NationStates Jolt Archive

So, likely you've seen ads as of late for this new movie based on the Jackie Gleason tv classic, The Honeymooners. Trailer here (http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/the_honeymooners/) and imdb.com page here (http://imdb.com/title/tt0373908/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnxteD0yMHxsbT01MDB8dHQ9b258ZmI9dXxwbj0wfHE9aG9uZXltb29uZXJzfGh0bWw9MXxubT1vbg__;fc=2;ft =20;fm=1).
(where what looks like a degernerated version of this proposed discussion is taking place, surely we can do better.) Now, of course one of the first things you'll notice is that this is being done by an all-African American cast.*

The movie is going to revolve around Ralph and Norton's ill-concieved get rich schemes and plans. Now, I had an immediate conviction about this-I had watched a lot of Honeymooners and didn't remember that really being the premise of the show. Rather than rely on my memory I looked up some summaries, I was wrong it seems. For instance, imdb.com summarizes the show as such-
A bus driver and his sewer worker friend struggle to strike it rich while their wives look on with weary patience. here (http://imdb.com/title/tt0042114/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnxteD0yMHxsbT01MDB8dHQ9b258ZmI9dXxwbj0wfHE9aG9uZXltb29uZXJzfGh0bWw9MXxubT1vbg__;fc=1;ft =20;fm=1)
and tvtome.com summarizes it this way-
The stories depict the
sincere attempts of two men attempting to better their lives,
and the ensuing frustrations when their schemes
to strike it rich inevitably backfire. here (http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/ShowMainServlet/showid-2507/)

So, I was wrong there and this is a little greyer than my initial reaction (proving once again that initial reactions aren't all that trustworthy.)

Now-there is nothing inherent in The Honeymooners that ties the characters ethnicity and as such narratively speaking without cultural context the character of Ralph and Norton can be anything.

However, there is cultural context. Especially in one of the shows contemporaries, Amos & Andy (http://www.tvtome.com/AmosnAndy/) Here is a show where ethnicity of the characters was important. An evolution of the Two-Black Crows (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Two-Black-Crows) minstral type, they where bumbling and scheming black(face) characters.

Now, mislead (apparently) by my memory of the original The Honeymooners, I was struck that this movie seemed really no more than Amos & Andy in Honeymooner clothing. I couldn't help but think that there is a Pierre Delacroix (http://imdb.com/title/tt0215545/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnxteD0yMHxsbT01MDB8dHQ9b258ZmI9dXxwbj0wfHE9YmFtYm9vemxlZHxodG1sPTF8bm09b24_;fc=1;ft=21; fm=1) somewhere going, "Will they watch anything?"

But really, is this so much different from those minstral portrayals? Are a black Ralph and Norton that different from the Two Black Crows? Have we come full circle in representation?

It isn't really an easy answer. I wouldn't say I'm offended, but rather struck by this. It's hard to classify it as anything else.

Now-if you've got a reasoned out thought on the subject, I'd love to hear it. I've been relucntant to post this because there is no avoiding kneejerk reaction, from condemnation to racism and all points in between. I would ask that the reasoned please let them be-they'll have their say and then we can all move on. (well, if this is like anything else I do, it will last maybe a page and die, but I got race in there, always a winner 'round here...) What are your thoughts?

Incidently, I have no concrete conclusion here, I only draw the line between the show it intends and the show I argue it suggests and ask for thoughts. For those who would confuse criticism with impeeding free speech, they are invited to discuss it here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=421595) rather than waste the threads time with ill-considered "Ever hear of free speech" posts.




*Here is my personal, non-hegemonic opinion on the adaptation, though I have not seen it and as such it has limited value-The Honeymooners was performative based, in fact it only existed as The Honeymooners for a very short period of time, the rest being folded into The Jackie Gleason Show as a sketch section. As such, the show is hinged not on a bus driver named Kramden, but rather a comedian named Gleason. In effect, it would be like trying to do Burns & Allen without George Burns or Gracie Allen-it wouldn't really be that show. A similar mistep was in the Sgt. Bilko (http://imdb.com/title/tt0117608/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnxteD0yMHxsbT01MDB8dHQ9b258ZmI9dXxwbj0wfHE9c2d0IGJpbGtvfGh0bWw9MXxubT1vbg__;fc=1;ft=17) , where as talented as Steve Martin is-he is not Phil Silvers and that is what made Sgt. Bilko, not the premise. So, based on that I find the movie suspect. Add to that my above concern and I just don't know about this film.

I never understood the problem with Amos and Andy. At least Amos and Andy were both faithful to their wives and families, had jobs, worked hard, and were generally honest, straightforward people. Most depictions of black people nowadays aren't that generous, other than Cosby. Anyway, I never thought Amos and Andy was such a big deal, as you can tell.

Edit: I do realize the radio version of Amos and Andy were voiced by white voice actors, I'm talking about the actual content.

I never understood the problem with Amos and Andy. At least Amos and Andy were both faithful to their wives and families, had jobs, worked hard, and were generally honest, straightforward people. Most depictions of black people nowadays aren't that generous, other than Cosby. Anyway, I never thought Amos and Andy was such a big deal, as you can tell.

Edit: I do realize the radio version of Amos and Andy were voiced by white voice actors, I'm talking about the actual content.
The first televised episode-
The Kingfish tries to get rid of Sapphire's sister by arranging a marriage between her and Andy, then learns she has $10,000 of savings in the bank.
the second episode
Sapphire thinks the Kingfish is secretly dating another woman, so she decides to make him jealous by having dinner alone with Andy.
the third-
The Kingfish stages a clothing sale at the Lodge using a lieutenant's entire wardrobe.
and tenth-

The Kingfish sets up a phony raffle that forces him to wind up in Arabia drilling for oil, trying to earn enough money to get home.
just a sampling. Source (http://www.tvtome.com/AmosnAndy/season1.html)

Here (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Amos-%27n%27-Andy) you'll find a defence much like yours,
Today Amos & Andy is mostly remembered for its stereotypes of African Americans. However, most of the humor of the show came from silly situations, bad puns, and commentary on current events rather than racial mockery. In the early period of the show, there were dramatic overtones as well. While the depiction of African Americans in the show is racially offensive by today's standards, the characterizations were more sympathetic and rounded than that of most other shows of the 1920s, which continued to use the old minstrel show stereotypes of the 19th century and did not enjoy the success of Amos & Andy. It should also be noted that the program was the first (and, for many years, the only) on-the-air depiction of African-American small businessmen and the community in which they lived.

However, it is still only 'good by the old standard' and not by the current one. Though it would seem by this movie it is still a present one.


EDIT: Forgot to comment on the episode content quoted. Amos & Andy where variations on the aforemention Two Black Crows and the Zip Coon (I lost the link, it's the northern black who tries to 'talk above his station' and the comedy is derived from misunderstanding and misuse of words. Same with the Bones character interacting with white characters in minstral. It depicts, essentially, them as scheming and not that bright.

Been a long time since I've watched the Honeymooners or an Amos & Andy episode. I'll have to refresh my memory first, then watch the movie to decide.

Been a long time since I've watched the Honeymooners or an Amos & Andy episode. I'll have to refresh my memory first, then watch the movie to decide.
I had the same problem, it seems. I watched a lot of The Honeymooners but it was so long ago-I never got the impression that was in the summaries I found. Good luck finding the Amos & Andy, mostly I've seen them through academic sources.

And you are right, and I should restate it again-without actually watching the movie no real qualitative critique can be made, only speculative and that has a limited value. Definately something worth restating before things get too far.

However, it is still only 'good by the old standard' and not by the current one. Though it would seem by this movie it is still a present one.

Maybe, but I'm only going by my memory. There's scheming because if there weren't, no one would watch, it wouldn't even qualify as entertainment. Much like the Honeymooners, the Lucy Show, etc. Any time you have white actors doing black voice characters, you'll get stereotype, but I don't think it's any worse than today's t.v.

Maybe, but I'm only going by my memory. There's scheming because if there weren't, no one would watch, it wouldn't even qualify as entertainment. Much like the Honeymooners, the Lucy Show, etc. Any time you have white actors doing black voice characters, you'll get stereotype, but I don't think it's any worse than today's t.v.
To a certain degree, I would agree with you (though not in the way I think you intended), even Spike (http://imdb.com/title/tt0215545/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnxteD0yMHxsbT01MDB8dHQ9b258ZmI9dXxwbj0wfHE9YmFtYm9vemxlZHxodG1sPTF8bm09b24_;fc=1;ft=21; fm=1) agrees, as that was the argument of his film.

Interesting that you bring up I Love Lucy, as it is also a show that is criticized this time for it's hegemonic enforcement of women while threading the needle with a hispanic foil in Rickie. The essay I'd reference here is in a musty ol' regular book so I can't link it, but it compares narrative victories and performative victories in the characters of Lucy and Gracie from I Love Lucy and Burns and Allen. In short, that it was like other shows was indeed part of the problem.