The rise of deconstructing white trash movies Analyses of representations of white trash in Erin Brockovich (2000), 8 Mile (2002), A Love Song For Bobby Long (2004) and Black Snake Moan (2006) Wednesday the 17th of February 2010 Master Thesis by: Frank van Laer (3326462) Professor Huijbersstraat 159 6524 NZ Nijmegen The Netherlands P: +31624902459 E: frank_van_laer@hotmail.com Table of Contents 1. Introduction 3 1.1. Topic 3 1.2. Research question & case studies 6 1.3. Academic discussion 7 1.4. Chapter structure 11 2. Stereotyping, whiteness and stars 12 2.1. Introduction 12 2.2. Stereotyping 12 2.3. Whiteness 15 2.4. Stars 19 3. White society’s (re)discovery of white poverty 22 3.1. Introduction 22 3.2. Black and white poverty 23 4. Case studies 32 4.1. Introduction 32 4.2. Whites’ position of privilege and power 33 4.3. White naked body 35 4.4. Purity of whiteness 36 4.5. Use of the star’s image 37 4.6. Individuation 40 5. Conclusion 42 6. Bibliography 45 6.1. Movies 45 6.2. Literature 46 2 1. Introduction 1.1. Topic “I’m a piece of f#cking white trash, I say it proudly” proclaims Jimmy Smith in the movie 8 Mile (2002).1 American rapper Eminem plays the role of Jimmy Smith, a white rapper living in a poor neighborhood in Detroit, Michigan. In the 20th century poor whites have mainly been portrayed in Hollywood movies (such as Gun Girls [1957], The Great Texas Dynamite Chase [1976], Kalifornia [1993], Natural Born Killers [1994], Love and a .45 [1994] and Freeway [1996]) as extremely violent people with no real personalities.2 Jimmy’s proclamation in 8 Mile, however, suggests that poor whites have been portrayed in a more positive way in Hollywood movies after the turn of the century. Although poor whites have still been called white trash in recent Hollywood films, they have been portrayed more as complex human beings. It would appear that the representation of poor whites in Hollywood movies has been changed, and that poor whites have been represented less stereotypically in Hollywood films from the 2000s than in 20th century Hollywood movies. Evidence suggests that stereotypes of poor whites have even been deconstructed in recent Hollywood films.3 When studying Hollywood movies it is impossible to ignore America’s dominant ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism.” White patriarchal capitalism permeates most American films and the way the majority of Americans think about themselves and the world around them (and thus provides a direct connection between Hollywood movies and U.S. society). The ideology entails three distinct aspects. The first – white – refers to the ideology that people of Western and Northern European descent are somehow better than are people whose ancestry is traced to other parts of the world. The second – patriarchal – refers to a culture predicated on the belief that men are the most important members of society, and thus 1 8 Mile, Hanson, Curtis. Imagine Entertainment. 2002: United States. 2 Gun Girls, Dertano, Robert C. Eros Productions. 1957: United States. The Great Texas Dynamite Chase, Pressman, Michael. Yasny Talking Pictures. 1976: United States. Kalifornia, Sena, Dominic. PolyGram Filmed Entertainment. 1993: United States. Natural Born Killers, Stone, Oliver. Warner Bros. Pictures. 1994: United States. Love and a .45, Talkington, C.M. Trimark Pictures. 1994: United States. Freeway, Bright, Matthew. The Kushner-Locke Company. 1996: United States. 3 The terms “white trash” and “poor whites” will be used throughout this study. 3 entitled to greater opportunity and access to power. The third – capitalism – refers to the belief that success and worth are measured by one’s material wealth.4 Hollywood studios make and sell movies that they think people want to see; that is, films that in some way reflect the dominant ideology in America, and films that show things of which most people are aware.5 This all points to the possibility that there may be a connection between Hollywood’s changing portrayal of poor whites and the awareness of poor whites by Hollywood’s main audience: the American people. This leads to the following question: Has the American public’s awareness of poor whites been changed during the 20th century? The probable connection between Hollywood films about poor whites and U.S. society’s changing awareness of this group make it necessary to examine to what extent stereotypes of poor whites have been deconstructed in recent Hollywood movies. A proper understanding of the term “white trash” is of fundamental importance when analyzing movies about poor whites. The term is not new, but rather was first introduced in the United States a few decades after the revolutionary era. In about 1800 white trash entered the national drama of unification and immediately took center stage. White trash became the subject of extensive public debates in the antebellum era. Several social observers agreed that white trash lived in terrible and degenerate conditions; it was those very conditions that seemed to define them as trash. But from the 1840s to the end of the reconstruction era in the 1870s, the same social observers passionately debated the reasons for the degeneracy of white trash. These debates reflected the emerging conflicts over the shifting boundaries of race, class, politics and culture that erupted in the American Civil War. On one side, northern abolitionist reformers argued that the existence of white trash in the South was evidence of the moral corruption and degradation that a slave society visits upon all of its members. End slavery, they argued, and the white trash would rise to their rightful place as respectable white citizens and industrious workers. On the other side, southern proslavery apologists argued that a “degenerate” class of poor whites in the South existed not because of social or economic factors, but rather as the result of “natural inferiority,” the inherited depravity that comes from generations of “defective blood.” As proof, they pointed to the existence of white trash in non-slave states.6 4 Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin, America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality at the Movies (Oxford 2009) 8-9. 5 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 28. 6 Matt Wray, Not Quite White: White Trash and the Boundaries of Whiteness (Durham 2006) 136-137. 4 There is no specific literature on the history of white trash in the 20th century. However, several scholars, such as Abel Green, J. Brooks Bouson, Colin Webster and Brannon Costello, have defined white trash in the 20th century. During the 1920s Abel Green argues that most white trash, “probably 95 percent, can neither read nor write English” and are “illiterate and ignorant, with the intelligence of morons.”7 Although Green’s definition of white trash is not highly academic, it is important to note that he clearly points out that white trash is uneducated and stupid. J. Brooks Bouson gives a more academic definition of white trash. Bouson claims that a classist slur and a racial epithet marks certain whites as a separate breed. Bouson also argues that white trash is “the most visible and clearly marked form of whiteness,” but she does not explain why this is the case. Literally, “trash” is just another word for “garbage.” Nevertheless, Bouson claims that the second part of the term “white trash” points to “the social degradation and shame implicit in this derogatory class designation.” Bouson concludes her definition of white trash with the statement that the term also invokes “long-standing stereotypes of poor whites as incestuous and sexually promiscuous, violent, alcoholic, lazy and stupid.”8 Both Bouson and Green define white trash as brainless people, but Bouson also connects white trash with things like shame, incest, uncontrolled sexuality, violence, alcoholism and idleness. Colin Webster’s definition of white trash has similarities to Bouson’s definition of the term with Webster also using the argument that white trash is lazy and sexually promiscuous. As Webster states, white trash represents “pollution, excess and worklessness far from respectability” and white trash multiplies faster due to weaker blood. Nonetheless, Webster brings something new up, because he claims that white trash is morally inferior to other white people.9 Brannon Costello also thinks that moral depravity is a significant characteristic of white trash: he argues that the distinction between decent whites and white trash is “as much moral as economic.”10 According to all these definitions, white trash is white, poor, stupid, lazy, alcoholic, violent, morally depraved, incestuous and sexually promiscuous. In short, 7 Abel Green, “‘Hillbilly’ Music”, Variety (1926) 1. J. Brooks Bouson, “‘You Nothing But Trash’: White Trash Shame in Dorothy Allison’s Bastard Out of 8 Carolina”, Southern Literary Journal (2001) 101. 9 Colin Webster, “Marginalized white ethnicity, race and crime”, Theoretical Criminology (2008) 298. 10 Brannon Costello, “Poor White Trash, Great White Hope: Race, Class and the (De)Construction of Whiteness in Lewis Nordan’s Wolf Whistle”, Critique (2004) 213. 5 white trash is “an amalgam of well-known stereotypes”: the term combines numerous (negative) stereotypes of poor whites.11 1.2. Research question & case studies The research question of this study is: To what extent have the stereotypes of poor whites been deconstructed in Hollywood movies from the 2000s? For this research question “deconstructing” means changing or eliminating particular stereotypes. In order to examine the research question, four Hollywood films will be analyzed. These four movies are Erin Brockovich (2000), 8 Mile (2002), A Love Song For Bobby Long (2004) and Black Snake Moan (2006).12 These films take place in different parts of the United States and they tell completely different stories. These movies, however, have one important thing in common: they are all “white trash films.” Furthermore, the case studies are representative of all recent white trash movies. What are white trash films? “White trash movies” are (Hollywood) films with white trash characters; and “white trash characters” are characters who exhibit several stereotypes of poor whites. What are the main characters and the storylines of the case studies? The main character of Erin Brockovich is Erin Brockovich (Julia Roberts). Erin is an unemployed single mother, desperate to find a job and having no luck. This losing streak even extends to a failed lawsuit Erin brings against a doctor over a car accident. With no alternative, Erin successfully browbeats her lawyer to give her a job at his California based law firm in compensation for the loss. At the law firm first no one takes her, with her trashy clothes and rude manners, seriously. This soon changes when she begins to investigate a suspicious real estate case involving the Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). What she discovers is that PG&E is trying to buy land that was contaminated by hexavalent chromium. Hexavalent chromium is a deadly toxic waste that PG&E is improperly and illegally dumping and, consequently, poisoning the residents in the area. As she digs deeper, Erin finds herself the leading point in a series of events that would involve her law firm in one of the biggest class action lawsuits in American history against a multibillion dollar corporation. Jimmy Smith (Eminem) is the main character of 8 Mile. He is a wannabe rapper living on the poor side of Detroit’s 8 Mile Road. He dumps his girlfriend Janeane when she tells him 11 Matt Wray and Annalee Newitz, White Trash: Race and Class in America (New York 1997) 171. 12 Erin Brockovich, Soderbergh, Steven. Jersey Films. 2000: United States. A Love Song For Bobby Long, Gabel, Shainee. Destination Films. 2004: United States. Black Snake Moan, Brewer, Craig. Paramount Classics. 2006: United States. 6 she is pregnant. To save money to make a demo tape, he moves into his mother’s trailer. Jimmy’s life is miserable: he has a lousy job at a sheet metal factory, and he chokes at local rap battles. Things improve when he meets Alex (Brittany Murphy). Alex is an aspiring model heading for New York. She becomes his girlfriend, and a fast-talking pal promises him to set up a demo. Unfortunately, Alex is not faithful to him, his mother rejects him, rifts surface with his friends, and he is mugged by a rival street gang. Jimmy, however, eventually acquires more shifts at the sheet metal factory, and he wins an important rap battle contest. The main characters of A Love Song For Bobby Long are Bobby Long (John Travolta), Pursy Will (Scarlett Johansson) and Lawson Pines (Gabriel Macht). In a Florida trailer park, the teenager Pursy is informed by her boyfriend that her mother passed away. She returns to her hometown, New Orleans, for the funeral and decides to live in her mother’s house. She finds, however, that the completely decayed house has two drunken dwellers: a former English professor Bobby and his former assistant Lawson, who has unsuccessfully been trying to write a book about Bobby’s life for nine consecutive years. Pursy decides to share the place, living together with them, and after their initial difficult relationship, Pursy, Bobby and Lawson disclose deep secrets and improve their lives. Rae (Christina Ricci) and Lazarus (Samuel L. Jackson) are the main characters of Black Snake Moan. Rae is the white trash tramp of a small town somewhere in rural Tennessee. She is molded by a life of sexual abuse at the hands of her father and verbal abuse from her mother, who seems to delight in reminding Rae of her mistake in not aborting her. One day Lazarus, a former blues musician who survives by truck farming, finds Rae nearly beaten to death near his home. Lazarus, who is also facing personal crisis at the dissolution of his marriage, nurses her back to health, providing her with gentle, fatherly advice as well as an education in blues music. Rae’s boyfriend Ronnie (Justin Timberlake), goaded by the man who nearly beat Rae to death, misunderstands the relationship between Rae and Lazarus, and vows to kill him. Lazarus, exhibiting a street-smart understanding of violence and its motives, calls Ronnie’s bluff, sensing that he is as troubled as Rae, and becomes a guiding force in the young couple’s resurrection. 