The Texts That Mattered: A New Feature

Last summer, I had a stroke of inspiration. I would create a blog on which different people talked about the text (book, movie, album, etc.) that was crucial in their lives. Perhaps it brought them to a career, or perhaps it came at a tumultuous time and brought them peace. The purpose would be to show the power of art (in all its forms) and to bring new texts to my audience. Getting folks to contribute was tough, and I only had about five posts. It simply could not support its own blog. However, I think The Lady Americanist is the perfect place to pick it back up. Let us begin: (reposted from the original blog with light editing).

Welcome to The Text That Mattered, a venture that was embarked upon in the throws of a graduate program in American studies. This discipline frequently emphasizes the importance of a text, be it a film, a book, a piece of art, or an album. Our reactions to art of all sorts is very personal and can be deeply profound, which is what I hope to explore here. An important relationship with a text is most certainly not limited (or even defined) by academics, but something that everyone experiences at some point in their lives. As the feature grows, I hope to interview a very diverse cross-section of people, exposing the universality of art and the importance of the humanities in the course of everyday human existence.

The interviewees are not choosing their favorite texts, but the text that was most profound in their lives (although these might overlap). The questions and the concept were also inspired by the now-defunct column in O Magazine, “Books That Made a Difference,” as well as the Proust Questionnaire in Vanity Fair and numerous other interviews that I have read and heard about how art has changed lives.

Feel free to use this feature as a way to discover new texts.  Perhaps the life changing text will reveal itself to you here.  I can’t wait to see what we discover together.

Knights and their Ladies Fair.

“There was once a land of Cavaliers and Cotton Fields called the Old South. Here in this pretty world, Gallantry took its last bow. Here was the last ever to be seen of Knights and their Ladies Fair, of Master and of Slave. Look for it only in books, for it is no more than a dream remembered, a Civilization gone with the wind…”

And so begins Gone With the Wind, the 1939 classic that has been at the center of a lot of recent controversy. After the terrible events in Charleston, the Lost Cause narrative and Neo-Confederates have been at the center of the cultural discussion. I could rehash it, but I think my colleague (and road trip buddy) John Price, handled it best. Price has been working the interview circuit for the last few days, especially after his piece was featured on the Huffington Post, and his grasp on the folklore angle is something I will leave to him. However, he also inspired this article.

Yesterday, he apologized to me for how hard he was on Gone With the Wind, knowing that I’m a fan of the film and book. I told him there was really no need. However, being a fan of a problematic text like GWTW is, well, problematic. I know the narrative behind it, but I just can’t help loving it for other reasons. It’s the same feeling one gets when “Blurred Lines” comes on at a wedding. You know what the song is really about, but gosh darn it, it is so catchy.

I first read Gone With the Wind in the 8th grade. I schlepped it around for pretty much the entire year, since its a pretty long book for the average 13 year old. I finally finished it in the spring of that year. I told myself that I wouldn’t watch the movie until I finished the book, and so my entire family sat down to watch all four hours of it. I was in love. From the sweeping opening credits to the final scene as Scarlett throws herself onto the steps of her home and proclaims “tomorrow is another day,” I was hooked. I was Scarlett for Halloween. I have numerous GWTW Christmas ornaments, a Scarlett Barbie doll, multiple editions of the book and movie, and even a musical jewelry box. Not one piece of my memorabilia has the Confederate flag on it.

Yep, I have an ornament that commemorates the destruction of Atlanta by Sherman’s army.

My sister’s favorite movie growing up was the 1939 film that often got caught in GWTW‘s shadow, The Wizard of Oz. Today we think of it as a classic, but it really didn’t earn that status until the 1950s when it was shown on television each year. That tradition made it an American institution. 1939 was filled to the gills with now-classic films: Ninotchka, Stagecoach, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Good-bye Mr. Chips, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and Dark Victory, just to name a few. 10 movies were nominated for Best Picture. Why does GWTW stand out?

Culturally, a lot of it has to do with the hype leading up to the movie. The book, which came out in 1936, is still one of the best selling books of all time. For a more contemporary comparison, consider the excitement leading up to the Harry Potter or Hunger Games films. The search for the perfect Scarlett O’Hara was national news, and it was so thorough that they began principal photography without having yet chosen an actress. Vivien Leigh was cast on the night that they filmed the burning of Atlanta with a stunt double. It starred one of the most bankable actors of the time (Clark Gable), and many of the other supporting characters were brought to life by the best character actors of the day. Thomas Mitchell, the man who plays Gerald O’Hara, was in three other movies that year, and they were all nominated for Best Picture (Stagecoach, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, and The Hunchback of Notre Dame). He is perhaps best known as “Uncle Billy” in It’s a Wonderful Life.

