At first glance, Jeff Adachi’s Slanted Screen is an earnest documentary that covers familiar ground. The shameful depiction of minorities—in this case, Asian-American men—in television and film is hardly news. What makes the movie special, however, is that it offers a rare view of Hollywood from the inside. Apart from the occasional talking head, the interviewees are actors, producers, directors… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (17)Page 1 of 1 pagesOH BOY!
MORE IDENTITY POLITICS!
PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN.
WHILE THE PSEUDO-LEFT DISTRACTS US WITH THE OVERCLASS’S DIVIDE AND RULE IDENTITY POLITICS SCAMS LIKE THIS ARTICLE, THE RICH AND THE MEGACORPORATIONS CONTINUE TO TURN AMERICA INTO A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY.
OUR PROGRESSIVE TAX BASE IS GONE.
WE ARE FURTHER AWAY THAN EVER FROM SINGLE PAYER UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE
THE OVERCLASS IS FLOODING OUR LABOR MARKETS WITH CHEAP AND DESPERATE THIRD WORLD LABOR, DRIVING DOWN OUR WAGES.
AND THE PSEUDOLEFT KEEPS CRANKING OUT THE IDENTITY POLITICS PROPAGANDA.
RACE AND GENDER
DIVIDE AND RULEIN THESE TIMES IS FUNDED BY THE OVERCLASS!
NO REAL LEFTIST WOULD POLITICIZE RACE AND GENDER!
THESE BATTLES CANNOT EVER BE WON.
ANY RACE AND GENDER BATTLES ARE HELPING THE OVERCLASS AND HURTING THE REST OF US.
NO WONDER THEY DO THE OVERCLASS’S DIRTY PROPAGANDA WORK!
Posted by cryofan on Jun 30, 2006 at 6:35 PM Wait a minute — you left out the part about how they were tortured until they agreed to take the role.
With all the people who have genuine problems we get actors playing parts they don’t like?
I hate to borrow this, but I will… “Just say no!”
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 1, 2006 at 6:19 AM wow!...clearly the people who wrote the previous comments are a couple really ignorant, racist, pseudo-leftists. Who, if they mustard the courage to actually talk to person of color, would realize that this article isn’t about “actors trying to get a job”, or, being able to “just say NO”, but is about racism that is perpetuated in front of America’s eyes on the television and movie screens. “overclass”...please.
Posted by youpeoplearestupid on Jul 2, 2006 at 2:42 AM youpeoplearestupid wrote:
wow!...clearly the people who wrote the previous comments are a couple really ignorant, racist, pseudo-leftists. Who, if they mustard the courage to actually talk to person of color, would realize that this article isn’t about “actors trying to get a job”, or, being able to “just say NO”, but is about racism that is perpetuated in front of America’s eyes on the television and movie screens. “overclass”...please.Say, you need to ketchup with the times, man! The Dems and GOP are the left and right arms of the overclass. Anyone who supports that game is a fool. This country is really in a pickle. Please respond. I relish the opportunity to further this debate. And please continue to salt your comments with more peppery malapropisms!
Posted by cryofan on Jul 2, 2006 at 6:14 AM youpeoplearestupid and cryofan,
Menu consider Dijonra of yellow journalism (whoops—journalism of color) this article serves, take heart. It may cause the audiance to dessert TV and movies for a more balanced diet at their local liberries.
Ignorant, racist and pseudo-something I don’t mind, but PLEASE don’t call me a leftist. I’m ambidextrose. (a John B. Anderson and Ross Perot voter)
Sweet dreams.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 2, 2006 at 6:45 AM youpeoplearestupid,
While race is a factor here (due to the film characters) the primary issue is CONTROL.
There is an element of control in nearly all relationships.
Money/Power/Control are closely related. It is up to each of us to decide how much independence we are willing to give up in order to get something. A marriage only works if each person is willing to give up a degree of control.
What the actors missed here is that their race was also their strength. Picture “The Last Emperor” starring Robert Redford as the emperor. Sure someone may have taken the role — whenever you negotiate you must be willing to chance losing. But what if they organized and said, “We will not do something which degrades people as a class,”? This is where unions came from — caring more about independence than any short term benefit.