1.3. Academic discussion This study will contribute to ongoing academic discussions on stereotyping, whiteness and perceptions of poverty in U.S. society. Stereotyping has been defined by several scholars. According to Charles Stangor, stereotyping is “the application of stereotypes when we interact 7 with people from a given group.”13 Willard F. Enteman agrees with Stangor that stereotyping is simply the use of stereotypes, but Enteman also emphasizes the connection between stereotyping and laziness. As Enteman states, a person who uses a stereotype “simply does not want to work harder than necessary to achieve a superficial result.” People who stereotype do not think carefully about situations and other human beings, even though this is necessary.14 Travis Linn takes Enteman’s critique of stereotyping one step further. Linn argues that stereotyping is very harmful. Linn claims that stereotyping is especially damaging when people use stereotypes which are based on “race, gender and other characteristics that are both inevitable and irrelevant to personal worth.”15 Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin point out that not only people, but also Hollywood contributes to “simplified notions of race and ethnicity via the use of stereotypes.”16 Numerous scholars claim that in the United States mainly non-whites, and in particular African Americans, are the victim of stereotyping. Timothy Brezina and Kenisha Winder argue that stereotyping affects the daily lives of the majority of African Americans in the U.S. Especially white Americans think that the reason why black Americans are at an economic disadvantage is that they are lazy and unwilling to support themselves.17 Francis T. McAndrew and Adebowale Akande agree with Brezina and Winder that stereotyping of African Americans still occurs frequently. There was a decline of stereotyping of African Americans from the 1930s through the 1970s, but stereotyping of black Americans increased again during the 1980s.18 John Hoberman gives a clear example of stereotyping of African Americans. African Americans are dominant in the world of sports, and that is why many Americans assume that black Americans are athletes by temperament and genetic endowment. This seemingly harmless assumption angers many African Americans, because they expect 13 Charles Stangor, “Volume Overview” in: Charles Stangor ed., Stereotypes and Prejudice: Essential Readings (Philadelphia 2000) 1. 14 Willard F. Enteman, “Stereotyping, Prejudice and Discrimination” in: Paul Martin Lester and Susan Dente Ross eds., Images That Injure: Pictorial Stereotypes in the Media (Westport 2003) 9-10. 15 Travis Linn, “Media Methods that Lead to Stereotypes” in: Paul Martin Lester and Susan Dente Ross eds., Images That Injure: Pictorial Stereotypes in the Media (Westport 2003) 9-10. 16 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 49. 17 Timothy Brezina and Kenisha Winder, “Economic Disadvantage, Status Generalization and Negative Racial Stereotyping By White Americans”, Social Psychology Quarterly (2003) 402. 18 Francis T. McAndrew and Adebowale Akande, “African Perceptions of Americans of African and European Descent”, The Journal of Social Psychology (1995) 649. 8 from their fellow Americans that they recognize their complexity as human beings. 19 This study will point out as well that people who stereotype ignore the complexities and personalities of others. Although white Americans are rarely the subject of stereotyping, poor whites are stereotyped quite a bit in the United States. After all, the term “white trash” is a result of stereotyping of poor whites. Nevertheless, most scholars seem to overlook poor whites (and the fact that they are often the victim of stereotyping). All contributors to Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic’s Critical White Studies solely connect whiteness to dominance and privilege. Bonnie Kae Grover argues that white is “the dominant race,” and that “good jobs, a fine education, nice neighborhoods, and the good life” are white entitlements.20 Ruth Frankenberg claims that white culture is dominant, and George A. Martinez argues that “even after slavery ended, the status of being white continued to be a valuable asset, carrying with it a set of assumptions, privileges and benefits.”21 Benshoff and Griffin write in their study on the representation of race, class, gender and sexuality in American film that “those considered white or of Anglo-Saxon descent still seem to have more privilege and opportunity than do those of other races.”22 Richard Dyer also claims, in his excellent study on the representation of whiteness in Western visual culture, that whites have a position of privilege and power. In his study, Dyer analyzes numerous movies with white people, but he does not mention any films about poor whites.23 Matt Wray is one of the few scholars who does recognize the existence of poor whites in America. Wray argues that poor whites have severely been stigmatized as white trash from 1800 to 1870.24 Wray and Annalee Newitz claim that nowadays white racism is not only directed against non-whites but also against poor whites. Stereotyping is a significant aspect 19 John Hoberman, “The Price of ‘Black Dominance’”, Society (2000) 49-50. 20 Bonnie Kae Grover, “Growing Up White in America?” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 34. 21 Ruth Frankenberg, “White Women, Race Matters: The Social Construction of Whiteness” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 633. George A. Martinez, “Mexican-Americans and Whiteness” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 210. 22 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 7. 23 Richard Dyer, White (London 1997) 9. 24 Wray, Not Quite White. 9 of this white racism.25 This study will try to raise awareness of both the existence and the stereotyping of poor whites in the United States. Although white poverty is not widely recognized in America, poverty itself is certainly acknowledged by U.S. society. What are the 20th century perceptions of poverty in U.S. society? When you take the ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism” into account, it is not surprising that the poor in the United States have been despised during the entire 20th century. After all, poor people have failed to fulfill the dominant ideology in America. According to James T. Patterson, “inhospitable opinions about the poor are among the most durable features of America’s experience with poverty and welfare since 1900.”26 Americans assumed that in most cases people were poor due to lack of effort. Martin Gilens claims that this is the main reason why so many Americans hated welfare in the 20th century; they were convinced that the majority of welfare recipients did not deserve welfare.27 Frank Stricker draws a less rigid image of the 20th century perceptions of welfare and poverty in U.S. society than Patterson and Gilens do. Stricker argues that 60% of the American people hated welfare in the late 1970s, but that only 40% of all Americans disliked welfare in the 1980s.28 This study will broaden the discussion of the 20th century perceptions of poverty in U.S. society by discussing the American public’s awareness of black and white poverty during the 20th century. To conclude, significant volumes of research have been conducted on stereotyping, and in particular the harmful consequences of stereotyping. Several scholars have pointed out that the American people detested the poor during the 20th century. Nonetheless, most scholars still overlook poor whites (and the fact that they are frequently the victim of stereotyping) in both U.S. society and Hollywood movies. This study will acknowledge both the existence and the stereotyping of poor whites in the United States by analyzing Hollywood films about poor whites. More specifically, this study will examine to what extent the stereotypes of poor whites have been deconstructed in Hollywood movies from the 2000s. This has not been done before, and therefore this study will fill a research gap. 25 Wray and Newitz, White Trash. 26 James T. Patterson, America’s Struggle against Poverty in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge 2000) 202. 27 Martin Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy (Chicago 2000) 1-2. 28 Frank Stricker, Why America Lost the War on Poverty – And How to Win It (Chapel Hill 2007) 179. 10 1.4. Chapter structure The above mentioned research question will be tackled thematically. The theoretical framework will be discussed in Chapter 2. The theoretical framework involves stereotyping, whiteness and stars. 20th and 21st century images of the poor in both U.S. society and Hollywood films will be explored in Chapter 3. This information is essential in order to be able to understand Hollywood’s changing portrayal of poor whites. The theory on stereotyping, whiteness and stars will be applied to Erin Brockovich, 8 Mile, A Love Song For Bobby Long and Black Snake Moan in Chapter 4, and the research question will be answered in Chapter 5. 11 2. Stereotyping, whiteness and stars 2.1. Introduction “I think... I think we’re f#cked up. I know I am. But that don’t mean what I feel ain’t real, that I can’t love somebody. And I know what I done is real real bad, but um... [pause] So if you want to quit on me I understand. But please don’t.” says Rae to her boyfriend Ronnie in Black Snake Moan (2006).29 Obviously Rae begs Ronnie not to leave her, but she also makes an effort to analyze Ronnie and herself. There is, however, a whole theoretical framework necessary to analyze white trash characters like Rae and Ronnie. This study’s theoretical framework will be discussed in this chapter. The theoretical framework involves stereotyping, whiteness and stars. Why are stereotyping, whiteness and stars relevant for analyzing white trash movies? By definition, white trash films include characters who exhibit various stereotypes of poor whites, and viewers of white trash movies often recognize these stereotypes, thus stereotyping is an important aspect of (watching) white trash movies. Obviously, numerous characters in white trash movies are white and poor. The combination of being white and poor makes the skin color of these characters highly significant. The reasons for this will be explained in this chapter. Finally, Erin Brockovich (2000) and 8 Mile (2002) are star vehicles, and Julia Roberts and Eminem are the stars in these white trash movies. 30 A star vehicle is a movie that is primarily made in order to enhance an actor’s career. Frequently a star vehicle uses the star’s image in a particular way. For this study, it is important to note how Roberts’ and Eminem’s images are used in Erin Brockovich and 8 Mile. 2.2. Stereotyping This study’s theoretical framework involves stereotyping. While watching a white trash movie, we often apply stereotypes to several white characters. What exactly are stereotypes and stereotyping? According to Charles Stangor, “stereotypes are beliefs about the characteristics of groups of individuals.” Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin’s definition of the term is highly similar; they write that stereotypes are “oversimplified images of a person 29 Black Snake Moan, Brewer, Craig. Paramount Classics. 2006: United States. 30 Erin Brockovich, Soderbergh, Steven. Jersey Films. 2000: United States. 8 Mile, Hanson, Curtis. Imagine Entertainment. 2002: United States. 