Popular Culture Race and Ethnicity in King Kong - Movie Review Example

Few channels have the power to influence attitudes and determine the direction of racial relationships as does cinema. Writing from the perspective of a sociologist who specializes in the study of racial relationships, Hall (2001) insists that racial stereotypes are popularized through film, just as prejudices are cemented by this media of pop culture communication. If film has the power to popularise racial stereotypes and to cement racial prejudices, it also has the power to constructively contribute to tolerant and harmonious racial relationships (Hall, 2001). As society becomes more multicultural, racial tolerance and the obliteration of prejudice become more important. Accordingly, the representation of blacks and minorities, or indigenous populations in film, has become an issue of social concern. The objection which several critics expressed towards King Kong (2005) and their denouncement of it as a racist film needs to be understood within the context of the larger social issues at stake and should not be dismissed as exaggerated reactions to innocent entertainment, as some have done. Indeed, King Kong is founded upon racial stereotypes and cements racial prejudices in its portrayal of indigenous populations as savages, its suggestion that blacks are wild beasts, such as is King Kong, who can only be tamed by the civilised Caucasian. Critical reactions to King Kong (2005) have tended towards its denouncement as a racist film, on the one hand, to its defence as innocent entertainment, on the other. Espousing the former view, McCarthy (2006) maintains that the storyline and plot revolve around three of the oldest and most persistent of the known anti-black stereotypes. These are that all non-Caucasians are savages and that members of the black race are hardly distinguishable from wild beasts (McCarthy, 2006). In this film, the non-Caucasians are represented in the hardly human, unmistakably savage and completely unwashed figure of the Skull island natives and blacks in the form of the gigantic and uncontrollable savage figure of the ape. The third stereotype upon which this film is founded and which its storyline propagates and legitimizes is that of the civilized Caucasians who, by the very nature of their appearance and the culture and civility which they symbolize, are able to tame, control and potentially even civilize the savage and the wild. King Kong (2005) promotes these stereotypes and should, accordingly, be classified as a racist film. For multicultural societies which are struggling to create a culture of racial tolerance and acceptance to replace the culture of racism, films such as this can have a potentially detrimental effect. Pon (2000) highlights this potential consequence by arguing that racist messages legitimize an audience's possibly racist sentiments and justifies their perception of minority races and groups as inferior. When these messages are conveyed in a multicultural society, they immediately conflict with multiculturalism's message and, accordingly, can contribute to racial tensions (Pon, 2000). In direct reference to Canadian society, popularly regarded as a successful experiment in multiculturalism, the message conveyed by King Kong (2005) does not simply conflict with official messages regarding racial tolerance and understanding but it touches upon the underlying racial tensions which exist beyond the surface. Studies have indicated that increasing numbers of racial minority groups and indigenous populations feel marginalized and discriminated against. The number of blacks and natives feeling out of place in society is on the rise. In 2002, 35% of blacks and 20% of natives in Canada reported unfair discriminatory treatment 'sometimes' or 'often' (Statcan, 2002). Therefore, films which wrongfully portray the true nature of blacks and native/indigenous populations, have the potential to enhance the mentioned feelings of marginalization and to deepen the racism which many Canadian minority groups feel they are subjected to. The fact that King Kong (2005) has the potential to deepen racism and heighten feelings of marginalization is evidenced in the fact that the film is, in essence, about the clash of civilizations and racial conflict. Certainly, on the surface King Kong (2005) may be interpreted as a never-ending conflict between the natural world and humankind. Hence, the starting point for the plot is the arrival of a group of Western filmmakers to a previously undiscovered and untouched island. Skull Island has its own culture, its unique rituals and its own indigenous population but, strangely enough, that which is native to the island is presented as alien. It is important to note that rather than present the film crew as being at odds with the island, the island, its people, culture and rituals are illustrated as at odds with the outsiders. Their rituals are projected in a mysterious and sinister fashion, suggestive of human sacrifice, violence and unspeakable horrors, born of ignorance. In addition, its native beast, King Kong, is presented as horrifyingly alien. It is important to note here, that what is alien, what is strange, are the outsiders and not King Kong, the islanders or their rituals and culture. However, since all of the stated is presented in an uncompromisingly Eurocentric fashion, as McCarthy (2006) claims, the audience's judgement is skewed and perverted. The island and all that it represents are alien to the audience's worldview and as we witness the indigenous population's lifestyle and their methods of communication, we feel a sense of repulsion. They are living in caves, are unwashed and their language is nothing other than animalistic grunts - they are, to all intents and purposes, the quintessential non-Western, non-Christian and non-Caucasian savages towards whom the white man owes the duty to civilize and educate. This is a popular Hollywood film message, according to Gittings (2001) and it is the message which King Kong (2005) communicates. Unlike the earlier Hollywood films which blatantly portrayed white superiority and native inferiority (Gittings, 2001), King Kong (2005) pays lip service to political correctness by concealing its underlying racist theme under one of nature versus man. Within the context of the stated, and