When I had only been in business a short time I was offered a partnership by an ad agency owned by two brothers-in-law.Their company had become my biggest single client (40%).
What it offered me was group insurance possibly a more steady income and no need to take time to sell, pick up and deliver jobs. (It took about half my time to do these non-billable chores.) The downside — they would decide (2 to 1) what jobs we would take on, what we would charge, what deadlines I would meet, etc.It was implied (and obvious) if I did not accept they would hire someone.
I declined, they hired, and my income immediately fell like a stone.Eventually I made up the lost income. Within a few years there was a divorce, a split between the two guys which evolved into a lawsuit, and my business outlasted the agency by another thirty years. But most important to me, I kept control of my life.
Control is never static, it is dynamic and a constant problem/opportunity.
Politics is mostly about control. Business management is about control. Slavery was about ultimate control.
“The last of the great human freedoms is our choice of attitude.” — Viktor Frankel
--------------------------------------
We are about to celebrate Independence Day. Those who gave this nation its freedom put everything on the line — life, fortune and sacred honor.
Now we are in a situation where our balance of control is challenged in ways new to this generation. We must be especially watchful, vocal and active, without destroying our unity.
Some challenge.
---------------------------------------
P.S. By the way, I’ve been married for over 45 years.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 3, 2006 at 7:30 AM It seems to me that just about everyone that has written a comment here are way out on right field. Are you all white? I must assume most who have written here are because it appears that most of you did not understand the implication of this article. Yes, it is about control, as whattheheck states, but it is about white man’s control. Control of what is considered acceptable and who gets what.
It seems to me white man has always determine the agenda of western life, at the determent of non-whites (Native Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, etc. – read the history of these groups, you might learn something).
So, who gave the white guys the right to set the rules?
When I was growing up in south Phoenix, Arizona, during the mid to late ‘60s, I honestly believed that one day I would see more Mexican Americans play lead roles in television and in movies. I’m 49 years old now and I am still waiting. What does that say about racism in the American Television and Film Industry?
I use to be a proud American with the belief that America was truly a country where anyone can succeed, that racism was only limited to certain small parts of America. Well, I was proven wrong. I now know better.
Posted by MrMiguel on Jul 3, 2006 at 9:16 AM MrMiguel,
“So, who gave the white guys the right to set the rules?”
In this case the actors gave them the right by agreeing to play the parts they were given. Apparently the money was more important to them at the time.
Freedom has comes at a price.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 3, 2006 at 11:51 AM What is far more important, is that Hollywood, in general, has actively, creatively, promoted a form of racist propaganda. Blaming the racist portrayals soley on the actors who take these roles is a facetious diversion.
It is highly unrealistic to expect that when Hollywood racists limit ethnic men to only stereotypical roles, that universal boycot of accepting these roles could take place among starving actors.
The testimonies of these actors are important in that they provide an important counter point of view. Hollywood has cast these men into two-dimensional villains and demeaning racial caricatures. Their testimony humanizes the actors.
If one asserts that a general pattern of racist portrayals towards minorities is to be condoned, then what-the-heck, the gloves would come off, and no double standards should be excused. Racism & prejudice towards all ethnicities, religions, etc… wouldn’t logically deserve condemnation, because the hypocrisy would be so obvious. And also consequently, moral underpinnings in society would fall apart.
Posted by plth on Jul 4, 2006 at 1:11 AM Plth, MrMiguel,
I guess this is where the terms conservative and liberal come into play…
You think the government and society should take care of problems for people while I believe as individuals we need to address our problems for ourselves.
MrMiguel is disilussioned..."I honestly believed that one day I would see more Mexican Americans play lead roles in television and in movies. I’m 49 years old now and I am still waiting. What does that say about racism in the American Television and Film Industry?” Well, there is a Hispanic TV channel here now — what does that say?
How many Americans play lead roles in Mexico? Why should they? Why should it be expected?
First: This is a big deal to the people affected, but not to most others. Most of us have more pressing issues of our own to deal with.Second: It is apparently not a big enough problem to those involved to work at solving.
