White House Celebrates Birth of a Nation During America 250
A flyer from the White House Film Festival
A recent film fest held at the White House to commemorate the "grand wizard of American Cinema" flew under the radar this past week. Curated by Stephen Miller, the film festival featured a screening of the 1916 controversial Birth of a Nation, which was the first film to be screened at the White House, nearly 110 years ago during the Wilson administration. Birth, based on Thomas Dixon's novel The Klansman, tells a fictionalized history of the south, using fear and stereotypes to imagine if the south were controlled by Black politicians. In addition to being fictionalized, Birth was largely responsible for perpetuating racist stereotypes that promoted violence against Black men, resulting in violence, threats, and fatal lynchings. It is somewhat surprising to learn that Miller enjoys films. First, he seems to derive no pleasure from anything except violence and humiliation. I've frequently wondered why so many of the guys in the Trump administration are so miserable and wish pain and violence on others. Yet, Miller was able to use the occasion of our nation's founding to celebrate one of his favorite films. Miller doesn't seem to like many other films. I've read his newspaper columns from his student days at Duke, and this particular entry titled "Hollywood and the Culture Wars" lays out his feelings about mainstream cinema. While I'm not always a fan of mainstream blockbusters, I can admit that there's always something in these movies that is appealing or entertaining. However, Miller acknowledges his paranoia when he claims that "American cinema is being converted into a propaganda machine." If Miller was aware of the history of cinema, he would know that has always been the case. Birth of a Nation is one of the prime examples that helped to propagate myths about Black masculinity and White femininity. Sadly, many of the stereotypes and propaganda from this film persists in the world today. However, Miller goes on to critique other films like Syriana, Munich, Goodnight and Good Luck, Brokeback Mountain and Fun with Dick and Jane (which I don't even remember). However, the other films that he mentioned are disparate, yet were all esteemed films that won Academy recognition in one way or another. He doesn't really make any argument about what culture war Syriana is pushing, even though it questioned our role in the wars in the Middle East, which is something that the president and other members of his administration have critiqued over time. Furthermore Munich is a powerful film about the 1972 Olympics in Munich and the Mossad's attempts to get revenge against the Palestinians. Spielberg's film is not only a great political spy thriller based on real events, but it also raises questions about the nature of revenge and global/political conflict as Avner gradually realizes the violence is never ending. Rather than presenting the issue in traditional Hollywood good vs. evil fashion, Spielberg creates a more nuanced and ambiguous plotline where Avner learns more about the nature of his missions and its impact on others. Maybe Miller didn't watch this film because it didn't show "the evils of the Islamic holy war, the merits of capitalism, [or]...America as a force of good in the world". I'm not sure if Miller ever saw Rambo III, but the American hero who takes on all sorts of bad guys hitches up with a group of freedom fighters to push back against the invading Soviets. In fact, this film was made in conjunction with the GOP, as republican senator Pete Wilson helped to obtain weapons for the film .
I would definitely recommend that Miller view this American classic, especially since we see Rambo help the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan repel the invading Soviets. American cinema has always been a kind of propaganda machine, but it also is a source of art and beauty; a medium that allows us to hear stories and explore worlds that we might now always come into contact with. Maybe Miller doesn't want to do much exploring. Maybe he's just looking for a window to observe his fantasy world or to view his constructed history, but cinema can offer so much more, and I would think that many people don't always look to cinema to be didactic or proselytizing. Rather, they go to be entertained or to escape or to feel and experience great art. While Jackass might not be great art, I find it to be hilarious and offers me some time to laugh with others. I don't think the Jackass crew is looking to convert people to take risks or seek out dangerous animals. In fact, they offer warnings before each episode and film about the risks involved. However, I don't think that Miller is a fan or likes to laugh at these kinds of films. In fact, in his article, which was supposed to be about Hollywood and its propaganda machine, he goes on to whine about sexual assaulter Bill O'Reilly being mistreated by David Letterman. Apparently, Dave stuck a pencil in O'Reilly's drink before he came out on the stage, and the media said nothing about this. Can you believe that? A talk show host trying to get a laugh? Miller contrasts Letterman's treatment of O'Reilly, who attacked and insulted his guest, with his fawning treatment of Jane Fonda. I'm not sure how this relates to his propaganda argument except to say that Miller likes to revel in his logical fallacies like the straw man, the slippery slope and the false cause. He misrepresents the argument about cinema by offering no valid examples except providing a list of movies he seems to hate. He then somehow links cinema and propaganda with Letterman's treatment of a sexual harasser and Inside Edition host, to claim that the left is trying to radicalize our country. In trying to make sense of this logic, he is arguing that the left has taken over entertainment because there are stories and ideas he doesn't like. Not only is Miller a misanthrope, but he's also a lousy thinker. I feel bad for him in the way these ideas run together in his addled mind. At least now he can host the kind of film festivals that can secure the existence of his people and the future of his children. While I deplore this film festival, I was glad to hear that they were unable to score any lawn jockeys to display on the White House lawn.
No comments:
Post a Comment