Technologically, GWTW was a feat as well. David O. Selznick, the film’s producer, used all 7 Technicolor cameras available at the time. Color films had only hit the mainstream in 1935, and even then, the technology was expensive and used only on grand epics that would recoup the money. The Wizard of Oz is also known for its use of color, and while Dorothy might have glimpsed the world of color in Oz, Scarlett could exist in no other realm. The book is full of references to color, especially regarding Scarlett’s looks and dresses. Most in the book are green (reportedly Mitchell’s favorite color), but the film mixed it up in order to highlight the technology.

Aside from the film world, 1939 was a year of transition for the United States. The Depression was finally showing signs of relief (although that wouldn’t really happen until World War II), the war in Europe escalated into a full blown official conflict, and television was introduced to the American public at the World’s Fair. Change was coming, and when that occurs, Americans tend to cling to more “traditional” myths, symbols, and traditions. When the concept of “America” or “American” is in flux or in question, we try to answer with tropes rather than with true introspection. The Lost Cause narrative is just that: a myth. It’s a way to explain ones heritage in a country that is only now entering its teenage years.

The other article that inspired my response was that of Lou Lumenick, a film critic for The New York Post, entitled “‘Gone With the Wind’ should go the way of the Confederate Flag.” Alright, Lou. First, most film scholars would not put GWTW at the top of their lists. It’s usually towards the top, but seldom is it the #1 pick. If it is, it’s usually in reference to just romantic films. Few film classes show it (partly because of its length), but also because there are so many movies out there that it can be easily set aside for something else. I’m not even linking to the article because I get the feeling that the author is not a terribly deep film critic.

The core of this problem is the call to ban ideas. Banning books and movies is a slippery slope. Who gets to decide what we ban? If we ban GWTW, we are also banning the performance that earned Hattie McDaniel her Oscar. For the unfamiliar, Hattie McDaniel is the first African American to win an acting Oscar. Her performance as “Mammy,” is complex and moving. The part is stereotypical. We don’t even get to know her name (it’s not Mammy; get real). She was an excellent character actor who spent her entire life playing maids and slaves. When she won, the studio required that she read an acceptance speech that had been written for her. The other black characters in the movie are all slaves or ex-slaves, and their names are all descriptive rather than their actual names, such as “Prissy” and “Big Sam.”

If we ban GWTW, we ban the opportunity to have the tough conversations about the South during the Civil War and Reconstruction. When Scarlett’s second husband, Frank, is killed, it is while he is on a poorly-disguised Klan venture to take out the blacks that accosted Scarlett earlier in the day. Never mind that Big Sam is the one who saved Scarlett. The movie is an excellent spring board for all sorts of discussions about racism in the 19th and 20th centuries. The book and movie are products of their own time as well of the Civil War era. It’s the same reason we don’t ban Birth of a Nation or Song of the South. Both allow film and cultural scholars to glimpse a certain time. In the case of Song of the South, Disney did its own “self-censorship,” and the film is unavailable in the United States for purchase. They appropriate the non-offensive aspects (Brer Rabbit and his gang) for Splash Mountain, but you aren’t going to find any of the live action parts of the movie anywhere. No one is saying that they are “the best films,” but they facilitate discussion.

The discussion about the Confederate flag is long overdue. It shouldn’t be displayed on state grounds. The South lost. If someone chooses to display it on their property, I’m going to judge them. It’s their right, and its my right. Romanticize it all you want, but the flag has always stood for the oppression of blacks. I even have documentation, thanks to Larry Wilmore at The Nightly Show:

“its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition.”

This quote is from Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephen’s “Corner Stone Speech,” in which he lays out the values of the CSA. After the war, the flag wasn’t flown regularly until the 1950s and 1960s when some felt that their “traditional” values were being threatened by the advancement of black civil rights. In other countries, especially in Europe where the swastika is banned, they use the Confederate flag as a stand-in.

