ESSAYS, ARTICLES, AND THEORIES ABOUT CINEMA: Blindsided By Racism

It will be stated that while the film, The Blind Side(2009) as a whole, is not overly racist in its audience and critical response, however does include aspects of racism in a contextual perspective that is simplified down to individual contexts that are justified by its audience and critical response. Specifically equating Sut Jhally and Justin Lewis’ essay, “Enlightened Racism,” to The Blind Side, the two factors of stereotype and class are used to establish contexts where racism does exist.

Jhally and Lewis make a claim that viewers of The Cosby Show have two overall accepted perspectives. Both of which will be explained and used to develop a contextual perspective withinThe Blind Side. The first perspective the author’s state is: “the wide spread feeling that black people have been traditionally stereotyped on television.” While their claim primarily examines television, the conventions used can translate across to another medium with cinema. Being that cinema surpasses television with a longer time span, there includes a larger opportunity for the development of racial stereotyping within the medium. Numerous examples can be used: from its conception with films like Birth Of A Nation (1912), Gone with the Wind (1939), to contemporary examples like Brian’s Song (1971) andThe Blind Side (2009). While one might argue that racism has slowly decreased over time with the examples given, however, one the other hand, Hollywood films like these have just become subtler in its representation of race, by imploring racism into the subtext of the film rather than overtly on the surface.

In The Blind Side, the film acquaints the viewer with Mike (called “Big Mike” in the film) as a downtrodden character, defined by the dangerous environment of the ghetto, where he lives. Since the film is based on a true story, it does present an issue when examining Mike, however it is important to separate the nonfiction Michael Oher with the fabricated representation of him in the film. In the case of examining the “character” of Mike, the nonfictional Michael Oher is irrelevant, because the film presents a stereotype in its portrayal of the real life figure. In other words, they took an actual human being and generated a stereotype in the way they recreated him into a “character,” and in doing so, he is characterized by the representation in the film. Mike’s large physical appearance is what appeals to the coach, who along with the football fans, see the external rather than the internal. If anyone can be credited with seeing the internal, it is the teacher who finds potential in his writing and motivates him to keep writing, but for some reason disappears with the progression of Sandra Bullock’s character, Leanne. Mike is given the position as blocker, one that can be identified with its “role” and its relation to the quarterback. The role of a blocker is the force that holds the opposing team members back, so the quarterback is given the opportunity to score and identified as the hero of the team. Even though everyone in the film tends to fawn over this ability to block the other team, they are still attracted to the work he accomplishes for the overall outcome, being the quarterback scoring. It is in the presentation of his physical appearance (ghastly obese and black) that defines him as a stereotype and launches into the role he is given.

Jhally and Lewis’ second perspective is that “human value can, in some way be measured by status and wealth.” WithThe Blind Side, instead of going for a sympathetic approach, bringing the audience into his struggle, the film goes through a focal shift, going from Mike and his situation, to Leanne and her “generosity” by helping him out. In the beginning, Mike and Leanne are separated by class and wealth. Leanne attempts to eliminate the separation by brining him into her home, thus bringing him up in the class spectrum. While the intentions of her actions could be discussed, Mike is the overall focus here, not Leanne. His departure from the lower class is not achieved on his own, but through his reliance on the aid of Leanne and her high-class status. His change is not made clear until he revisits the ghetto he came from, thus identifying the difference between the two classes. This is best explained when Jhally and Lewis state, “A value system based on social class (upper equals good, lover equals bad) devalues most black people.” In relation to their statement, an evaluative system is established, confronting the viewer with a “good or bad” evaluation for the presentation of class, a situation that is “black or white.”

Mike gives into these changes because it is human nature to accept opportunities when they are presented. This is in no way criticizing Mike for giving into these opportunities. If anything, he makes the best of decisions to better himself. To him, the smallest things make the biggest difference. For Leanne, it is the opposite: the bigger things matter the most. This is illustrated in the film when Leanne presents Mike with his own room and says:

MIKE: I never had one before.
LEANNE: A room to yourself?
MIKE: A bed.

Leanne sees the entire room as shelter, however it is simply comfort in which the bed provides that elates Mike. It is not a bigger or little picture of the world, but Leanne happens to see the big picture through bigger things, and Mike sees the same, but through little things. Another example is the way the film differentiates Mike from the rest of the football team. Football players are motivated by the coach yelling, therefore mentally, the players exert more effort. With Mike, the coach yells at him, but Mike continues struggling. Instead of a continuance with motivation, Leanne interferes with the practice, pulling him out of the crowd, and gives him an overly confident mother-to-son talk. In reaction, Mike is suddenly able to block properly. It is not the motivation by the coach, which pushes every player equally, but the private babying that Leanne gives him, which almost makes him appear mentally incapable of perceiving direction compared to his other players. The film exclaims that if it had not been for his induction into a higher class, Mike would not have been able to accomplish any of these goals. This is an example for Jhally and Lewis’ claim that “requiring upper middle class status as a mark of normalcy creates a world that forces black viewers to accept a value system in which they are the inevitable losers.” In their context, the reference is made to The Cosby Show, however in the context ofThe Blind Side, black viewers are forced to accept they are losers, unless they accept support from white people.