12 or group.”31 An example of a stereotype is that poor whites are ignorant, violent and incestuous. Stereotyping is the use of stereotypes; it is the application of stereotypes when we interact with people from a given social group.32 Stereotypes and stereotyping are not the only significant concepts for analyzing white trash movies. Social categorization, subtyping and individuation are relevant concepts as well. Stereotyping is the result of social categorization. When watching a white trash movie, social categorization frequently occurs. In general, however, social categorization occurs when, rather than thinking about another person as a unique individual, we instead think of the person as a member of a group of people. We can do this, for instance, on the basis of someone’s physical features (such as skin color, gender or age) or other types of categories (such as nationality, occupation or mental condition). Once we categorize someone, thoughts and feelings about the categorized person are also quickly activated.33 While watching a white trash movie, social categorization occurs when we see a character who exhibits one or more of the characteristics of white trash, and we think of the character as someone who is white trash. Indeed, we sometimes go beyond social categorization. When do we do this? According to Stangor: “Although we may normally begin with social categorization when we first meet someone, we may, at least in some cases, go beyond this initial step. Whether or not we do so will depend upon our current relationship with the other person as well as our goals for further relationships with him or her. If we find the person interesting or relevant enough, or if we are dependent upon them for some reason, then we are likely to go beyond social categorization to learn more about the person.”34 The story of a film always evolves around the main characters, and therefore the main characters often become important to the audience. When this occurs we go beyond social categorization with the main characters of a white trash movie. 31 Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin, America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality at the Movies (Oxford 2009) 428. 32 Charles Stangor, “Volume Overview” in: Charles Stangor ed., Stereotypes and Prejudice: Essential Readings (Philadelphia 2000) 1. 33 Stangor, “Volume Overview”, 2. 34 Stangor, “Volume Overview”, 3. 13 One potential outcome that can occur when we continue to learn about someone is known as subtyping. Subtyping can occur both in real life and while watching a white trash movie. According to Stangor: “Subtyping occurs when the individual recategorizes the individual into a lower level social category (a subtype). Subtyping involves combining information from two or more categories together to form our judgment of the person. Because subtypes provide even more meaningful information about the person than do broader social categories, they are likely to be used routinely when we think about people.”35 While watching a white trash movie, subtyping can occur when we, for instance, first think of a character as a white person, but later subtype him as a poor white person if we subsequently learn this information about him. In this case a second category (his income) has been combined with the first category (his skin color), and our judgments about the character may change. Sometimes it may not be possible to classify the individual into a subtype, and individuation may occur. For this study about deconstructing white trash movies, individuation is the most relevant concept. When individuation occurs, the deconstruction of stereotypes occurs as well. What is individuation? Individuation, according to Stangor, means that: “Rather than using a person’s social category or categories as a basis of judgment, we consider them instead in terms of their own unique personality. Individuation is likely to occur when there is no social category that seems relevant, or when the person behaves so inconsistently with the category that it no longer seems relevant. In this case the category membership of the person becomes only one small part of the information that we use to make sense of the person.”36 By definition, it is very difficult to individuate white trash characters, because they behave in highly stereotypical ways. However, when we are watching a white trash movie, individuation can occur when a white trash character behaves so inconsistently with their category that it no longer seems relevant. In this context, it is important to keep in mind that individuation coincides with the deconstruction of stereotypes of poor whites. A great 35 Stangor, “Volume Overview”, 3. 36 Stangor, “Volume Overview”, 3-4. 14 example of this is Mandy Moore as Sally Kendoo in American Dreamz (2006).37 Sally seems to be a white trash country girl: she is poor, white, stupid, morally depraved and sexually promiscuous, and she looks like Britney Spears; but she appears to be a shrewd business woman who becomes the host of a wildly popular television talent show. 2.3. Whiteness This study’s theoretical framework involves not only stereotyping, but also whiteness. White trash movies touch upon significant debates concerning whiteness and racial imagery. Richard Dyer argues that racial imagery is central to the organization of the modern world. The countless small decisions that constitute the practices of the world are at every point informed by judgments about people’s capacities, judgments based on what people look like, where they come from, how they speak and even what they eat. These judgments are all racial judgments. Each day people everywhere across the world struggle to overcome the stereotypes and barriers of race. Race is not the only factor governing these things, but race is always one of the factors.38 There has been an enormous amount of analysis of racial imagery in the past few decades, but until recently a notable absence from such work has been the study of images of white people. Indeed, to say that one is interested in race has come to mean that one is interested in any racial imagery other than that of whites. That is why the average moviegoer thinks about issues of race only when seeing a film about a racial or ethnic minority group.39 Race, however, is not only attributable to people who are not white, nor is imagery of nonwhite people the only racial imagery. It is necessary to examine the racial imagery of white people – thus not the images of other races in white cultural production, but the imagery of whites themselves. This is necessary because as long as race is something only applied to non-white people and white people are not racially seen and named, whites function as a human norm.40 In other words, as Benshoff and Griffin state, “when it goes unmentioned, whiteness is positioned as a default category, the center or the assumed norm on which everything else is based.”41 37 American Dreamz, Weitz, Paul. NBC Universal Television. 2006: United States. 38 Richard Dyer, White (London 1997) 1. 39 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 52. 40 Dyer, White, 1. 41 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 53. 15 Research – on museum exhibitions, books, advertisements, movies, TV-shows and computer games – repeatedly shows that in Western representation white people are overwhelmingly and disproportionately predominant. Whites have the central and elaborated roles, and therefore most stars are also white. Above all, white people are placed as the norm. Whites are everywhere in representation. This, however, along with their placement as the norm, represents whites not as whites but as people who are variously gendered, classed and sexualised. At this level of racial representation, white people are not of a certain race, they are just the human race.42 Benshoff and Griffin claim that whiteness is most often invisible to people who consider themselves to be white; but many non-whites “are often painfully aware of the dominance of whiteness, precisely because they are repeatedly excluded from its privileges.”43 This is crucial to the security with which whites occupy their privileged position. White people are taught to believe that all that they do, good and bad, all that they achieve, is to be accounted for in terms of their individuality. Whites cannot believe that they obtain a job, a nice house, or a helpful response at school or in hospitals, because of their skin color, but because of their unique and achieving personality.44 While watching a white trash movie it is interesting to see how the white trash characters deal with white people’s position of privilege and power. Do they feel ashamed that they have failed to take advantage of their privileged position? Or do they not feel ashamed, because they know that life can be hard for whites as well? For example, the introductory quote of this study (“I’m a piece of f#cking white trash, I say it proudly”) suggests that Jimmy is not ashamed at all that he failed to take advantage of white people’s position of privilege and power. Why is he not ashamed of himself?45 As said before, this study’s theoretical framework involves both stereotyping and whiteness. What is the connection between these two and how does stereotyping and whiteness apply to white trash movies? There is a connection between stereotyping and whiteness, but this connection is very weak. The reason for this is that not whites, but nonwhites have always been severely stereotyped. One cannot come up with a limited range of endlessly repeated images for white people, because the privilege of being white in white culture is not to be subjected to stereotyping in relation to one’s whiteness. Whites are solely 42 Dyer, White, 3. 43 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 53. 44 Dyer, White, 9. 45 The questions that are posed in this chapter will be answered in Chapter 4. 16 stereotyped in terms of gender, nationality, class, sexuality and ability. Whiteness generally colonises the stereotypical definition of all social categories other than those of race. To be normal, even to be normally abnormal (gay, disabled), is to be white. White people in their whiteness, however, are imaged as individual and/or endlessly diverse, complex and changing.46 White trash movies are exceptions to this rule because in these films white people are strongly stereotyped, and not only in terms of gender, nationality, class, sexuality and ability. Thus white trash movies are one of the few film genres that connect whiteness with stereotyping. According to Dyer’s theory on whiteness, white people have the monopoly on individuality.47 Whites, however, do not only have the monopoly on individuality, white people are also the ones thought of as being capable of mental and intellectual tasks; while non-white people are thought of as being more basely physical and even animalistic. White culture has repeatedly constructed and exploited stereotypes of non-whites as being overly sexualized. Benshoff and Griffin argue that throughout U.S. history “fear and hysteria about ‘rampant and animalistic’ non-white sexualities (as opposed to ‘regulated and healthy’ white sexualities) have been used to justify both institutional and individual violence against nonwhite people.”48 “Sexual promiscuity” is one of the characteristics of white trash. When we are watching a white trash movie it is interesting to see that some white trash characters are sexually promiscuous. Does this mean that white trash people have a non-white soul in a white body? Or do white trash movies show us that whites can be as flawed as non-whites? White trash movies touch on important debates regarding whiteness and racial purity. Dyer claims that genealogical research has partially been motivated by the search for the origins of humankind. In this perspective, white people represent the only sub-race that has remained pure to the human race’s Aryan forbears.49 In this way, white people are represented as moral and good, while non-white people are often characterized as immoral and inferior.50 In the quest for purity, whites win either way: either they are a distinct, pure race, superior to all others, or they are the purest expression of the human race itself. What is striking in either version is the emphasis on purity and of the special purity of whiteness. 51 The ideology of 46 Dyer, White, 11-12. 47 Dyer, White, 11-12. 48 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 54. 49 Dyer, White, 22. 50 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 54. 51 Dyer, White, 22. 