To conclude, it’s hard to be a GWTW fan these days. And that’s good. For me, the film was always about the tumultuous romance between Rhett Butler (the only voice of reason in the movie) and Scarlett O’Hara. She’s not a likable character, which always signaled to me that her values were not in line with my own. The journey through the book for me was important intellectually. It was a book that challenged me on every level. Seeing the movie opened up a world of classic film that I had not experienced before, and it lead me to my less-controversial favorites, such as The Philadelphia Story, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?, and Annie Hall. In that way, Gone With the Wind was important to me in that it lead me to my professional calling. For others, it comes from the tradition of watching the film every year during the holidays on television. Film is complex, and its ideas are not one-dimensional.

This post has been a few days in the making. Getting it all down has been a little crazy-making. I probably have a lot more to say. So, to quote Scarlett: “I can’t think about that right now. If I do, I’ll go crazy. I’ll think about that tomorrow.”

– The Lady Americanist.

P.S.: If this wasn’t enough Gone With the Wind for you, here is one of my first posts on this blog, which centered on the book and movie as pivotal texts in American studies.

The Lady Americanist on Late Night.

                 Me and Jimmy Fallon, 2008.

In my dissertation, one of the iconic aspects of NBC that I investigate is late night television, particularly the influence of Lorne Michaels on the post-11:30 pm programming.  He made Saturday nights appointment viewing, and he has completely changed the face of NBC’s talk shows as well.  Following the lead of the New York Times‘ Bill Carter, I also have to keep an eye on the offerings on the other networks, especially NBC’s perpetual late night rival, CBS.

So the news of last week definitely changes the game.  Letterman appealed to younger, more acidic audiences.  He wasn’t afraid to be a little meaner than Leno, and he did it well.  As has been said numerous times in the past two weeks, Letterman inspired two generations of comics, first from Late Night on NBC, then from Late Show with David Letterman on CBS.  As Stephen Colbert pointed out, his first year in college marked Letterman’s first year at Late Night.  Letterman begat comics like Jimmy Kimmel and Conan O’Brien.

I’m a big fan of Colbert, and I have enjoyed his work long before The Colbert Report, including Strangers with Candy and The Daily Show.  However, many express concern that he will not be as popular when he drops his Report persona and moves on to being the real Colbert.  I call foul on this line of thinking. Colbert is not a one-trick-pony.  He is smart, well-trained in comedy (including time at The Second City), and has the potential to be a great interviewer.  Consider Fallon.  We never saw the “real” Fallon prior to his time on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon.  He was always playing a character (and usually laughing while doing so), and thus, who knew what kind of successor to Conan* he would be.  Fallon has proved to be warm, affable, and very likable during his time on the late night shows.  I even met Fallon once prior to his ascension to Late Night.  I liked him, but was annoyed as his tendency to break on SNL.  I had no idea what NBC was thinking (but who did during that period).  When I met Fallon at 30th Street Station in Philadelphia, he noticed that I kept looking at him.  I was trying to figure out if it was him, or just a guy who looked a lot like him.  He waved to me and motioned me over.  We talked for probably a solid 5 minutes, mainly with him asking me questions about myself.  He was genuinely nice, and from that point, I knew he would succeed on Late Night.

There has been a distinct generational switch in late night.  The old guard is really moving out, while those comedians who have put in their time are finally getting some mainstream recognition.  I will be watching these new trends closely, and hopefully I’ll have something more profound to say as it all develops.

– The Lady Americanist.

*Side note: I am a Conan O’Brien devotee.  Team Coco for life.

The Lady Americanist at the ASA.

Over the last four days, hundreds of American studies scholars descended on the Washington Hilton to convene the annual conference of the American Studies Association.  And for the first time, I was among them.  I have been part of the field of American studies for nine years now, but this year was the first year I had an opportunity to attend. It is difficult to have a paper accepted, and my research is still in its infancy, so I did not submit a presentation, but I did sign up to speak at the Students’ Committee Lightning Talks.  I was ready to network and learn the trends of the discipline.

First, the experiences I had with the Students’ Committee were awesome.  There was a very productive roundtable about teaching, a spirited discussion about student labor, and an eclectic set of lightning talks.  I received some excellent feedback on my own dissertation plans, as well as an offer of collaboration on future research from a colleague from Yale.  I also won five books through Students’ Committee give-aways, so I obviously enjoyed that.

