elrhiarhodan | Revisiting a Disappointment

A few weeks ago, for Day 18 of the recent Movie Meme, I noted that the movie I was most disappointed in was The Phantom Menace, in part because of Jar-Jar Binks.

This engendered a few comments regarding the racist overtones of the character, and I think, despite the back-and-forth dialogue, I wasn't able to convince my interlocutors of the problematic nature of Jar-Jar's portrayal.

What I'd forgotten over the years - because frankly, I'd really like to forget that TPM actually exists - is that there is a far worse portrayal in the movie - Watto, the creature that owns both Anakin and his mother, Shmi. Watto is, for all intents and purposes, a vile caricature of a shtel Jew, or worse, Shylock from The Merchant of Venice.

I am bringing this up now because I just read an excellent article - Diversity in a Galaxy Far, Far Away: Star Wars’ Poor History and New Hope in Representation - that far more eloquently describes how poorly the Star Wars universe treats race, gender and diversity that I ever could.

Even if you don't read the article, please take note of this point:

What does this mean for our enjoyment of a series that is otherwise well-crafted, compelling, and perhaps the greatest franchise in science fiction? Are we no longer allowed to watch Star Wars? Of course we are. The task now lies in balancing our enjoyment with a critical eye for the ways in which the movies go wrong. By keeping conscious of how these various stereotypes and issues of representation affect not just us, but also those around us, we actually do the series justice.

By acknowledging that racism and sexism don’t only manifest themselves in explicit utterances of offensive slurs, but rather permeate all levels of our society, from politicians to police officers to the media we enjoy, we end up agreeing with Obi-Wan Kenobi, one of Star Wars’ great heroes. In Return of the Sith, he says one of my favorite quotes from the series: “Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes.” When we recognize that there are more subtle expressions of racism and sexism, we reject those absolute definitions.

But remaining silently critical is not enough. We must make sure to press Star Wars—and other producers of media, from Marvel Comics to triple-A videogame developers—for better representation, and to make amends for their past offenses.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

We already agreed to disagree on the racism issue, but how exactly are the movies sexist, especially with the prequels more than the original despite Leia and her metal bikini? Padmé is "helpless" in Attack of the Clones???
...
I think all fairy-tales should be censured because they are clearly racist (poor dragons) and sexist (poor princesses). Then our world will be perfect and all prejudice will cease.

Actually, many of the classic Grimm Brothers fairy tales are overtly anti-Semetic.

Yeah, well, the Grimm fairytales are all rather gruesome and violent. I like many of them, but they're not exactly what you'd promote in civilized society. There are plenty of other fairytale authors, but that might not have been the best example.

I just can't agree with the article. The Gungans have fantastic technology - they build cities under the water, they have ships that can make it through the planet's core, they seriously stand their ground against the Trade Federation Army on land even though they are used to primarily living underwater. Their slingshots may seem "backwards" if they didn't work so well against the Trade Federation Army. One of the main premises of the first movie is that only after the Gungans and the Naboo people overcome their differences and form an alliance, they can defeat the Trade Federation who treatens their home, and the movie ends with them rejoicing and celebrating their victory.

The Tuskens are called savages by Anakin when he tries to excuse his act of mass murder. That's not a movie being racist - that's a disturbed character (who later turns out to be the Big Bad) making feeble justifications for an unspeakable act of violence. He does the same thing in movie III when he slaughters dozens of Jedi, including little kids. If anything, the movies show how poisonous that sort of thinking is. And I could go on and on.

I am on the fence about the dismissal of the Gungan's technology - although I stand by the coded racism in Jar-Jar's portrayal.

But remember, Obi-Wan, in A New Hope was also very dismissive of the "Sand People" - I forgot the exact wording, but he basically called them illiterate savages.

I suppose you might have a point about Jar-Jar - I don't know the context well enough to really tell.

Regarding Tuskens, I just fast-viewed the movie and Obi-Wan doesn't really say much about them. He says they're easily scared [by his Jedi tricks], that they ride behind each other to hide their numbers and that the're not precise shooters [compared to the Empire]. By all those hints, you can see a civilization that's not very technically advanced (which is understandable, given that they're living in the desert), possibly supersitious but efficient enough in their way of life. But through all six movies, we don't see anything of their culture (beside the fact that they live in tents), because they're always seen through the eyes of the other Tatooine inhabtants, with whom they compete for the little that the desert gives them. Do they have legends? What games do their kids play? Maybe they love music? We never really find out, and it's that disregard that makes it easier for Anakin to murder them.

It has always bugged me a great deal that, on one hand, Leia is shown as this strong and independant princess, and on the other hand, is totally objectified by running around half-naked for a good part of the movie.

I agree. Putting Leia - who'd just been a total badass - into the metal bikini was gimme for all the boys in the audience. The "slave girl" role served the plot, but it was humiliating. Carrie Fisher has been quite vocal about that.

But that's only a small problem because it's the original movies, while Padmé's attire and portrayal is the height of sexism.

Is it? how so?

I find the slave outfit sexist because it's obviously aimed to please the male audience. And there's nothing that would justify that no other character would give her at least their shirt, or something.

I find the fashion in the prelogy just generally over the top and confusing. Well, except of course, the bad guys and bad guys to be wearing black. subtle hints...

Well, I don't see the prequels as more sexist than the original, but the article pretty much implies that.

You're so totally right about the shirt - huh. You know, they could have even kept the semi-naked scenes (it is the height of a battle, and they're busy saving Han and generally trying not to die) if they just ended the scene where they're flying away with someone handing Leia the shirt, and then her maybe hugging Han or just them looking at each other. Plenty semi-naked stuff for male audience if they had to have the metal bikini and it would be obvious that Leia's friends care about her comfort and help her the first (safe) possible moment...

Ah ok. Sorry. I thought you were saying the prequels were more sexist. Haven't read the whole article, but sexism isn't what bothers me the most about it. LOL

and not to be picky, but it's either Return of the Jedi, or Revenge of the Sith. :P

Good catch - although I don't think the typo invalidates the point the author was making.

No, but as it actually is from Revenge of the Sith, it gives a bonus point to the prelogy. ;)

Revisiting a Disappointment - The Phantom Menace

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject