Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Troy

We Can't Possibly Need a New Version of Roots

Recommended Posts

This is picking up on the Roots conversation started by Harry which segued into a conversation about Race.  

I still don't think remaking Roots was necessary given, as we've discussed the great many other stories which have yet to make it to the screen.  

It is curious The Atlantic failed to mention the fact the Alex's story was largely fictional, as if this does not matter.  When Roots broadcast it was presented as truth. (@Sara, do you think Haley would have paid over $500,000, in an out of court settlement, for plagiarizing a single paragraph?)

The Atlantic did mention Nate Parker’s record-breaking Birth of a Nation.  I heard something about a film being made sometime ago, but I have heard nothing about a finished film until now. 

I own the original Roots novel and DVD.  Over the years I've tried to get my own 20 something daughters the watch the Roots miniseries, but they have no interest in seeing it.  I have not spoken to them at all about this new version.  

I will watch it.  i will try to keep an open mind and manage my expectations.  

 

Why the Roots Remake Is So Important by STEPHANE DUNN
The Atlantic, May 29, 2016

roots.jpg

In an age of remakes and reboots, it’s no surprise that A&E announced that it was “reimagining” the epic drama in an effort to appeal to a new generation of viewers. The four-part miniseries, which begins airing Monday, is executive produced by Mark Wolper, whose father David Wolper helped create the original Roots with Haley. While it may be easy to question the worth of a remake given the original’s masterpiece status, A&E’s Roots has the kind of high production values that can better translate the visual power of its predecessor to younger audiences. But more importantly, the new series brings new light to the misperception that popular culture has done a good job telling stories about slavery and black history in the decades since Roots first gripped the U.S.

To date, America’s most defining chapter, slavery—with all of its complexity, contradictions, and endless fictional and true narrative possibilities—has been under-treated by Hollywood. The recent visibility of films such as the Oscar-winning 12 Years a Slave, Nate Parker’s record-breaking Birth of a Nation, the intriguing, savvy WGN series Underground, and Django Unchained, Tarantino’s fantastical slave era-cowboy hero flick—might make it appear otherwise. (BET’s unusual but laudable 2015 effort, The Book of Negroes miniseries, failed to widely engage American viewers.) read the full article

 

Why America Forgot About ‘Roots’ By MATTHEW F. DELMONT
The New York Times, May 27, 2016

more roots.jpg

But “Roots” fell out of favor almost as quickly as it rose, in part because Haley’s story started to unravel as soon as it was in print. He relied heavily on an editor to finish the book and later paid over half a million dollars to settle a plagiarism suit. Other people were upset with the way ABC, Haley and Doubleday, his publisher, seemed to be wringing money from the history of slavery.

It was also hard for people to pin down “Roots.” Was it fact or fiction? Haley, who died in 1992, said it was a bit of both, a mix of archives, oral traditions and imagination in a composite narrative he called “faction.” The television version complicated matters further, insisting that the production was based on a true story while billing the series as an “ABC novel for television.”

If “Roots” was too fictional for most historians, its version of historical fiction was not literary enough for English departments. “Roots” is notably absent from The Norton Anthology of African American Literature, which runs to nearly 3,000 pages. The literary critic Arnold Rampersad described “Roots” as being “so innocent of fictive ingenuity that it seldom surpasses the standards of the most popular of historical romances.”  read the full article

Black Power Line

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting that the New York Times simply made up the figure and that you don't believe it?  You don't find it odd that the editors of the Norton Anthology of African American Literature failed to include the book?  Haley said Roots was faction only after he got busted.  The judge presiding over the case said Haley "perpetrated a fraud."

Are you old enough to remember when the miniseries broadcast?  If so, you'll also remember that it was not presented as fiction but a family history, a lot of effort was put into making it appear factual including a trip to Gambia.  I guess you also believe Haley is a direct descendant of Kunta Kinte too.  

But that is fine Sara, I know from experience with you that new information and facts don't inform your opinions once you have your mind set.  I gave it a shot, but I give up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sara it would be a less cluttered and easier to follow your points if you did not quote everything others wrote in your responsest.  Your response to me is more difficult to parse than necessary because me quoted text and your response is formatted exactly the same.  If you are reply to a question I posted a few hours ago it is not necessary to quote me, I'll remember what I wrote.

I did post the link to the Times article.  

Sorry if I come across snippy, but you know you never move from a position once you've asserted it.  You wrote only one paragraph was plagiarized, emphasising only one.  Because it was absurd on it's face I challenged on on it.  But once it became clear that there was obviously more than one paragraph copied you called into question the journalism of the paper of record and shifted the argument to focus on whether Haley intended the book to be pure fiction versus an account of his family's story.

Unfortunately I don't really care enough to hunt down a link to determine when/if haley flipped flopped on his description of roots.   Besides, despite popular belief, not everything can be found in a Google search.  To properly establish the chronology of statement would require some good old fashion research to establish a timeline.  We do know Haley's genealogy as presented in Roots can't be substantiated.

Is the book worthless--compared to what?  Compared to a well written historical fiction novel--yes.  What made Roots so very compelling (at least for me) was that is was presented as truth.  Once it was revealed for what it is, the novel is was down on my list, and is only interesting as far a fraudulent literature is concerned.

But again you assert that the book was always presented a fiction, but that is not my recollection and you apparently have no memory of the period and are relying on the echo chamber of lies bouncing around the web.

In fact, all of Haley work is suspect as far as I'm concerned including the biography of Malcolm X.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Courlander's 1978 suit was successful and proved that eighty-one passages from Roots were copied from Courlander's 1967 book, The African, which subsequently led to decreased scholarly interest in Haley."
--Herb Boyd, "Plagiarism and the Roots Suits," First World 2, no. 3 (1979): 31–33, 31–32.