As the weekend continued, the energy of the conference began to center on a proposed boycott of Israeli universities by the ASA.  Perhaps this would have escaped my radar, but a few of my professors were deeply involved in opposing the boycott.  Therefore, we were keeping an eye on the new information about the discussion.  A few of us even attended the town hall meeting to hear some of our professors speak and to hear others speak on the issue.  Never before had I been in a room where the energy was so tense.  My personal feelings stem from my own curiosity about how much good a boycott would do.  Yes, it would punish Israeli institutions (and therefore those associated with them), which is the goal for some; but would it actually help Palestinians?  It flies in the face of academic freedom and would not effect any real change on the Israeli-Palestinian issue.  Most of their complaints seemed to be with the State Department or with their home institutions anyway.  I’d rather see more concrete action being taken to help mediate between Israelis and Palestinians.

The boycott, along with the subjects of many of the panels, made me wonder what conference I had attended.  I felt I could talk shop with my professors and other students, but the panels seemed to be outside my understanding of American studies.  Perhaps, even at 27, I’m old-fashioned in my perception of the discipline.  Why do we have to be anti-American to be critical of American culture and history?  It was all very confusing.

On the practical side of things, we had a lovely trip overall.  We all bought way too many books, and we struggled getting them home.  We all overpacked (story of our lives), and one of my friends / colleagues and I got to experience the Newseum.  What an incredible place!  Our visit was far more emotional than I expected.  I was especially touched at the Berlin Wall (my own family was separated by the Iron Curtain), the 9/11 exhibit (including the antenna from the North Tower), and the JFK assassination exhibit.  I would go back again in a heartbeat, this time equipped with more downtime and more tissues.

Finally, my interest in Presidents was piqued when a book seller informed me that our hotel was the site of the assassination attempt on President Reagan (also the basis for the attempt on President Bartlett’s life on The West Wing).  My roommates and I studied the newsreel footage and managed to find what we think was the spot.

Who knows if I’ll ever attend the ASA again?  I would have to see both where my research goes and where the association goes.

The Lady Academic on the Academic Summer.

At an Independence Day party yesterday, some of my parents’ friends were asking me how I was spending my summer.  “Do you get the summers off?” one well-meaning friend inquired.  It made me realize to those outside the academy, it might appear that professors and students have a few months off from school, since they are mostly not going into the office.  

To give an idea of what an academic spends the summer doing, here is a sample of my activities: 

 – I am taking one class about consumer culture, which has me doing some dissertation related research, as well as ethnographic research and reading.  It’s nice to be in the classroom and keep myself focused.

 – I am working on a preliminary literature review for my dissertation.  Not only does that include writing, but also reading and understanding new texts.

 – I am fortunate enough to be writing three articles for an online scholarly encyclopedia, which will not only give me experience doing so, but also provide a few publication credits.  I will be writing about youth television, celtic youth groups, and Catholic schools.  

 – I am preparing to teach a new class (for me) in the fall, so I have spent the summer choosing texts, creating a syllabus, and making lesson plans.  

 – Finally, I am the president of our student association, so the other officers and I have been meeting to discuss conferences and other activities for the club this year. We have a lot of fun things in the works, both academic and social.  

So, I might not be going into the office, but I am certainly not “off” for the summer.  I do get to spend significantly more time with my family and friends, and I have found time to recharge, but my mind is never far from the work I’m doing.  

The Lady Americanist on Transnational Hollywood.

Star Trek: Into Darkness; Monsters University; Fast and Furious 6; Despicable Me 2.

A curious trend has been sweeping the American film industry.  Well, perhaps not that curious once one investigates further.  While art-house film buffs and critics have bemoaned the end of American film for quite a while, the average movie-goer is also starting to wonder if the end isn’t near for the artistic side of the movie experience.  It seems as if every movie at the multiplex is part of a larger franchise.

Has Hollywood run out of ideas?  Doubtful.  Certain filmmakers are still creating fantastic new worlds and weaving nuanced narratives that engage and excite.  Woody Allen still produces an average of one film a year; Wes Anderson takes his time to sketch complex characters who live in deliberately-designed environments, right down to the perfect soundtrack.  The only thing these directors are missing is the massive profits of their sequel-driven counterparts.

