Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Starry Messenger

(32,378 posts)
12. There's a lot to unpack there.
Thu Feb 23, 2012, 09:03 AM
Feb 2012

She probably 100% did not know that her book was going to be feeding into racist stereotypes. That, in itself, is a problem. Our education is controlled by a power structure that colludes to erase discussions of racism, and the racist history of this country.

However, her book went through several layers of people to get published. I'm guessing most of those layers were also white. Although, as you point out, there are details in the book that white people probably do not know about Jim Crow, there is a way to have that conversation without the rather (imo) self-congratulatory air the book has with the role of "well-meaning white people who save the black people" in it. This probably could have been avoided if the author had consulted some Black editors, but I'm sure there are very few in the mainstream publishing world, due to white bias in all areas of media. Or it could have been avoided if a Black woman could get a major contract with a mainstream publishing house to write a book on this topic and hit the #1 bestselling lists for weeks. This is still rare to nonexistent in this country too. And it's not from a lack of Black women authors who write kick-ass books.

There's been a wide array of reactions to The Help from Black writers, about the book and the movie. I'm white, and there were things in the book that I knew nothing about, but I felt that the subject could have been covered 100% better if the author had taken time to vet her book. (Its wild popularity means that it's going to be treated as "*the* book on the subject", which I think is sad. That said, I haven't seen the movie, and it sounds like efforts were made to bring balance that the book lacked.)

There are books and articles written on some of the tropes the author used in the book, that were published before she went to press. Lots of Black writers publish blogs and carry articles on their websites that cover these issues heavily. There are books by Black authors on the subject. As they say, Google was her friend. She may not have known when writing her book, but she could have educated herself. She felt comfortable enough to publish a book on the topic of racism, but not to read books or talk to more than a few Black people about the book (maybe she didn't even do that?) http://acriticalreviewofthehelp.wordpress.com/2011/08/28/i-just-made-this-shit-up-per-stockett/


“I just made this sh*t up!” Kathryn Stockett’s incredibly demeaning response

<snip>
In this case taking the approach to make “shit up” won’t cut it, because actual history can’t be altered, especially since the book was marketed as historical fiction. While there were other attempts made on Evers life, being “bludgeoned” wasn’t one of them.

So in a room that contained journalists, not a one even realized the issue wasn’t Stockett placing real events in a fictitious novel. That’s regularly done these days. Especially after Forrest Gump was such a big hit.

The problem is she rode a wave of good will and credibility because it was assumed SHE HAD DONE the needed research on the black culture and captured the feel of the time period.

At least that was the hype her PR department primed the public for on the novel.

In an early indication that something was wrong, Stockett was caught off guard in a number of interviews, especially when asked about Medgar Evers. Because in three known audio interviews she actually claimed Evers had indeed been ”bludgeoned” to death instead of being shot.
<snip>



I think the question we should ask next is, why was her credibility and good will automatically assumed? She had the power and the opportunity to write a book that the publishing house was committed to throwing their weight behind. It was an incredible advantage that most Black authors will never seen in their lifetime. If she intended to be an ally against the racist power structure, I don't think she succeeded.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Intersectionality in Movies: The Help [View all] obamanut2012 Feb 2012 OP
Interesting review, and I agree that the complete absence of the male was troubling Warpy Feb 2012 #1
I did like how some of the control and power was transferred to obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #4
Are you gonna make me watch this movie? justiceischeap Feb 2012 #2
Watch it for Viola Davis, Octavia Spencer, and Jessica Chastain obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #5
I'm going to have to read the book, or... TreasonousBastard Feb 2012 #3
VERY interesting! obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #6
The book is well written and an interesting read Warpy Feb 2012 #7
I read the book and disliked it so much I avoided the movie. Starry Messenger Feb 2012 #8
The scary thing is, she thinks it's wonderful and all civil roghtsie obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #9
My take on it. Neoma Feb 2012 #10
If you want to better understand the perspective, you might try reading more written from it. laconicsax Feb 2012 #11
There's a lot to unpack there. Starry Messenger Feb 2012 #12
And also reactions from Southern whites knowing she was being crazy racist obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #13
Wow, I never thought about that. Starry Messenger Feb 2012 #14
You didn't threadjack at all obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #15
Not having read the book or seen the movie, I still have an opinion/question justiceischeap Feb 2012 #16
I think they saw $$$$$ and didn't care obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #17
I'll try to watch it over the weekend. justiceischeap Feb 2012 #18
It's old attitudes that are passed on. Neoma Feb 2012 #20
you're kidding right? Most white people don't come from priveleged backgrounds. Just like most Tunkamerica Feb 2012 #25
I was explaining exactly that... Neoma Feb 2012 #26
you implied through your language that not all but most were rich. Tunkamerica Feb 2012 #31
As I said in explanation: Neoma Feb 2012 #32
I never said they did obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #27
Meh, I was verging off topic. Neoma Feb 2012 #28
As I recall history, the ladder of inequality went something like this: justiceischeap Feb 2012 #29
Yep. Neoma Feb 2012 #30
You forgot Italians and Chinese immigrants Tx4obama Feb 2012 #35
Wow there are so many great posts in this thread Catherina Feb 2012 #19
Therein lies the problem. Neoma Feb 2012 #21
I knew about the lawsuit, which shows what a poser Stockett was obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #23
As history, the movie clearly fails. mistertrickster Feb 2012 #22
Skeeter's maid's name was Constantine obamanut2012 Feb 2012 #24
I did not like the movie JustAnotherGen Feb 2012 #33
You know...you've made me rethink my enjoyment of the book. ScreamingMeemie Feb 2012 #34
"Why now?" Starry Messenger Feb 2012 #36
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Feminism and Diversity»Intersectionality in Movi...»Reply #12