Quentin Tarantino’s recent movie, “Django Unchained” has sparked controversy, if you haven’t noticed. And it’s not just the excessive violence and blood stains that is having people talk. We’re all used to Tarantino’s artistic eye for blood sprays and bullet physics by now. The talk I’m hearing at work, at school, and on city transit is about that N word. The movie showers the audience with it. It pops its ugly head in like whack-a-mole every couple minutes, forcing the audience to consider the integrity of the movie. It also puts the audience into an uncomfortable position as we wonder if we should be laughing at Tarantino’s jokes (which many include that N word), or if we should be shaking our heads with arms crossed. Is “Django Unchained” inherently racist? or is it just western society’s insecurity with the negative connotations of that N word?
Unburying the Monolith
Our attitude towards that N word serves only to turn it into a monolith; something which is casting a cold shadow over us, and so we feel uncomfortable in its presence. I hope you’ve noticed my bolding of the letter ‘N’ and distancing it with the word ‘that’. This is my own attempt to turn the controversial word ‘nigger’ into a monolith. The act of distancing ourselves from a word, or making it a taboo in all forms, ignoring the contexts in which it appears imbued it with a certain power. But in the correct contexts, nigger is not racist nor should it be interpreted as offensive.
To come to a better understanding of this statement, let’s take a look at Saussure’s Theory of the linguistic sign. We can think of a word, which is a sign, consisting of three parts: the signified, the signifier and the referent. The signifier is the sound-image representation (a word). The signified is the concept the signifier evokes in our minds. In today’s post-modern interpretation of this theory, the signifier and signified are separated by a line of difference, and are not necessarily joined permanently. To a limited extent, the signifier can drift from one signified to another, adding new connotations and losing some. The signifier can be combined with different signifieds, depending entirely on the context.
The problem that we face with the signifier ‘nigger’ is that it is almost always coupled with the negative connotations, that is, it always seems to signify the derogating of black people. This is not always the case. For example, the term ‘nigger’ used within the context of this essay is for the critical examination of its use in the movie “Django Unchained”. I will not argue, however, that the word ‘nigger’ should be reappropriated to signify a more positive connotation such as the term ‘queer’ has within the LGBT movements. Simply put, ‘nigger’ by itself in the movie cannot be considered racist without determining if the context of the movie is racist. Therefor, we have to examine the characters, plot and imagery of “Django Unchained” to reach a conclusion as to what the term ‘nigger’ signifies.
Looking at the Context
Approaching the essay from a negative perspective, we can criticize “Django Unchained” for employing Said’s orientalist representations of the African American characters. Orientalist representations are non-white characters depicted as savages, uncivilized, feminine, exotic or lacking education. Often times, it is the white man who saves the orient from the clutches of their own incivility or savagery. These constructed images affect post-colonial nations and cultures, from from the United States to Rhodesia. Yet orientalism isn’t a complete discourse as it doesn’t acknowledge the ambivalent nature of people and events in both history and literary forms.
In the case of “Django Unchained”, Django himself succumbs to many of the orientalist representations. In fact, the essentialist attitude of the film’s antagonist, Candie, is that black people are of a different race, and are naturally inclined to be submissive to their white masters. They do not posses the willpower to raise up and fight their masters. I am curious, also, as to the intentions of the name “Django”, the movie’s lead character. It is exotic sounding. Why not refer to him with a less exotic name such as Will or Jon, for example, like the head of Candie’s household, Stephen?
Another extreme representation is the relationship between Django and Dr. Shultz. It is Dr. Shultz who rescues Django from the chains of slavery in the beginning of the movie, and from there Dr. Shultz provides Django with the means to survive in a white man’s world.
The Ambivalence of Django Unchained
It would be unfair to ignore the ambivalent quality of “Django Unchained”. As I mentioned, orientalist representations is an incomplete discourse because it ignores resistance. Even though Django relies heavily on orientalist representations, which I believe is because the movie is written and directed by a white man, the movie still includes conflicting perspectives on the times. The bountiful ambivalence within “Django Unchained” prevents it from being reduced to a negative context which would warrant a racist interpretation of the abundant use of the term nigger.