17 “white patriarchal capitalism” clearly reflects this theory of the superiority of the white race, because the ideology considers white people somehow better than non-white people. If races are conceptualised as pure, then miscegenation threatens that purity. Given the actual history of interbreeding in the imperial history of the past few centuries, it is not surprising that various means have been found to deal with this threat to whiteness.52 According to Benshoff and Griffin, throughout much of U.S. history “marriages were carefully arranged to keep a family lineage ‘pure,’ and laws prohibiting interracial marriage were common in most states. If there were non-white relationships within a family tree, they would frequently be hidden or denied.”53 In white trash movies it is interesting to see how the film deals with the subject of the special purity of whiteness. Do white trash characters have relationships with non-white characters? Do white trash characters have sex with non-whites? In American Dreamz, for instance, several characters are Arab American, Jewish American and African American, but Sally’s boyfriend is white. Does this make her less white trash? White trash movies broach relevant debates concerning whiteness and the naked body. Dyer argues that until the 1980s, it was rare to see a white man semi-naked in popular culture. Art galleries, sporting events and pornography offered socially sanctioned or cordoned-off images, but the cinema, the major visual narrative form of the 20th century, only did so in particular cases. This was not the case with non-white male bodies. In the Western, the plantation drama and the jungle adventure film, the non-white body was routinely on display. There were, however, two exceptions: the boxing film and the adventure film in a colonial setting with a star possessed of a champion or built body.54 White trash movies are also one of the exceptions, because in these films the white body is regularly on display. A wonderful example of this is Natalie Portman as Novalee Nation in Where The Heart Is (2000).55 Novalee is poor, white, ignorant and sexually promiscuous, and she shows off her beautiful body in almost every scene. The two common features of adventure films – a champion/built body and a colonial setting – set the terms for looking at the naked white male body. The white man has been the center of attention for many centuries of Western culture, but there is a problem with the display of his body, which gives another inflection to the general paradox of whiteness and visibility. A naked body is a vulnerable body. This is so in the most fundamental sense – the 52 Dyer, White, 25. 53 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 54. 54 Dyer, White, 146. 55 Where The Heart Is, Williams, Matt. Wind Dancer Productions. 2000: United States. 18 bare body has no protection from the elements – but also in a social sense. Clothes are bearers of prestige, notably of wealth, status and class: to be without them is to lose prestige. Nakedness may also reveal the imperfections of the body by comparison with social ideals. It may betray the relative similarity of male and female, white and non-white bodies, undo the merciless insistence on difference and power carried by clothes. The exposed white male body is susceptible to pose the legitimacy of white male power: why should people who look like that – so unimpressive, so like others – have so much power?56 White trash people do not have wealth, status and power, and their shabby clothes are not bearers of prestige. Their worn-out clothes are only bearers of poverty. Do their worn-out clothes make them more white trash? There is also value in the white male body being seen. On the one hand, the body often figures very effectively as a point of final justification of social difference. By this argument, whites – and men – are where they are socially by virtue of their bodily superiority. The sight of the body can be a kind of proof. On the other hand, the white insistence on spirit, on a transcendent relation to the body, has also led to a view that perhaps non-whites have better bodies, run faster, reproduce more easily and have bigger muscles. The possibility of white bodily inferiority falls heavily on the shoulders of those white men who are not at the top of the spirit pile, those for whom their body is their only capital. Particularly in the context of white working-class or “underachieving” masculinity, an affirmation of the value and even superiority of the white male body has special resonance.57 White trash people probably value their own bodies very highly as well, because their body is their only possession. But is this also the case in white trash movies? If so, for what do the white trash characters use their body? A clear example of this is Hilary Swank as Maggie Fitzgerald in Million Dollar Baby (2004).58 Maggie is poor, white and uneducated. Under guidance of boxing trainer Frankie Dunn (Clint Eastwood), Maggie becomes a boxing champion and earns a lot of money. Thus Maggie literally uses her body to escape poverty. 2.4. Stars This study’s theoretical framework involves stereotyping and whiteness, but also stars. Two of the case studies within this study (Erin Brockovich and 8 Mile) are star vehicles, and the 56 Dyer, White, 146. 57 Dyer, White, 146-147. 58 Million Dollar Baby, Eastwood, Clint. Warner Bros. Pictures. 2004: United States. 19 presence of stars in these white trash movies is highly significant. Dyer claims that the fact that a given star is in a film is part of the audience’s foreknowledge. According to Benshoff and Griffin, fans of a particular star want to see any of the star’s films, and stars are therefore used to sell films, giving movies a kind of brand-name appeal.59 The star’s name and his/her appearance (including the sound of his/her voice and dress styles associated with him/her) all signify that condensation of attitudes and values which is the star’s image. The star’s image is used in the construction of a character in a film in three different ways: selective use, perfect fit and problematic fit.60 While watching a white trash movie it is interesting to see how the star’s image is used in the construction of a white trash character. It is important to note whether the use of the star’s image is a selective use, a perfect fit or a problematic fit. A film may, through its use of the other signs of character and the rhetoric of film, bring out certain features of the star’s image and ignore others. In other words, from the structured polysemy of the star’s image certain meanings are selected in accord with the overriding conception of the character in the film. This selective use of a star’s image is problematic for a film, in that it cannot guarantee that the particular aspects of a star’s image, which it selects, will be those that interest the audience. To attempt to ensure this, a film must bring the various signifying elements of the cinema to the foreground and minimise the image’s traits appropriately.61 When we are watching a white trash movie and the use of the star’s image seems to be a selective, it is relevant to note which aspects of a star’s image the film has selected. Does the movie emphasize the star’s white trash background, and/or does the film refer to the star’s previous white trash movies? In some cases, all the aspects of a star’s image fit with all the traits of a character (a perfect fit). Some aspects of the star’s image will probably not be especially important, but they will not be incompatible either. There are cases of this working with already known characters like Clark Gable as Rhett Butler in Gone with the Wind (1939) and Gérard Philipe as Julien Sorel in Le rouge et le noir (1954).62 A perfect fit can also occur with films not based on previous material, but written and developed expressly for a given star. 63 In a white 59 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 33-34. 60 Richard Dyer, Stars (London 1998) 126. 61 Dyer, Stars, 127. 62 Gone with the Wind, Fleming, Victor. Selznick International Pictures. 1939: United States. Le rouge et le noir, Autant-Lara, Claude. Documento Film. 1954: France. 63 Dyer, Stars, 129. 20 trash movie the use of the star’s image can be a perfect fit when the film has been written and developed expressly for the star or when the movie is highly autobiographical of the star’s life. In what ways does the film refer to the star’s life? Although good cases can certainly be made for both a selective use of a star’s image and perfect fits between star’s images and film characters, the powerfully, inescapably present, always-already-signifying nature of star’s images more often than not creates problems in the construction of a character. The contradictory and polysemic nature of the images makes it hard either to delimit a few aspects or to fully articulate the whole thing with the character as constructed by the other signs in the film. There are several examples of problematic fits between star’s images and characters – Lana Turner in The Postman Always Rings Twice (1946), Bette Davis in Now, Voyager (1942) and Marlon Brando in Last Tango in Paris (1972).64 These examples all specify the particular point of signification where the contradiction may be discerned. In certain cases, the contradiction may be at all points, such that one can conceptualize the problem in terms of a clash between two complex sign-clusters, the star as image and the character as otherwise constructed. A great example of this is Marilyn Monroe as Lorelei Lee in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953).65 In a white trash movie the use of the star’s image can be a problematic fit when the star’s image is completely upperclass and absolutely non-white trash. In this case the star’s image contradicts too much with the white trash character. To conclude, stereotyping, social categorization, subtyping and individuation are significant concepts for analyzing white trash movies. Also, the fact that white characters are stereotyped in white trash movies makes these films unique in the world of Western representation. The desperate position of white trash characters, their inability to control their bodies and the visibility of their bodies, makes white trash movies highly interesting study objects. Finally, while analyzing a movie that is both a white trash film and a star vehicle, it is essential to see whether the use of the star’s image is a selective use, a perfect fit or a problematic fit. 64 The Postman Always Rings Twice, Garnett, Tay. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM). 1946: United States. Now, Voyager, Rapper, Irving. Warner Bros. Pictures. 1942: United States. Last Tango in Paris, Bertolucci, Bernardo. Produzioni Europee Associati (PEA). 1972: Italy. 65 Dyer, Stars, 129-130. Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, Hawks, Howard. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation. 1953: United States. 21 3. White society’s (re)discovery of white poverty 3.1. Introduction In American Dreamz (2006), Sally’s agent advises her to manifest her white trash background on the talent show, saying, “see, people like the whole white trash thing.”66 Blockbuster white trash movies like Erin Brockovich (2000) and 8 Mile (2002) prove that this statement is correct; in particular white Americans flocked to the multiplexes to see these films. 67 These high grossing white trash movies point out, as well, that white society has been aware of white poverty during the 2000s. Perhaps this seems very obvious, because there have always been numerous poor whites in the United States, however, the release dates of most white trash films suggest that white society’s awareness of white poverty is a fairly recent phenomenon. Kalifornia (1993), Natural Born Killers (1994), Love and a .45 (1994), Freeway (1996) and Freeway II: Confessions of a Trickbaby (1999) have been released during the 1990s, and Erin Brockovich, 8 Mile, A Love Song For Bobby Long (2004), American Dreamz and Black Snake Moan (2006) have been released during the 2000s.68 This leads to the following question: Have both white society and Hollywood (re)discovered white poverty during the past few decades? This question will be examined in this chapter by exploring shifting images of the poor in both white society and Hollywood movies during the 20th century and early 21st century. Why is this question relevant for this study? This study’s research question is: To what extent have the stereotypes of poor whites been deconstructed in Hollywood movies from the 2000s? As outlined in Chapter 2, the deconstruction of stereotypes of poor whites occurs by individuating white trash characters. Viewers are the ones that individuate white trash characters, but they are only able to do this if they are aware of the existence of poor whites. That is why it is very important for this study to examine white society’s awareness of white 66 American Dreamz, Weitz, Paul. NBC Universal Television. 2006: United States. 67 Erin Brockovich, Soderbergh, Steven. Jersey Films. 2000: United States. 8 Mile, Hanson, Curtis. Imagine Entertainment. 2002: United States. 68 Kalifornia, Sena, Dominic. PolyGram Filmed Entertainment. 1993: United States. Natural Born Killers, Stone, Oliver. Warner Bros. Pictures. 1994: United States. Love and a .45, Talkington, C.M. Trimark Pictures. 1994: United States. Freeway, Bright, Matthew. The Kushner-Locke Company. 1996: United States. Freeway II: Confessions of a Trickbaby, Bright, Matthew. The Kushner-Locke Company. 1999: United States. A Love Song For Bobby Long, Gabel, Shainee. Destination Films. 2004: United States. Black Snake Moan, Brewer, Craig. Paramount Classics. 2006: United States. 22 poverty during the past few decades. Analyses of white society’s 20th century awareness of black poverty and Hollywood’s 20th century awareness of white poverty provide the necessary context. 3.2. Black and white poverty Although African Americans have always been disproportionately poor, black poverty was ignored by white society during the first half of the 20th century. The academic study of poverty in America began around the end of the 19th century. During this period social reformers and poverty experts made the first systematic efforts to describe and analyze the poor. Racial distinctions were common in these works, but, as Martin Gilens states, “such distinctions usually referred to the various white European ‘races’ such as the Irish, Italians and Poles; this early poverty literature had little or nothing to say about blacks.” 