No Guts, No Glory.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 4, 2006 at 7:08 AM “You think the government and society should take care of problems for people while I believe as individuals we need to address our problems for ourselves. “
Strange, I do not recall stating that the “government and society should take care of problems for people...etc.” nor have I stated that I am conservative or liberal, so please keep those labels to yourself.
Yes, I am disillussioned, but with the idea that America would have one day shed it’s racist tendancies by now.
You ask “How many Americans play lead roles in Mexico?” I don’t care, I do not live in Mexico.
What bothers me is when white Americans play roles as Mexicans, or Mexican Americans, rather than using a real Mexican, or Mexican American. And there are lots of examples of this!
One recent example: “Nacho Libre” with Jack Black playing the lead role of a Mexican.
What I do not see are Mexican Americans playing important lead roles in either Film or Television. Since I no longer live in the USA (I currently live in the UK) the absence of leading actors that are Mexican Americans in popular TV series, or block buster films, is even more apparent.
Posted by MrMiguel on Jul 4, 2006 at 7:38 AM “First: This is a big deal to the people affected, but not to most others. Most of us have more pressing issues of our own to deal with.
Second: It is apparently not a big enough problem to those involved to work at solving. “
Well, thanks for being frank.
Often in the past, in response to criticisms about mainstream media racism, the excuses & responses were often:
being (willfully) ignorant of the problem, hostile denial, or that these sorts of racist portrayals are really what mainstream Americans want to see.Now it’s basically: ‘Ok, ok, so what? I don’t care about racist propaganda by the mainstream media. Not my problem.’ No point in making someone care about it.
After all the denials are debunked, the malice towards asian men is laid bare. It’s good that the hostility and antagonism from the mainstream towards minorities is acknowledged and out in the open now, instead of being denied with facetious malicious rhetorical strategems. Actually at least, that is progress.
However, minorities can have the right to criticize & expose Hollywood and the rest of the mainstream media for their arrogance, hypocrisy, and racist (& sexist) practicies.
The men of color who complain and work against mainstream media racism are the real heroes, and the real villains are actually the racist masterminds behind the stereotypical & malicious portrayals of minorities & women.
Posted by plth on Jul 4, 2006 at 10:33 AM Look at the comments that cry RACISM. This is why leftism is dead in America--because leftism became more about race and gender than about getting the money and control away from the rich and giving it to the rest of us. The most advanced countries in the world (i.e., western europe) will have nothing to do with racial and gender identity politics.
Why do you think that is?
Our American Left is a creation of the rich and powerful. They created this Identity Poltiics Left so as to drive the white majority away from economic leftism. And they have been successful in doing that.
The American majority wants nothing to do with a “liberal” government because they know that liberalism in America is all about race and gender.
Posted by cryofan on Jul 4, 2006 at 1:56 PM hmm…
So the American left should abandon its resistance towards racism?
And that the rich and powerful actually “created” this “identity politics”?Was Martin Luther King sponsored by Exxon Mobile? ;-)
I don’t know why some people think that anti-racism and economic leftism are opposing issues. —Unless the underlying dynamic is that economically disadvantaged white men are in favor of racism and suppression of non-white men. In that case, the more appropriate political label for that form of leftism is the White National Socialist Movement.
It’s funny that Hollywood should and often have adopted the same attitude of the Nazi party towards minority men.
Otherwise, another possible psychological explaination for what is going on with the mainstream media’s depiction of asian men and women is this:
It’s a visceral, primal matter of male tribalism and ego. White men have enjoyed a comfortable feeling of superiority over all minorities. Asians, especially East Asians, have progressed far in professional fields and East Asian countries have shown progress economically and scientifically. Thus notions of white male superiority are challenged, and East Asian men then became a source of insecurity and prompted feelings of threat & resentment. Therefore, there is a general pattern of antagonism towards East Asian men in the mainstream media.It’s a love hate thing—love the E. Asian women, and hate the E. Asian men. The men are resented competitors, and the women are about equal to white women because E. Asian women are not regarded as “genetically inferior” (by racist ideology, ref: The Bell Curve, Charles Murray) as are women who have “darker skin.”