Many of the movie’s point of views contest each other. Dr. Shultz believes that the slavery of black people is despicable, which is the opposite of Candie who thinks that black people are born to serve as slaves. Django wants revenge, enjoys his job as a bounty hunter, stating that what’s not to like about killing white people and getting paid for it. Of course, Stephen, the black head of the Candie household, sucks up to the white man, and goes as far as to punishing other slaves. It’s his way of surviving. I believe that without these multiple perspectives, such that if it were simply the white man vs the slaves, then the movie would have little merit. It would ignore the many perspectives of the time period.
Closing Comments
Within the context of “Django Unchained”, the word nigger has no racist connotations beyond its purpose of providing the movie with a specific tone. Obviously, “Django Unchained” has a certain cartoonish nature to it, indicative by its hyper violence and exaggerated gore. The use of that N word furthers the distance between reality and the universe the movie is set in. Used in today’s context, it summons the history behind it in our mind, but in Tarantino’s film the negative connotations are already present, thus it has nothing to evoke.
Django Unchained is an amazing movie. Go see it. Django is the epitome of sexy.
It takes guts to take on this issue. Well done.
Thanks!
After watching the film, the first thing that has come to my mind was: wow, a western with a black (hero) protagonist, which i havent seen so far, the western being exclusively made for white viewers(the only who can identefy themself with). Why isnt that the common topic, because I find thats the best sign that american society is curing itself from the racist past. It is, at last, a movie of which a afro american could be proud of, i guess, because Jamie Foxx being a powerful yet revenge driven hero in a world of faint and broken black individuals. For sure, there are many other black heroes in todays hollywood movies, but american pictures will reach equalness only when black actors can play a role that anyone else could have played too -> i magine myself a black terminator or asian kate winslet on titanic and nobody actually cares about race (which really doesnt genetically exists) but about the acting.
You are absolutely right about that monolith thing, giving the word that much power up till today will only preserve the shame anyone feels, when, being a free man, it should not make you in person feel bad but rather feel sad about the happenings of history. I think the normal reaction to such stupedity should be the same as to all other stupid things stupid man say: cripple for handycap, terrorist for muslim, nazi for german, nigger for black -> punch him in the face for those who dont know it better, because most times there is no rational cure for stupedity but learn it the hard way. Of course that only being the answer to those who really are stupid and dont know it better. Those who should know it better but rather try to find intellectual reasons for their stupid behaviour should be ashame of themselves and try at least to not raise their children to the same believes, as this behaviour will lead us straight back to the past millenium
“i magine myself a black terminator or asian kate winslet on titanic and nobody actually cares about race (which really doesnt genetically exists) but about the acting.”
This will be the moment, I beleive, Western Society will have reach equallity. We can’t claim a film or story as reedeming Western Culture if, for example, it is a Slave Narative or a Coming Out Narrative. Race, gende, sexuality and so on shouldn’t always have a baring on how the story is told. Just because, say, the main character is female, doesn’t mean that character has to face female-only obstacles.
Well, technically the word is negative already as the original definition had something to do with being extremely ignorant and inferior anyway. But I agree that its use in the movie wasn’t racist. It wouldn’t have been realistic without it. I was actually surprised when this discussion started popping up.
But anyway, I think you made some good points. And whenever you avoid a word like that, it only serves to make it more negative and give it more power.
Yes, avoiding a word only amps its negative power. This is why I think some of the Queer movement tried to reappropriate the word Queer to mean something different.
Thank you, very interesting post. Put a link to the post in my blog )
I saw Django and found
I saw Django and found it intertaining almost humorous to a point, the racist over tones were strong but in context to the stituation and the times.. I found it interesting from a stand point of my history of my great grandfather who would have been 17 during that period..The violence was some what cartoonish with exploding bodies as if these people consisted of jello. Controversy surrounds everything these days so Django can’t escape but as a movie it’s just a throw back to the day when movies were just movies and Django is no less or n more.