69 In 1904, Robert Hunter’s study Poverty was published, in which he uses statistical and ethnographic accounts of poverty to describe America’s poor. Hunter discusses the work habits, nutritional needs and intelligence of the Italians, Irish, Poles, Hungarians, Germans and Jews, but he does not pay any attention to African Americans.70 From a 21st century point of view, it seems rather odd that Hunter and other early 20th century writers made strong distinctions between several white “races.” Until the second half of the 20th century, white society considered Americans from Jewish, Southern European or Eastern European descent, as less white than Americans from Northwestern European descent. In 1933, Daniel Katz and Kenneth Braly surveyed (mainly white) undergraduate students of Princeton University about their perceptions of various ethnic groups. As Gilens states, “Students were given a list of eighty-four traits and were asked to select the five that were ‘most characteristic’ of the group in question. In characterizing blacks, 75 percent chose ‘lazy’ as among these five traits; it was second in popularity after ‘superstitious’ and twice as popular as the next most frequently chosen trait, ‘happygo-lucky.’ In contrast, the students chose ‘lazy’ as a characteristic of only one of the nine other ethnic groups in the survey (Italians), and only 12 percent chose ‘lazy’ as one of the five most characteristic traits of this group.”71 69 Martin Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy (Chicago 2000) 103. 70 Robert Hunter, Poverty (New York 1904). 71 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 156. 23 Although Princeton students are not average Americans, the survey suggests that white society thought less of Italian Americans than of English, Dutch, German and Scandinavian Americans. Early 20th century Hollywood movies revealed that white society did not ascribe the moral and good characteristics of “real” white people to Irish Americans and Italian Americans. As Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin state, early American films “typically showed Irish Americans as small, fiery-tempered, heavy-drinking, working-class men.”72 And Irish American women were typically represented in early Hollywood movies like The Finish of Bridget McKeen (1901) as ill-bred, unintelligent house servants.73 Early American cinema did not think any better of Italian Americans than of Irish Americans; stereotypical representations of people of Italian heritage included that of an assimilationist small businessman, a socialist radical or anarchist, and a Latin Lover. Rudolph Valentino was the most famous Latin Lover of the 1920s; he had been born in Italy and appeared in films such as The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (1921) and The Sheik (1921).74 During the 1920s, many African Americans migrated from the rural southern states to cities in the Midwest and Northeast of the United States. This mass migration caused growing black communities in several northern cities, such as Philadelphia, New York, Boston, Detroit, Chicago and Minneapolis. These large black communities, in particular the emergence of Harlem as a well-known urban black neighborhood, brought some attention to black poverty. White society finally seemed to acknowledge African Americans. During this period popular white-oriented mass-circulation magazines printed numerous stories on African American life and culture. As Gilens states, however, “this increased attention focused more on blacks as symbols of the Jazz Age and on Harlem as a place of ‘laughing, swaying and dancing.’ White Americans remained profoundly uninformed and unconcerned about black poverty.”75 72 Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin, America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality at the Movies (Oxford 2009) 56. 73 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 56-57. The Finish of Bridget McKeen, Edison Manufacturing Company. 1901: United States. 74 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 61-62. The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, Ingram, Rex. Metro Pictures Corporation. 1921: United States. The Sheik, Melford, George. Paramount Pictures. 1921: United States. 75 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 103. 24 During the 1930s, almost every American suffered from the Great Depression. This economic downturn caused mass unemployment in all states. The Great Depression increased white society’s attention for poverty. Nonetheless, white writers and commentators kept ignoring black poverty. I.M. Rubinow’s book Quest for Security, for instance, was published during the worst years of the depression. Although Quest for Security has often been cited in literature on poverty, Rubinow makes no mention of African Americans in his study.76 During the 1940s, poverty remained a pressing concern, but the bombing of Pearl Harbor and America’s participation in the Second World War understandably focused the public’s concern elsewhere.77 During the aftermath of World War II, the American public shifted its attention from the war to rebuilding the domestic economy and fighting communism in both the United States and abroad. America’s economy flourished, wealth increased, living standards rose quickly, and poverty seemed like a distant problem. Gilens claims that “poverty in the United States declined from 48 percent in 1935, to 27 percent in 1950, to 21 percent in 1960.” 78 With more money to spend, Americans changed their lifestyles drastically. By 1960, 86 percent of all American homes had televisions, numerous Americans had moved to the suburbs and even more Americans owned a car. Nevertheless, poverty still existed in the United States. During the 1950s, Americans – and American journalists – ignored this fact, because they were too busy celebrating America’s prosperity; consequently, Time, Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report each published an average of just sixteen stories on poverty during the entire decade.79 Although the American public lost interest in poverty during the 1950s, white society paid considerable attention to white poverty throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. During this period white Americans could read about white poverty in newspapers, magazines and books, but Hollywood made sure that they could also see poor whites on the big screen. The image of the hillbilly, in particular, appeared in numerous Hollywood movies. Like “white trash,” “the hillbilly” is a combination of numerous stereotypes of poor whites. According to Anthony Harkins, the hillbilly is “typically associated with the Ozarks or Appalachia” and is “filthy, lazy, uncivilized, drunk and impoverished not only economically 76 I.M. Rubinow, Quest for Security (New York 1934). 77 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 103. 78 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 103-104. 79 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 103-104. 25 and culturally but also genetically.”80 According to Harkins’ definition, a hillbilly and someone who is white trash are very similar to each other; they are both not only white and poor, but also the scum of the earth. During the period between the end of the First World War and the aftermath of the Second World War, mountaineer characters appeared in almost every film genre: action movies, thrillers, documentaries, social dramas, musicals, comedies, cartoons and even government propaganda. Although moviegoers were already weary of ignorant moonshiner and feudist stereotypes during the mid-1910s, these portrayals remained dominant during the 1920s. As the savage mountaineer persona increasingly lost credibility during the late 1920s, however, it was gradually replaced by the hillbilly. The image of the hillbilly dominated Hollywood movies about poor whites during the span of the 1930s and held sway through the end of World War II. After the Second World War, hoary stereotypes of barefoot and longbearded feuding hillbillies came increasingly under attack. Hollywood reinvented the hillbilly image once again, this time in the guise of rustic but domesticated Ma and Pa Kettle. The Kettle films became enormously popular. In these movies, as Harkins states, “the hillbilly persona represented a cracked mirror image of postwar attitudes about the sanctity of the child-focused nuclear family and the new, and for many, unsettling, suburban and consumerist American society.”81 By the mid-1950s, when white society started to ignore America’s poor, the Kettle films decreased in popularity, and the hillbilly image disappeared from Hollywood’s radar.82 As said before, white Americans lost interest in poverty during the 1950s. During the 1960s, however, white society rediscovered poverty. Several excellent books on poverty were published, such as John Kenneth Galbraith’s The Affluent Society and Michael Harrington’s The Other America. Stimulated by these publications, the American public and policy makers began once more to notice the poor.83 John F. Kennedy helped to raise awareness of poverty in the United States as well. During the presidential campaign of 1960, Kennedy is said to have been shaken by the grinding poverty that he saw in West Virginia. In this state, countless poor whites lived in rural poverty due to a lack of both education and job opportunities. As President of the United States, Kennedy created a number of antipoverty programs focusing 80 Anthony Harkins, Hillbilly: A Cultural History of an American Icon (New York 2004). 81 Harkins, Hillbilly, 142. 82 Harkins, Hillbilly, 141-171. 83 John Kenneth Galbraith, The Affluent Society (Boston 1958). Michael Harrington, The Other America: Poverty in the United States (New York 1962). 26 on juvenile delinquency, education and training programs, and he provided federal assistance for needy regions of the United States. The poverty programs of the early 1960s, and the popular images of the poor that went along with them, however, were as Gilens states, “just as pale in complexion as those of the turn of the century.”84 Both the media and Kennedy’s cabinet members did not pay much attention to poor African Americans. The dominant image of poverty at this time was the image of the white hillbilly.85 Popular images of poverty changed dramatically, however, during the mid-1960s. White society had ignored poor African Americans for centuries, but black poverty started to dominate public thinking about poverty during the mid-1960s. This racialization of the poor turned poverty into a solely black problem; white poverty virtually disappeared from the public’s attention. One significant social change made the racialization of popular images of the poor possible. This change was the huge migration of African Americans from the rural South to the urban Midwest and Northeast. At the turn of the 20th century, more than 90 percent of all African Americans lived in the South, and three-quarters of all African Americans lived in rural areas. African Americans had been leaving the South at a slow rate for decades; during the 1920s, many rural southern African Americans migrated, for instance, to northern cities. Black migration from the South, however, increased tremendously during the 1940s and 1950s. According to Gilens, “the average black out-migration from the South between 1910 and 1939 was only 55,000 people per year. But during the 1940s it increased to 160,000 per year, during the 1950s it declined slightly (to 146,000 per year), and between 1960 and 1966 it fell to 102,000 per year.”86 In 1910, African Americans accounted for only 2 percent of all Americans living in the Midwest and Northeast. As a consequence of the migration during the 1940s and 1950s, however, African Americans made up 7 percent of all northerners by 1960, and 12 percent of the northern city population.87 Both Gilens and Frank Stricker claim that the civil rights movement played an important role in white society’s discovery of black poverty. The civil rights movement dominated the mid-1960s and fought for equal rights, black enfranchisement and an end to legal segregation. The civil rights movement’s most significant successes were the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Civil Rights Act prohibited segregation in public accommodations and banned discrimination by trade unions 84 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 104. 85 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 104. 86 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 104-105. 87 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 104-105. 