Anyway, to improve the lives of economically disadvantaged men (including white men) in America, the optimal solution is to reform, regulate, and fix the often ruthless, exploitative, and unfair “robber baron” kinds of capitalism that blatantly exploit the poor.
Posted by plth on Jul 4, 2006 at 4:31 PM plth,
Look, I am against racism. Also gender, body weight, religious or whatever discrimination.
But I am also sick and tired of people slapping such labels on each and every perceived personal slight. (However, I could go for a bit more profiling where Homeland Security is at stake.)
If these actors felt the parts they were offered were denigrating people based on race they were free to rebel and refuse. If the producers and directors were oblivious or even actively trying to denigrate the group as a whole they were free to do so. The public is also free to choose to go watch or not
.
What is it with people who like to think they are “liberal” that their solution is to “reform, regulate and fix” the behavior of other people. This is diametrically opposed to any form of LIBERATION.I suppose as a person of half Swedish heritage, I should have been offended when Hans Christian Andersen was played by Danny Kaye, a Polish Jew. Wow, do you suppose this was done because so many big time Hollywood moguls were Jewish. Has this been properly investigated?
Unless the people involved are using coercion or force — let them work it out. Anything else just accentuates the race issue rather than removing it.
There are genuine problems to deal with.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 5, 2006 at 6:58 AM plth,
Look, I am against racism. Also gender, body weight, religious or whatever discrimination.
But I am also sick and tired of people slapping such labels on each and every perceived personal slight. (However, I could go for a bit more profiling where Homeland Security is at stake.)
If these actors felt the parts they were offered were denigrating people based on race they were free to rebel and refuse. If the producers and directors were oblivious or even actively trying to denigrate the group as a whole they were free to do so. The public is also free to choose to go watch or not.
What is it with people who like to think they are “liberal” whose solution is to “reform, regulate and fix” the behavior of other people. This is diametrically opposed to any form of LIBERATION.
I suppose as a person of half Swedish heritage, I should have been offended when Hans Christian Andersen was played by Danny Kaye, a Polish Jew. Wow, do you suppose this was done because so many big time Hollywood moguls were Jewish. Has this been properly investigated?
Unless the people involved are using coercion or force — let them work it out for themselves. Anything else just accentuates the race issue rather than removing it.
“The last of the great human freedoms is our choice of attitude.” — Viktor Frankel
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 5, 2006 at 7:04 AM First of all, if Danny Kaye, had to wear a Star of David on his lapel whenever he acted in movies, then I would agree with your comparison. However, that is not the case, and It is again a facetious argument.
Asians, Blacks, Latinos, etc… are visible minorities. To make the point obvious, these ethnicities aren’t “white.” And merely swapping out Jewish for Swedish is not the same as intentionally refusing to cast Bruce Lee, and preferring a white actor for the the lead role of the Kung Fu TV series. Nor is it the same as the overwhelming trend of casting East Asian men as villains or as other unsympathetic characters in the mainstream media.
I don’t see how creating criticisms against racism by the mainstream media, would equate to government regulation. No one here said that they don’t believe in the 1st Amendment. So that is a red herring defense about mainstream media racism.
And therefore I don’t see where our argument is, unless it is merely that criticism of racism by the mainstream media, is what is actually bothering people.
Posted by plth on Jul 5, 2006 at 10:15 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Lakshmi Chaudhry
- The Godless Fundamentalist
In The Root of All Evil, biologist Richard Dawkins reveals his own lust for certainty - The Power of Mean
Fuller argues that the moral power of Rankism = that everyone experiences being a somebody and a nobody - can overcome the innate force of bullying? - Why Pakistan Gets A Nuclear Pass
The Bush administration's pragmatic policy toward Pakistan suggests its foreign policy is less ideological than imperial - The True Temptations of the West
Temptations of the West: How to be Modern in India, Pakistan, Tibet and Beyond is a travelogue by Pankaj Mishra about the shadow of poverty in South Asia. - Why Hemingway Is Chick-Lit
Women read more fiction than men. - What Not to Watch
Makeover shows like "What Not to Wear" teach women to listen to their inner demons
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