Seems I'm not the only one less interested in Haley's work.

If white people selling the book and making another miniseries if is enough to validate Haley's literary merit for you great and if that put me in the minority even better.

Half a million dollars, in 1978, is cheap to you?!  My God woman...  I'm done here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn information gets around fast online...lol.

I just saw this 15 minutes ago in USA Today and was going to post the article in this thread and Troy beat me to it.  It seems like every week or so people are presenting me with the same information I was going to present to them.



Troy I believe Snoop feels the same way you and I do about the series but I don't think he articulated if frustration properly.
He basically started cussing and complaining about them always showing movies about Black slavery rather than the improved more wealthier state of Black America today.

But the way he expressed his frustration.....it leaves White America open to say,
"Well you just can't please those people.
We try to get past slavery and racism and they keep bringing it back up.
Then we put on a movie about it and talk about it and they complain about THAT.....geez!"


He should have cut down on the cussing and did a little more explaining and putting his anger in context.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Snoop did not do a lot of cussing it probably would not have been shared a bazillion times.

I was doing a search to trying to find the start time for Roots and the video popped up.

Honestly, I'm a little disappointed in myself for contributing the the echo chamber that has become the social media fueled internet.  Snoops video was almost 9,000 times and hour over the last 10 hours!

If Snoop was really a "real Nigga," he'd stop enriching Mark and his boys at Facebook and help uplift some Black owned websites. Humm... I think I'll add this comment to the 12 hundred other ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've watched this new version of Roots from the start and in my opinion it is well produced and directed and gives a very interesting slant on slavery, showing for one thing, how the slaves tried to rebel on the ships coming across the Atlantic.  Snoop, who is enslaved to weed,  needs to liberate himself from the mindset that wants depictions about slavery swept under the rug. Even though he's a millionaire celebrity he doesn't seem to realize that at any given time and any given place, he can be slapped down by the racism that is the hangover from slavery. 
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sara, I see you have trouble understanding the nature of the web and hyper links.  I cited the publication, which means if you want to read the article you have to go to the library or something (again everything is not on the web), the hyperlink was to Herb  Boyd page so that you would know who he is.  I wrote I was done, I slipped up LOL

I removed the quote you pasted from instagram, which was broken was i the process and needlessly copied.  I will continue to delete unnecessarily quoted content you past from your posts as I discovered them. If you don't like it sorry.

I watched the episode too.  Of course it was much better produced than the original and did a much better job of depicting the humanity of the Africans, while in Africa. The people were beautiful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was Watching The Game,Saw Some Of Roots.Like The Original..Le Var,Burton_ Kunta Kinte Is Better.Again Mis Type Not Supporting Hitler Trump..Someone Name Sara Thinks I'm Supporting Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sara the idea that you would pass on going to the library does not surprise me. 

Sara why hurls barbs at Harry? He said he mistyped--which is something we all do and he answered the question.

Similarly why all the machinations over conceding that you were incorrect about the quoting of a single paragraph.  You would not be the first person you was wrong about something.  We all have been wrong.

--------------------

Finally @Sara, and this is important: if you (or anyone else who makes a habit of it) persist on quoting full comments from other posters, I will simply delete them--unread.  

If I have to spend time deleting these too often, I will prevent the offending poster from post. Please stop doing it.  

Sorry for taking such extreme measures If I could stop people from doing this in software I would, but I can't so I have to resort to a brute force tactic which I'm not a fan of.

For example, there is absolutely no reason for you to fully quote Harry's post when you are entering the very next post.  When you do this you clutter the board and make is harder for others to read it.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee, aren't we lucky to have this martyr among us, replete with her messianic complex, so lost and lonely that she'd rather be among people she holds in contempt than to be alone in her own company.   LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After butchering that sentence, you got a lot of nerve calling somebody a dummy.  Say what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're unlucky because the messianic martyr is still among us, singing her praises.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sara

OK.....
NOW I see why you've been running around here acting goofy about my quotes...LOL.


I think Troy brought this to your attention because often you not only quote a person's ENTIRE post, but you also tend to respond to them WITHIN  their actual quote which makes it hard for others (and probably the person you're responding to)  to understand who said what and follow the conversation.

I thought about mentioning it to you a couple times....but hey....it's your style, so it's really not my place to tell you how to express yourself.

But in your defense, I will admit that it's hard (for me atleast)  to make multiple SEPARATE quotes in one thread.
That's why I choose to just quote people in red letters and put my responses below them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it behooves people to be accurate about quoting Ol Will.  Interesting how sarass can get Shakespeare's quotes correct, but can't follow Troy's instruction about quoting, putting herself at risk for being kicked off this board. something that would devastate her  because she has no life - just 4 walls and a mirror to enable her narcissism. "Is this a dagger I see before me?"  No, sarass, that's your snotty  nose.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1, the red letters definitely help.  If I feel the need to quote a paragraph from a different poster, another conversation or even another source I indent the text.  Of course their are other ways to accomplish the same thing.

What really gets on my nerves is when Sara fully quotes a comment that immediately precedes her in the conversation--this is completely unnecessary and nonsensical.  And yes inserting replies directly within a quoted, without differentiating the quoted text from her reply is very confusing and potentially misleading.

I don't consider this type of posting a "style." It is just sloppy use of the platform and I'm not going to tolerate it any longer.

So this is a rule I've chosen to implement and will enforce as I see fit.  No one will be booted without warning, Sara has been warned, and she can decide to comply or not.  It really is entirely up to her.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...