27 and schools. The Civil Rights Act also called for the desegregation of public schools and outlawed some of the voting procedures used to impede African Americans. The Voting Rights Act banned literacy tests and established federal government oversight of registration and voting in jurisdictions with low voter turnout. As a consequence of these acts and other legal measures, nationwide voter registration rates among African Americans increased from only 29 percent in 1962 to 67 percent in 1970.88 During the late 1960s, civil rights leaders shifted their attention from legal inequality to economic inequality. The battle for black enfranchisement in the South had a long way to go because southern white society resisted both legal and economic equality for African Americans. Nevertheless, as Gilens states, “the first large urban uprisings during the summer of 1964 and the greater number of ghetto riots during the summers to follow shifted both the geographical and programmatic focus of the struggle for racial equality.” 89 During the early 1960s, civil rights leaders had already tried to reduce racial economic inequality in the United States. In 1963, the National Urban League had called for a “crash program of special effort to close the gap between the conditions of Negro and white citizens” and released a ten-point “Marshall Plan for the American Negro.” In the same year, Martin Luther King issued a similarly conceived “G.I. Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged.” Unfortunately, these early efforts were not successful because the struggle for basic civil rights in the South drew all of the attention.90 In 1966, however, Martin Luther King and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) focused their attention on the miserable living conditions of the African Americans in the northern ghettos. King and the SCLC organized demonstrations and rent strikes in Chicago to dramatize the horrible economic conditions of countless urban African Americans. King called for a number of measures aimed at improving the lives of Chicago’s African American population: integrating the segregated public schools, reallocating public services to better serve minority populations, building low-rent public housing units, and removing public funds from banks that refused to make loans to African Americans. King did his best, but he achieved very little in Chicago. Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago said that King’s efforts were unnecessary, because his administration was already doing a lot to improve the lives of poor African Americans. More moderate Chicago-based civil rights 88 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 108. Frank Stricker, Why America Lost the War on Poverty – And How to Win It (Chapel Hill 2007) 100. 89 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 108. Stricker, Why America Lost the War on Poverty, 100. 90 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 108-109. Stricker, Why America Lost the War on Poverty, 100. 28 leaders resented King’s intrusion into their affairs and the attention he received from the media. Black militants called King a sell-out for talking to the white political powers. King’s concern with the economic problems of urban northern African Americans was not completely worthless, however. With his efforts in Chicago, King helped to focus public attention on the problem of black poverty.91 At least as important as the shifting focus of civil rights leaders (from legal inequality to economic inequality) were the ghetto riots. Poor African Americans forced white Americans to acknowledge them once and for all. During the smoldering summer of 1964, riots broke out in several northern cities and neighborhoods, such as Harlem, Rochester, Chicago, Philadelphia and Jersey City. Property damage was estimated at $6 million. The ghetto riots of the mid-1960s received wide media coverage and white society could not ignore the economic problems of poor African Americans anymore. Consequently, white Americans started to see poverty as a problem solely concerning African Americans. White poverty disappeared from white society’s radar until the 1980s.92 During the mid-1960s, the contrasts between white Americans and African Americans became more prevalent in U.S. society. Consequently, white society no longer made a distinction between several white “races.” In 1967, Princeton undergraduates were surveyed again about their perceptions of various ethnic groups. In 1933, the trait “lazy” was chosen as characteristic of both African Americans and Italian Americans. In 1967, however, Princeton students only considered African Americans as lazy.93 Nonetheless, Hollywood still made a distinction between different white “races.” Although actors of Irish heritage regularly played a variety of roles instead of being typecast as only Irish characters, Italian American actors and directors did not hide their ethnicity.94 For example, Sylvester Stallone and John Travolta played Italian American protagonists in Rocky (1976) and Saturday Night Fever (1977) respectively, and Francis Ford Coppola and Martin Scorsese made a myriad of movies centered on Italian American gangsters, such as The Godfather (1972) and Mean Streets (1973).95 91 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 109. Stricker, Why America Lost the War on Poverty, 100. 92 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 109-111. Stricker, Why America Lost the War on Poverty, 100. 93 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 158. 94 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 58, 64. 95 Rocky, Avildsen, John G. Chartoff-Winkler Productions. 1976: United States. Saturday Night Fever, Badham, John. Robert Stigwood Organization (RSO). 1977: United States. The Godfather, Coppola, Francis Ford. Alfran 29 Although white Americans had forgotten about white poverty during the late 1950s, the 1960s and the 1970s, Hollywood released a few movies with white trash characters during these decades, such as Gun Girls (1957), Lorna (1964), Mudhoney (1965), Pink Flamingos (1972), Sixpack Annie (1975) and The Great Texas Dynamite Chase (1976).96 In these films teenage girls embark on crime sprees (Gun Girls, The Great Texas Dynamite Chase), busty women have sex with many men (Lorna, Sixpack Annie) and unemployed men pass the day by drinking beer and frequenting whorehouses (Mudhoney, Pink Flamingos). Apparently the American public did not want to see poor whites on the big screen during the black poverty dominated decades, because Gun Girls, Lorna, Mudhoney, Pink Flamingos. Sixpack Annie and The Great Texas Dynamite Chase were all commercial failures. During the early 1980s, an economic recession hit America and caused a decline of the gross domestic product and both an unemployment and poverty increase. As Gilens states, “per capita gross domestic product fell over 3 percent between 1981 and 1982, unemployment rose to almost 11 percent, and the poverty rate increased from about 11 percent in 1979 to over 15 percent in 1983.”97 At this time, Ronald W. Reagan was President of the United States. Reagan’s administration tried to combat the economic downturn with domestic spending cutbacks and verbal attacks on government antipoverty programs. Not surprisingly, Reagan’s efforts to “trim the safety net” caused much political controversy.98 Reagan’s controversial policymaking and the horrible living conditions of the poor brought poverty to the front-pages again. Time, Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report published only 43 stories on poverty in 1979 and 1980 combined, but in 1982 and 1983 these newsmagazines published 103 stories on America’s poor. The stories were mainly focused on the growing problems of unemployment, poverty and debates regarding the right response of the government to these problems. As Gilens states, “about 39 percent of poverty-related newsmagazine stories in 1982-83 focused on poverty or government antipoverty programs, Productions. 1972: United States. Mean Streets, Scorsese, Martin. Taplin – Perry – Scorsese Productions. 1973: United States. 96 Gun Girls, Dertano, Robert C. Eros Productions. 1957: United States. Lorna, Meyer, Russ. Eve Productions. 1964: United States. Mudhoney, Meyer, Russ. Delta Films. 1965: United States. Pink Flamingos, Waters, John. Dreamland. 1972: United States. Sixpack Annie, Broderick, John C. American International Pictures. 1975: United States. The Great Texas Dynamite Chase, Pressman, Michael. Yasny Talking Pictures. 1976: United States. 97 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 125-126. 98 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 125-126. 30 with another 28 percent on unemployment or efforts to combat it. In addition, smaller numbers of stories concerned homelessness, housing programs and legal aid (each constituting 6 percent to 8 percent of poverty coverage).”99 To conclude, during the period between the civil rights movement and Reagan’s presidency, white Americans saw poverty mainly as a black problem, but during the early 1980s white society’s attention turned once again to white poverty. White society’s rediscovery of white poverty coincided with the lowest percentage of African Americans in magazine stories on the poor since the early 1960s. During 1982 and 1983, only 33 percent of poor people portrayed in stories on poverty were African American.100 Hollywood, however, did not rediscover white poverty during the 1980s because Hollywood never stopped releasing movies with white trash characters during the course of the 20th century. Nevertheless, after only losing money with white trash movies during the late 1950s, the 1960s and the 1970s, white society’s rediscovery of white poverty during the 1980s gave Hollywood the opportunity to finally make some money with white trash films. Although 1980s white trash movies like The Galaxy Invader (1985) and Ginger Ale Afternoon (1989) failed at the box office, 1990s white trash films like Kalifornia, Natural Born Killers and Freeway were commercially successful.101 After releasing highly stereotypical white trash movies during the entire 20th century, Hollywood studios started to make different kinds of white trash films after the turn of the century. These 21st century white trash movies still show stereotypes of poor whites, but they also deconstruct the age-old stereotypes. The four case studies of this study (Erin Brockovich, 8 Mile, A Love Song For Bobby Long and Black Snake Moan) are excellent examples of these deconstructing white trash movies. 99 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 126. 100 Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare, 126. 101 The Galaxy Invader, Dohler, Don. Moviecraft Entertainment. 1985: United States. Ginger Ale Afternoon, Zielinski, Rafal. Churchill Partners. 1989: United States. 31 4. Case studies 4.1. Introduction “Everyone knows that books are better than life! That’s why they’re books!” shouts Pursy in A Love Song For Bobby Long (2004). Hollywood movies are also better than life, because one of the best-known Hollywood conventions is that all films end with a happy ending.102 21st century white Americans are highly familiar with this convention because they have been raised with Hollywood movies. As said in Chapter 1, white Americans are also extremely familiar with the ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism” because this ideology permeates most American films and the way most Americans think about themselves and the world around them.103 Keeping this convention and ideology in mind, you can easily assume that white Americans – when watching the four case studies, Erin Brockovich (2000), 8 Mile (2002), A Love Song For Bobby Long (2004) and Black Snake Moan (2006) – expect a happy ending and assume that the happy ending will be financial success (capitalism) for the white trash characters (white).104 It is common knowledge that people are moved more by a movie character’s ordeals when they know the character better. That is why white American viewers want to get to know the white trash characters very well in order to enjoy the happy ending as much as possible. Thus, they want to individuate the white trash characters. Probably they want solely to individuate the main white trash characters, because Hollywood movies generally center on either one character or a core group of characters, and this makes it more likely that the happy ending will only affect the main characters of a film. This is also the reason why this chapter will focus on the main white trash characters of the case studies: Erin, Jimmy, Bobby, Pursy, Lawson and Rae. In brief, white Americans want to individuate the main white trash characters of a white trash movie. Concepts of whiteness and stars, however, which have been discussed in Chapter 2, make the individuation of white trash characters difficult. This leads to the following questions: In what ways do concepts of whiteness and stars make the individuation 102 Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin, America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality at the Movies (Oxford 2009) 25. 103 Benshoff and Griffin, America on Film, 8-9. 104 Erin Brockovich, Soderbergh, Steven. Jersey Films. 2000: United States. 8 Mile, Hanson, Curtis. Imagine Entertainment. 2002: United States. A Love Song For Bobby Long, Gabel, Shainee. Destination Films. 2004: United States. Black Snake Moan, Brewer, Craig. Paramount Classics. 2006: United States. 