race of that character is changed from white to Black and the narrative is not rethought accordingly. For example, take Soul’s idea of putting a white character into the body of a Black man. Or Soul’s idea of a Black man’s soul being put into an animal. Where whiteness in America does not have a tradition of being violently colonized and enslaved, Blackness does. Where whiteness in America doesn’t have a racially loaded history of being compared to animals in a dehumanizing way, Blackness does. And suddenly, a plot point that seemed innocuous when envisioning the character as white, becomes part of a larger tradition of whiteness violating and dehumanizing the Black body, begun with American slavery.

    It is not just enough to change a character’s race; when changing race, the narrative has to be re-envisioned accordingly in line with a character’s positioning in society. For Black folks in America, race informs so much of our experiences in life; to ignore this when creating a narrative of Black life is to practice a white-centered misconception of “colorblindness” that denies the full humanity of our personhood.

    And nothing makes this misrepresentation clearer than Soul’s animation, which erases Joe Gardner’s Black ethnic features in the afterlife, effectively saying that the default representation of human, of a soul, is whiteness.

    ¤ 


    There are a few future things in the works that I am hopeful about. Disney is set to premiere Ironheart on Disney+ in the near future, and is creating a TV show featuring Princess Tiana in 2023 with (hopefully) an eye to a less stereotypical portrayal than the earlier film. The Disney partnership with South African film company Kugali to produce Iwaju in 2022 looks promising as long as it doesn’t turn into a repeat of the single representation story, and diasporic wars where African, Afro European, and Black American creatives are pitted against each other. Mama K’s Team 4, a Zimbabwean cartoon, is set to premier on Netflix in 2022. And our most promising discovery: the Kweli TV app, which curates Black content from around the world with shows like Bino & Fino, a cartoon featuring two kids from Nigeria who, my son says, look exactly like him.

    In the meantime, my son has stopped asking to watch television. He told me the other day that he understands why I have always avoided TV and read to him instead. It is not just the wonder of imagination and language that books rather than TV provide. It is not just the vibrant storylines that inspire his own creations. As my Black son looks at his bookshelves he can see row after row of books whose covers shine with characters who look like him, whose pages are full of joyful stories about characters who look like him living their lives in full Black joy instead of the shapeshifting and death embedded into so much of mainstream American television entertainment engaging with Blackness for kids.

    My son knows now, like many Black kids in America do, that if you try to look for yourself onscreen all you will see is erasure, sometimes stereotype. He knows to look for himself on the page instead. You can find some beautiful things there, if you try.

    My son’s basket of to-read books contain his current four favorites: Dragons in a Bag, Hi-Lo, Obi & Titi, and The Adventures of Mia Mayhem. In these books, like the others on his bookshelf, Black joy and Black life are embraced. And any of these would make amazing television or cinematic content.

    Take Dragons in a Bag, the first book in a series about Black kids and dragons in Brooklyn written by the wonderful Zetta Elliot. Or Hi-Lo, Judd Winick’s alien robot who saves the world with his best friends — a Black girl with magical powers and an Asian boy who breaks gender stereotypes to spread love rather than violence. Or Obi & Titi, O.T. Begho’s tales of a Black boy and girl racing through magical adventures in Nigeria. Or the Mia Mayhem series, Kara West’s thrilling adventures of a Black girl superhero in a long lineage of superheroes. These books are amazing, well written stories with nuanced representations of character. And guess what?

    No one Black dies in these books. And no one Black turns into a frog, a ghostly blue object, or anything else that is not Black for some corporation’s bizarre mindset that still believes that seeing Black faces onscreen for 120 minutes is too much.

    They stay Black kids the whole time.

     

    URL

    https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/disneys-disembodied-black-characters/

×
×
  • Create New...