I normally watch movies for the sake of watching them. This is the first time I looked at a movie from a critical perspective. To put my movie watching mentality into perspective, I loved the Spider Man reboot as well as the Transformers series.
no crap! youtube
Spam which slipped through the cracks…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_%28film%29
That is where Django comes from. It was a spaghetti western which Tarantino was paying homage to. I don’t think the film was racist at all… the two strongest characters in my opinion were Stephen and Django. I think it is a shame that S. Jackson didn’t get any awards for his role.
Interesting article….I though the film was a bit slow.
On the article …you issued a discussion about the referent.
You’re right, queer is not the same as nigger. You might call your friend queer,
But do you call a black man a nigger?
Bullets and love
I am impressed with this website, really I am a fan.
Excellent article. Well-written, concise an the use of Said and Saussure was well balanced and not over-relied upon.
Completely agree.
I’m amazed, I must say. Seldom do I come across a blog that’s both educative and entertaining, and without a doubt, you’ve hit the nail on the head. The problem is something that not enough men and women are speaking intelligently about. Now i’m very happy that I stumbled across this in my hunt for something concerning this.
Hi, I do think this is an excellent website. I stumbledupon it ;) I may revisit yet again since i have book-marked it. Money and freedom is the greatest way to change, may you be rich and continue to help other people.
yea its racist, towards whites
Awesome article.
You are obviously inherenty racist for even writing this bullshit. Your criticism of “orientalist representation” is unfounded. Blacks were made civilized by white people who brought them to the americas and black people were uneducated and let’s not forget that blacks were sold by other blacks to americans. Blacks were then freed by whites. It happened that way, exactly, and only that way. Get over it. I must therefore conclude that the movie had some base in fact as far as that. Though I haven’t seen it I have to assume that it was actually more racist toward white people than it was to blacks, despite the use of the N-word, because of current society. The white man has become the devil. Quit being stupid too, the N-word was obviously used to make it realistic. No ones boldly being racist on the big screen so black people can finally find another cause. Please pick one that isnt destroying society.
fgk
I could spend precious time countering every idiotic and flawed point within this argument you have presented, alas I suspect your tiny mind would be incapable of unwinding its persecution complex for the time it would take for you to actually learn something. So instead I will simply call you a cunt…
Cunt!
Know what? That felt so nice ima say it twice!
Cunt!
Yes, when I’m too lazy to counter-argue what I truly believe to be idiotic points, I too just call the opinion-holder a cunt because ‘cunt’ by itself has contained within it all the rhetoric needed to reform the opinions of the opinion-holder I disagree with, and, dammit, actual intellectual dialogue between two people is so pre-reddit.
To magicmint: Thank you for this! I just saw Django Unchained yesterday and have been thinking critically about it all day today (as well as while watching it). I found your deconstruction of the N-word use in this film very helpful.
To Nick: Yeah, persecution complex indeed. And we’re OBVIOUSLY in a post-racial America when you have the audacity to say that Africans (and other black peoples) were uneducated and you can reduce a system of mass kidnapping and forced, free, labor to the simple phrase “brought to the Americas”. Ah, and “Blacks were then freed by whites.” as though freedom was something to be given, like a GIFT, instead of something that should’ve been the norm, the very least we could expect from each other. And then – lol! – you haven’t even seen this movie, but you’re just SURE it’s reverse-racist! Which is a thing! That totally exists! If you bother to read follow-up comments (I doubt it), then you should know that this movie has both good white people and bad white people. Good black people and bad black people. Finally, if you’d taken the time to actually read more than the title and “orientalist”, you would know that the author deliberated and dissected this movie and its use of the N-word carefully, and decided that it probably ISN’T racist. So who are you ranting at, exactly?
And, finally, to the Anon who is enamored of the word “cunt”: It’s a great word, innit? *I* like saying it. It feels wonderful rolling off the tongue. However, similarly to the N-word, actually, it is derogatory. It is a word which women can choose to reclaim, but which shouldn’t be used as an insult by anyone, because that associates women’s genitals with badness. Call Nick up there an asshole, or a douchecanoe, or a myopic shithead, or an ignorant smorgasbord of fuck. But please leave off the gendered insults. Thank you.
|