32 of the main white trash characters of Erin Brockovich, 8 Mile, A Love Song For Bobby Long and Black Snake Moan difficult? To what extent do these concepts prevent white Americans from individuating the main white trash characters of the case studies? These questions will be examined in this chapter by analyzing the case studies while drawing from this study’s previous chapters. The concepts that will be discussed in this chapter are: whites’ position of privilege and power, the white naked body, the purity of whiteness and the use of the star’s image. 4.2. Whites’ position of privilege and power As discussed in the academic discussion, white people hold a position of privilege and power. It is easier for whites to get a job and a nice house than it is for non-whites.105 Jimmy (in 8 Mile), Bobby and Lawson (in A Love Song For Bobby Long), and Rae (in Black Snake Moan) all fail to take advantage of whites’ position of privilege and power. During the entire running time of 8 Mile, Jimmy lives in his mother’s trailer and works at a Detroit sheet metal factory. Although he eventually gets more shifts at the factory, he stays poor due to his low salary. In A Love Song For Bobby Long, Bobby and Lawson do not earn any money. Bobby is a former English professor and Lawson is a struggling writer, and they are basically unemployed. Rae is also unemployed in Black Snake Moan. Jimmy, Bobby, Lawson and Rae look poor, because they all wear worn-out clothes. Rae, in particular, indulges in her white trash persona. She wears brown cowboy boots, tiny blue shorts, and a small top with the American flag, the Confederate flag and two guns on it. To an outside observer, that is the odd part of these characters: they do not seem to be ashamed of their failure to take advantage of whites’ position of privilege and power. During one of the final rap battles, Jimmy even proclaims “I’m a piece of f#cking white trash, I say it proudly.” Their shamelessness makes them white trash. 105 Bonnie Kae Grover, “Growing Up White in America?” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 34. Ruth Frankenberg, “White Women, Race Matters: The Social Construction of Whiteness” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 633. George A. Martinez, “Mexican-Americans and Whiteness” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 210. Richard Dyer, White (London 1997) 9. 33 Wink (Eugene Byrd) and Jimmy (Eminem) [left picture], and Pursy (Scarlett Johansson), Bobby (John Travolta) and Lawson (Gabriel Macht) [right picture]. Look at Jimmy’s, Bobby’s and Lawson’s worn-out clothes. Rae (Christina Ricci) in her white trash outfit. For white Americans it is difficult to understand when poor whites are not ashamed of their failure to take advantage of their privileged position or are not ashamed of their failure to live up to the ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism.” These are the reasons that white American viewers think that Jimmy, Bobby, Lawson and Rae are white trash. As explained in Chapter 2, it is difficult to individuate white trash characters, because they behave in a very stereotypical manner. It is even harder to individuate white trash characters when they do not seem to use their mind. 34 4.3. White naked body Erin (in Erin Brockovich), Jimmy (in 8 Mile) and Rae (in Black Snake Moan) rely more on their bodies than on their brains. Although Erin has to think when she is investigating the Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) case, she uses her body at a crucial moment. At the Lahontan Regional Water Board office, she uses her gigantic cleavage to persuade the man behind the desk to let her look in the archives in the backroom and to let her copy numerous documents about PG&E. These documents are such valuable evidence that they convince Ed to hire her back. And when Ed asks her how she got the documents, she simply replies: “They’re called boobs, Ed.” Ed (Albert Finney) and Erin (Julia Roberts) [left picture], and Jimmy (Eminem) [right picture]. Pay attention to Erin’s persuading cleavage, and notice the physicality of Jimmy’s rapping and the muscular arms of his opponent. Jimmy and Rae do not seem to use their minds at all. Jimmy’s work at the sheet metal factory is highly physical and he solves all his problems with his fists. In 8 Mile, he has disagreements with Greg (over his mother), the Leaders of the Free World (over his rapping) and Wink (over Alex), and all of these disputes end up with a fight. By definition, rapping is showing off your verbal skills, but 8 Mile portrays rapping as something physical. The rap battles look like verbal boxing matches. The physicality of these fights is emphasized by the rappers’ muscular arms. In Black Snake Moan, Rae’s sex addiction has taken over her body and mind. She has to obey to the cravings of her body. Lazarus teaches her to resist these cravings, but her mind does not seem strong enough to actually do this. Erin, Jimmy and Rae are portrayed as very physical human beings; they are almost animalistic. Erin’s and Rae’s physical nature is emphasized by their semi-naked bodies. Both women show their bare legs, arms and cleavage in almost every scene. In white society showing an excess of skin is considered classless, and that is why their semi-nakedness makes 35 Erin and Rae increasingly white trash. In short, the physical nature of Erin, Jimmy and Rae make them all more white trash, and thus more stereotypical, which makes them harder to individuate. Erin (Julia Roberts) and Ed (Albert Finney) [left picture], and Rae (Christina Ricci) [right picture]. Notice Erin’s cleavage and bare legs, and Rae’s half-naked body. 4.4. Purity of whiteness Richard Dyer claims that genealogical research has partially been motivated by the search for the origins of humankind. In this perspective, white people represent the only sub-race that has remained pure to the human race’s Aryan forbears. Non-white people are then seen as degenerative, falling away from the true nature of the human race. In the quest for purity, whites win either way: either they are a distinct, pure race, superior to all others, or they are the purest expression of the human race itself. What is striking in either version is the emphasis on purity and the special purity of whiteness.106 If races are conceptualized as pure, then miscegenation threatens that purity.107 White society does not understand why you would hang out with non-whites if you are not forced to. That is why most white Americans do not have any black friends. In 8 Mile, Jimmy’s friends are almost all black, and this makes him more white trash. The fact that Jimmy only has sex with white women (Janeane and Alex), however, works against his white trashiness. As said before, Rae’s habit to walk around half-naked makes her more white trash. Rae’s black roommate (Lazarus) and her sexual encounters with two black men (Tehronne and Lincoln) add to her white trashiness. White Americans think that Jimmy’s choice of friends and Rae’s choice of roommates and sexual partners are trashy. These observations 106 Dyer, White, 22. 107 Dyer, White, 25. 36 make individuating Jimmy and Rae difficult, because it is hard to individuate characters that are white trash. Jimmy (Eminem) and his predominantly black friends [left picture], and Rae (Christina Ricci) and her black roommate Lazarus (Samuel L. Jackson) [right picture]. 4.5. Use of the star’s image As outlined in Chapter 2, the star’s image is used in the construction of a character in a film in three different ways: selective use, perfect fit and problematic fit. 108 A film may, through its use of the other signs of character and the rhetoric of film, bring out certain features of the star’s image and ignore others (a selective use).109 This is very much the case in Erin Brockovich. The movie clearly refers to Julia Roberts’ previous role as a prostitute in Pretty Woman (1990).110 In both films she wears tight fitting tops, miniskirts, high heels and a lot of makeup. But Erin Brockovich ignores other aspects of Roberts’ image, such as her image as America’s sweetheart. As said before, Roberts as Erin shows a lot of skin, and this habit makes Erin more white trash. The resemblances of Roberts in Erin Brockovich and Roberts in Pretty Woman add to Erin’s white trashiness. 108 Richard Dyer, Stars (London 1998) 126. 109 Dyer, Stars, 127. 110 Pretty Woman, Marshall, Garry. Touchstone Pictures. 1990: United States. 37 Julia Roberts as Vivian Ward in Pretty Woman (1990) [left picture] and as Erin Brockovich in Erin Brockovich (2000) [right picture]. Pay attention to the miniskirts and the outrageous red hair in both pictures. When we speak of a perfect fit, all the aspects of a star’s image fit with all the traits of a character.111 In 8 Mile, the use of Eminem’s image is a perfect fit: Eminem’s image is extremely white trash because he grew up in a trailer park in Detroit, many of his songs are about his white trash past, and he swears a lot. His white trash image is perfect for the role of a white trash character in a white trash movie, and clearly his white trash image adds to Jimmy’s white trashiness. 111 Dyer, Stars, 127. 38 Eminem [left picture] and Jimmy [right picture]. Look at the resemblances of Eminem and Jimmy. Furthermore, the use of Eminem’s image is a perfect fit because Eminem is a rapper and he plays a rapper in 8 Mile. Also, the film is packed with Eminem songs (“8 Mile,” “Lose Yourself”) and the movie refers in many ways to Eminem’s life. First, the film takes place in Detroit at a time when Eminem was still poor (1995). Second, both Eminem’s daughter (Hailie) and Jimmy’s little sister (Lily) are blonde, and Eminem and Jimmy adore their blonde angels tremendously, thus, Lily clearly refers to Hailie. Finally, Eminem has a bad relationship with both his mother and his ex-wife (Kim), and Jimmy has a troublesome relationship with both his mother (Stephanie) and his girlfriend (Alex). When you know these facts it is hard to keep Eminem and Jimmy apart, and this is something that 8 Mile does not seem to want us to do. For white Americans, this makes it difficult to individuate Jimmy, because they are not sure if they are watching a character (Jimmy) or a real person (Eminem). 39 Eminem and his daughter Hailie [left picture], and Jimmy and his sister Lily [right picture]. Look at the resemblances of the two pictures. 4.6. Individuation As discussed in this chapter, the concepts of whites’ position of privilege and power, the white naked body, the purity of whiteness and the use of the star’s image make the individuation of Erin (Erin Brockovich), Jimmy (8 Mile), Bobby, Pursy and Lawson (A Love Song For Bobby Long), and Rae (Black Snake Moan) difficult. These concepts make the characters white trash, and thus stereotypical, which makes them harder to individuate. Surprisingly, these concepts do not prevent white Americans from individuating the main white trash characters of the case studies. The reason for this is that Erin, Jimmy, Bobby, Pursy, Lawson and Rae go through huge positive transitions in the movies. These transitions make the characters more unique, and therefore easier to individuate. As Charles Stangor states, individuation means that “rather than using a person’s social category or categories as a basis of judgment, we consider them instead in terms of their own unique personality.”112 Thus, individuation and uniqueness go together. The big contrasts between the introductions of Erin, Jimmy, Bobby, Pursy, Lawson and Rae in the films and the happy endings of the movies point out the positive transitions of the characters. Erin is introduced as a single mother who had children at a young age, has not attended college, was fired at her previous job and who divorced her husband. She looks for a new job, but nobody wants to hire her. Erin Brockovich ends with Erin winning a major law case against a multibillion dollar company (PG&E) and receiving a $2 million paycheck. She has fulfilled the ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism,” and that is why this happy ending is not very surprising for white American viewers. The ending of 8 Mile is more surprising for 112 Charles Stangor, “Volume Overview” in: Charles Stangor ed., Stereotypes and Prejudice: Essential Readings (Philadelphia 2000) 3-4. 