as several audience members have claimed in its defence, the giant ape personifies nature in all its glory, power, majesty and even beauty (King Kong is just a movie, 2006). His power and violence are unleashed, as can be that of nature, when he is tampered with and when his habitat is threatened. In accordance with this interpretation, the film is an allegorical depiction of the consequences which can befall humanity should it persist in its quest to tame, cultivate, civilize and control nature. Should we accept this interpretation, then King Kong (2005) is innocent of all accusations of racism and indeed, when viewed by Canada's multicultural populations, will not transgress against the unwritten rules of racial understanding and tolerance. To accept the foregoing man versus nature interpretation of King Kong (2005) is to turn the metaphorical blind eye to the totality of the film's plot and its primary storyline. Plot and storyline center on White Man and Western Civilization versus Black Man, indigenous populations and non-Western civilization. Not only is this evident in the unflattering comparative portrayal of the Skull Islanders versus the film and ship crew members but also in the fact that the outsiders ultimately emerge as the more honourable, the more courageous and, hence, the victorious. This is perfectly portrayed in the scene where, even though running for their lives and desperate to leave the island and its horrors behind them, as soon as Jack Driscoll discovers that Ann is missing, a rescue party is organized and the ship's departure from the island is postponed for another 24 hours. This is not simply a portrayal of exemplary courage, honour and loyalty but an expression of the principles upon which Western civilization supposedly stands for. It is white man and Western civilization against the inferior Other, the savage. The courage and the power which Western civilization and the White man stand for are again expressed in Ann's defiance of the giant ape and her ultimate conquering of him. In direct comparison to the natives' cowardice, whereby they are seen as cowering in fear when King Kong roars and immediately decide to sacrifice Ann to him, as they have many others before her, as a peace offering and appeasement, she stands up to the beast. Even when she is held in his gigantic paw, completely at his mercy, she refuses to appease or supplicate. Instead, she struggles, tries to attack him and jabs him with her ceremonial necklace. It is a David and Goliath struggle with the weak standing up to the incomparably strong, relying, not on physical strength but on persistence and the principles of struggle against injustice and the sanctity of life. In just the span of a few hours, Ann, the white woman, achieves that which none of the natives had been able to over the generations - she conquers King Kong, she tames the beast. Although King Kong (2005) is an undoubted portrayal of white superiority, one cannot claim that all the outsiders in the film are depicted in a positive light or that, indeed, all blacks in a negative one. In one scene, Hayes, a black assistant to the ship's captain tells a young ship crew member Jimmy, that he needs to straighten up, be smart, get an education and take things seriously, so he does not have to work on the ship for the rest of his life. In this scene, we paradoxically have a black man guiding and civilizing' a white youth. It is, however, important to note that Hayes, although black, is civilized,' having been acculturated into Western traditions, principles and mannerisms. Therefore, this single scene, especially when understood from within the context of the stated, does not absolve the film from the accusation of racism. Even the fact that not all of the whites in the film are positively portrayed does not absolve King Kong (2005) from the claim of racism. The filmmaker, Carl Denham, is a cowardly and comical figure, a man whose sole concerns are money and his personal interest. He leads his crew into danger and when confronted with that danger, runs. Rather than argue this to be an indictment of the white man, however, or a balanced portrayal of the white race, this can be more accurately interpreted as an attempt to add character variety into the storyline. Indeed, as Benshoff (2000) argues, when a white person is negatively portrayed in a film which can otherwise be interpreted as racist, the said portrayal is usually incited by the imperatives of providing variety and a degree of comic relief. The portrayal, in other words, should not be interpreted as an attempt to add balance to the depiction of either race (Benshoff, 2000). In other words, Denham's character does not remove the stain of racism from King Kong (2005). The argument presented in the above supports the claim made at the outset of this essay: king Kong (2005) has an underlying and undeniable racist theme. Racism, while partially concealed through the depiction of a white character in a negative light and in the theme of man against nature, is ultimately impossible to conceal. It expresses itself in the visual image of the quasi-human natives, let alone their culture, mode of communication and cowardly rituals and in the horrifying physique of the giant ape, King Kong. It is further expressed in the White man's conquering of the beast and the havoc which King Kong, the black person, wreaks upon Manhattan. Indeed, King Kong (2005) is not meaningless entertainment but, entertainment with a racist message which has the potential to contribute to racist sentiments in multicultural societies such as the Canadian. Bibliography Benshoff, H.M. (2000) Blaxploitation horror films: Generic reappropriation or reinscription' Cinema Journal, 39(2), pp. 31-50. Blonde is beautiful mystique.' USA Today. Gittings, C. (2001) "Zero Patience", Genre, Difference, and Ideology: Singing and Dancing Queer Nation.' Cinema Journal, 41(1), 28-39, Hall, R.E. (2001) The ball curve: Calculated racism and the stereotype of African American men.' Journal of Black Studies, 32(1), 104-119. King Kong is just a movie.' (2006, Jan 26). USA Today.McCarthy, S. (2006, Jan 19). Pon, G. (2000) The Art of War or the Wedding Banquet Asian Canadians, masculinity, and antiracism education.' Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l'ducation, 25(2), pp. 139-15. Read More