In May of 2012, Wes Anderson’s Moonrise Kingdom, one of his best received films, made over $66 million worldwide on a budget of $16 million.  Not bad.  It profited and recouped its budget a few times over.  It even tapped into some of the more elusive audiences, appealing to families with older children and teens.  Earlier that same month, the superhero superband film The Avengers came to theaters all over the country. On it’s budget of $220 million, The Avengers made $1.5 billion worldwide.  Billion.  With a “B.”  What did The Avengers have going for it?  Big stars?  Well, while The Avengers had Robert Downey Jr., Chris Helmsworth, and Scarlett Johansson, Moonrise Kingdom had Bill Murray, Edward Norton, and Bruce Willis, who have all been attached to some huge movies in their careers.  Big name director?  Both Joss Whedon and Wes Anderson are pretty well-respected auteurs of creative films.  Awards season fanfare?  Both films were nominated for just one Academy Award, but won other industry honors.

The big difference between The Avengers and Moonrise Kingdom is how they translate abroad.  If a film has nuanced dialogue that is difficult to translate (both in word and emotion), its worldwide appeal drops.  Movies like The Avengers don’t rely on dialogue, but on impressive special effects, action-packed sequences, and characters with notoriety.  The characters of The Avengers are already well-known, requiring no introduction.  The Avengers is also essentially a giant sequel for about six franchises.  Abroad, sequels are keeping Hollywood afloat.

Recently, on NPR’s All Things Considered, Hollywood producer Linda Obst discussed her new book, Sleepless in Hollywood.  She has a lot of tales to tell, but she spent much of the interview discussing “the new abnormal.”  As DVD sales have dropped off, a industry that used to comprise 50% of film revenue, Hollywood has shifted its attention to the profitable international market, which now makes up 80% of the market.  Sequels are especially lucrative: While the profits on the Ice Age films stayed the same with each release (still impressive), each sequel doubled upon the last internationally.  As Obst put it, studio heads certainly understand the “business” part of “show business,” but they have lost the “show.”

Obst does not leave us without solutions.  She suggests making one less “tentpole film,” or films that are guaranteed moneymakers such as the superhero movies or Harry Potter that support the industry financially, and using that $200 million to make a few more small films that attract more ignored audiences.

I would suggest using our consumer power to speak out, but only being 20% of the intended audience puts Americans at a disadvantage in that respect.  Movie theaters and distributers need to re-democratize the movie-going experience as well.  The World War Z $50 ticket is a move in the opposite direction of what most movie-goers want or can afford.  As ticket prices decrease, theaters will see increased audience numbers.  Simple as that.  Theaters should also bring back matinee, student, and other specialty pricing.  Tap into the audiences that have the free time to see films with lower prices.  Audiences will still come in large numbers to evening showings because that is when the average working American has the opportunity to see movies.  That will not change.  Additionally, with lower ticket prices, theaters will see increased activity at the concession stand.

Take, for instance, our local West Shore Theater.  It is a rehabbed 1940s one-screen theater that is packed most evenings.  It only shows two movies a night, one at 7 and one at 9 or 9:30.  Ticket prices are a reasonable $3.50, and concessions are just as inexpensive. I took my mother to see The Hunger Games last summer for less than $10, including a drink and popcorn.  In Philadelphia, its difficult to even get into the theater alone for less than $11.  The West Shore Theater shows late / last run movies.  For example, it is showing Iron Man 3 and The Great Gatsby this weekend, and The Muppets (2011) for a charity fundraiser.  The theater is attempting to raise funds for a digital projector, as most studios are converting to an all-digital format.  The large numbers at the West Shore are evidence enough of what lowered prices will do for attendance.

Sequel-itis is just a symptom of a larger issue in Hollywood.  There is no room in Tinseltown to be a risk-taker; if it isn’t a guaranteed profit maker, especially in the international sector, studios are reluctant.  Even most of the art-films are helmed with veteren directors (Allen, Anderson, Mann, Coppola), so they have something of a built-in audience.  Hopefully profits won’t bury one of America’s most important art forms, allowing creativity and quality to rule the day once more.

Additional Reading:

“Will Iron Man 3 Shed Light on Hollywood’s China Problem?” – Vulture, April 17, 2012

A Slice of American Studies.

Welcome to my professional online portfolio!  Here, you can view my CV, work experience, presentations, and some of my pieces of research.  This was created within the confines of a Ph.D. course, but it extends far beyond that.  For more American Studies scholarship from all over the web, you can check out my Tumblr page dedicated to American Studies, which will feature articles and images on a weekly basis.

To learn more about me, or about the discipline (or counter-discipline!) of American Studies, check out the tabs above.