40 a white American audience. At the start of the film, Jimmy loses a rap battle and gets fired at a pizza place. Although the movie ends with Jimmy winning a rap battle contest and getting more shifts at the sheet metal factory, he does not become rich and famous. Thus he does not fulfill the ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism.” The ending is even more surprising for white Americans, because they know that Eminem has become a superstar rapper (who turned in his trailer for a mansion). So 8 Mile is about a character (and not a real person) after all. Bobby, Pursy and Lawson do also not fulfill the ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism” in A Love Song For Bobby Long. Nevertheless, they go through huge positive transitions. Bobby turns from an unemployed alcoholic into a loving father; Pursy turns from a high school dropout into a college student; and Lawson turns from a struggling writer/alcoholic into a writer who can actually finish a book. Although the ending of the film is joyful, white American viewers are probably amazed that there is no pot of gold for any of the white trash characters. The happy ending of Black Snake Moan is also not the happy ending that white Americans expect. Rae is introduced as a white trash nymphomaniac who cannot control her body. She not only has sex with her boyfriend (Ronnie), but also with a black drug dealer (Tehronne). At the end of the movie, she is still not cured of her sex addiction and she has not escaped poverty, but the ending is cheerful nonetheless, because she gets married to Ronnie. To conclude, white American viewers (under influence of the ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism”) expect financial success for the main white trash characters of the case studies. Only Erin, however, becomes a millionaire. Although the concepts of whites’ position of privilege and power, the white naked body, the purity of whiteness and the use of the star’s image make the individuation of Erin (in Erin Brockovich), Jimmy (in 8 Mile), Bobby, Pursy and Lawson (in A Love Song For Bobby Long), and Rae (in Black Snake Moan) difficult, these concepts do not prevent white Americans from individuating the main white trash characters of the case studies. The reason for this is that Erin, Jimmy, Bobby, Pursy, Lawson and Rae go through huge transitions, which make them more unique, and therefore easier to individuate. 41 5. Conclusion This study’s introductory quote from 8 Mile (“I’m a piece of f#cking white trash, I say it proudly”) suggests that poor whites have been portrayed in a more positive way in Hollywood movies after the turn of the century. It would appear that the representation of poor whites in Hollywood movies has been changed, and that poor whites have been represented less stereotypically in Hollywood films from the 2000s than in 20th century Hollywood movies. Evidence suggests that stereotypes of poor whites have even been deconstructed in recent Hollywood films. This leads to the research question of this study: To what extent have the stereotypes of poor whites been deconstructed in Hollywood movies from the 2000s? For the research question “deconstructing” means changing or eliminating particular stereotypes. You can break down the research question into two questions: Have stereotypes of poor whites been changed in early 21st century Hollywood films? Have stereotypes of poor whites been eliminated in early 21st century Hollywood movies? Four “white trash films” have been analyzed in order to examine the research question: Erin Brockovich (2000), 8 Mile (2002), A Love Song For Bobby Long (2004) and Black Snake Moan (2006).113 “White trash movies” are (Hollywood) films with white trash characters; and “white trash characters” are characters who exhibit numerous stereotypes of poor whites. The analyses of this study have been focused on the main white trash characters of the case studies: Erin (Erin Brockovich), Jimmy (8 Mile), Bobby, Pursy and Lawson (A Love Song For Bobby Long), and Rae (Black Snake Moan). As outlined in Chapter 4, white American viewers of the case studies want to individuate Erin, Jimmy, Bobby, Pursy, Lawson and Rae. Why do white Americans want to individuate these white trash characters? White Americans are highly familiar with both Hollywood conventions (happy ending) and America’s dominant ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism.” Therefore, when watching a white trash movie, white Americans expect a happy ending and assume that the happy ending will be financial success (capitalism) for the white trash characters (white). The audience is moved more by a film character’s ordeals when they know the character better, and that is why white Americans want to get to know the white trash characters very well so they will enjoy the happy ending as much as 113 Erin Brockovich, Soderbergh, Steven. Jersey Films. 2000: United States. 8 Mile, Hanson, Curtis. Imagine Entertainment. 2002: United States. A Love Song For Bobby Long, Gabel, Shainee. Destination Films. 2004: United States. Black Snake Moan, Brewer, Craig. Paramount Classics. 2006: United States. 42 possible. Thus they want to individuate the white trash characters. Hollywood movies generally revolve around one character or a core group of characters, and this makes it more likely that the happy ending will only affect the main characters of a film; therefore white Americans probably only want to individuate the main white trash characters: Erin, Jimmy, Bobby, Pursy, Lawson and Rae. Concepts of whiteness and stars (whites’ position of privilege and power, the white naked body, the purity of whiteness and the use of the star’s image), however, make the individuation of Erin, Jimmy, Bobby, Pursy, Lawson and Rae for white American viewers difficult because these concepts make the characters white trash, and thus stereotypical, which makes them harder to individuate. These concepts, however, do not prevent white Americans from individuating the characters. The reason for this is that Erin, Jimmy, Bobby, Pursy, Lawson and Rae go through huge positive transitions, which make them more unique, and therefore easier to individuate. “White trash” is a combination of negative stereotypes of poor whites. The fact that the main white trash characters of the case studies go through positive transitions gives a white American audience the overall impression that white trash is not all bad. Thus the case studies have added positive characteristics to an amalgam of negative stereotypes. Given the knowledge that Erin Brockovich, 8 Mile, A Love Song For Bobby Long and Black Snake Moan are representative of all recent white trash movies, you may conclude that stereotypes of poor whites have been changed in early 21st century Hollywood movies. After all, as discussed in Chapter 3, in 20th century Hollywood films white trash characters were portrayed simply as awful human beings with no positive features. Nevertheless, stereotypes of poor whites have not been eliminated in early 21st century Hollywood movies, because stereotypes of poor whites still occur in recent Hollywood films. This study applied many concepts of Whiteness Studies (whites’ position of privilege and power, the white naked body, the purity of whiteness) to four white trash movies, and this suggests that “White Trash Studies” can become a valuable branch of Whiteness Studies. Nevertheless, it is unsure if a separate white trash branch of Whiteness Studies is viable, because the academic world pays very little attention to white trash. Whiteness scholars, such as Bonnie Kae Grover, Ruth Frankenberg, George A. Martinez and Richard Dyer, for example, ignore white trash completely. Most academics probably overlook white trash, because they assume that white trash is just another term of abuse for poor whites. This study has shown, however, that “white trash” is a much more complicated term: it is a combination of the stereotypes of poor whites, 43 and the use of the term is directly connected to white society’s awareness of poor whites. In short, white poverty is mainly an economic issue, and white trash is primarily a socio-cultural phenomenon. That is why white trash asks for a different approach than white poverty. This study’s approach of white trash has been successful, and may therefore serve as a blueprint for further white trash studies. 44 6. Bibliography 6.1. Movies 8 Mile, Hanson, Curtis. Imagine Entertainment. 2002: United States. A Love Song For Bobby Long, Gabel, Shainee. Destination Films. 2004: United States. American Dreamz, Weitz, Paul. NBC Universal Television. 2006: United States. Black Snake Moan, Brewer, Craig. Paramount Classics. 2006: United States. Erin Brockovich, Soderbergh, Steven. Jersey Films. 2000: United States. Freeway, Bright, Matthew. The Kushner-Locke Company. 1996: United States. Freeway II: Confessions of a Trickbaby, Bright, Matthew. The Kushner-Locke Company. 1999: United States. Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, Hawks, Howard. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation. 1953: United States. Ginger Ale Afternoon, Zielinski, Rafal. Churchill Partners. 1989: United States. Gone with the Wind, Fleming, Victor. Selznick International Pictures. 1939: United States. Gun Girls, Dertano, Robert C. Eros Productions. 1957: United States. Kalifornia, Sena, Dominic. PolyGram Filmed Entertainment. 1993: United States. Last Tango in Paris, Bertolucci, Bernardo. Produzioni Europee Associati (PEA). 1972: Italy. Le rouge et le noir, Autant-Lara, Claude. Documento Film. 1954: France. Lorna, Meyer, Russ. Eve Productions. 1964: United States. Love and a .45, Talkington, C.M. Trimark Pictures. 1994: United States. Mean Streets, Scorsese, Martin. Taplin – Perry – Scorsese Productions. 1973: United States. Million Dollar Baby, Eastwood, Clint. Warner Bros. Pictures. 2004: United States. Mudhoney, Meyer, Russ. Delta Films. 1965: United States. Natural Born Killers, Stone, Oliver. Warner Bros. Pictures. 1994: United States. Now, Voyager, Rapper, Irving. Warner Bros. Pictures. 1942: United States. Pink Flamingos, Waters, John. Dreamland. 1972: United States. Pretty Woman, Marshall, Garry. Touchstone Pictures. 1990: United States. Rocky, Avildsen, John G. Chartoff-Winkler Productions. 1976: United States. Saturday Night Fever, Badham, John. Robert Stigwood Organization (RSO). 1977: United States. 45 Sixpack Annie, Broderick, John C. American International Pictures. 1975: United States. The Finish of Bridget McKeen, Edison Manufacturing Company. 1901: United States. The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, Ingram, Rex. Metro Pictures Corporation. 1921: United States. The Galaxy Invader, Dohler, Don. Moviecraft Entertainment. 1985: United States. The Godfather, Coppola, Francis Ford. Alfran Productions. 1972: United States. The Great Texas Dynamite Chase, Pressman, Michael. Yasny Talking Pictures. 1976: United States. The Postman Always Rings Twice, Garnett, Tay. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM). 1946: United States. The Sheik, Melford, George. Paramount Pictures. 1921: United States. Where The Heart Is, Williams, Matt. Wind Dancer Productions. 2000: United States. 6.2. Literature Benshoff, Harry M., and Sean Griffin, America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality at the Movies (Oxford 2009). Bouson, J. Brooks, “‘You Nothing But Trash’: White Trash Shame in Dorothy Allison’s Bastard Out of Carolina”, Southern Literary Journal (2001) 101-123. Brezina, Timothy, and Kenisha Winder, “Economic Disadvantage, Status Generalization and Negative Racial Stereotyping By White Americans”, Social Psychology Quarterly (2003) 402-418. Costello, Brannon, “Poor White Trash, Great White Hope: Race, Class and the (De)Construction of Whiteness in Lewis Nordan’s Wolf Whistle”, Critique (2004) 207223. Dyer, Richard, Stars (London 1998). Dyer, Richard, White (London 1997). Enteman, Willard F., “Stereotyping, Prejudice and Discrimination” in: Paul Martin Lester and Susan Dente Ross eds., Images That Injure: Pictorial Stereotypes in the Media (Westport 2003) 9-10. Flynt, James Wayne, Dixie’s Forgotten People: The South’s Poor Whites (Bloomington 2004). Frankenberg, Ruth, “White Women, Race Matters: The Social Construction of Whiteness” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 632-634. 46 Gilens, Martin, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy (Chicago 2000). Glasmeier, Amy, An Atlas of Poverty in America: One Nation, Pulling Apart, 1960-2003 (New York 2006). Green, Abel, “‘Hillbilly’ Music”, Variety (1926) 1. Grover, Bonnie Kae, “Growing Up White in America?” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 3435. Harkins, Anthony, Hillbilly: A Cultural History of an American Icon (New York 2004). Hoberman, John, “The Price of ‘Black Dominance’”, Society (2000) 49-50. Linn, Travis, “Media Methods that Lead to Stereotypes” in: Paul Martin Lester and Susan Dente Ross eds., Images That Injure: Pictorial Stereotypes in the Media (Westport 2003) 9-10. MacRae, C. Neil, Charles Stangor and Miles Hewstone eds., Stereotypes and Stereotyping (New York 1996). Martinez, George A., “Mexican-Americans and Whiteness” in: Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic eds., Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror (Philadelphia 1997) 210-213. McAndrew, Francis T., and Adebowale Akande, “African Perceptions of Americans of African and European Descent”, The Journal of Social Psychology (1995) 649-655. Patterson, James T., America’s Struggle against Poverty in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge 2000). Schneider, David J., The Psychology of Stereotyping (New York 2004). Stangor, Charles, “Volume Overview” in: Charles Stangor ed., Stereotypes and Prejudice: Essential Readings (Philadelphia 2000) 1-16. Stricker, Frank, Why America Lost the War on Poverty – And How to Win It (Chapel Hill 2007). Webster, Colin, “Marginalized white ethnicity, race and crime”, Theoretical Criminology (2008) 293-312. Wray, Matt, Not Quite White: White Trash and the Boundaries of Whiteness (Durham 2006). Wray, Matt, and Annalee Newitz, White Trash: Race and Class in America (New York 1997). 47