I was so angry after seeing The Help, a movie about a white woman writing the testimony of black maids in the South. It took days to cool off. It is a deeply flawed film. The violence of segregation is used for comic relief. The chick-flick antics are just wrong. But at its core is a question betrayed by laughter: Does love make us responsible for each other?
Based on the 2009 book, The Help opened August 13th in theaters nationwide and it has been slammed by critics. I mean W.W.F. slammed. Hulk Hogan slammed. Professor Melissa Harris Perry tweeted from the theater, “so angry hard to formulate words.” She was joined by Nelson George in the New York Times and the Association of Black Women Historians in pointing out the film’s silence on the rape, lynching and terror of Southern racism under tongue-in-cheek humor. And they are right.
But the failure is not simply a mimetic one. Instead the failure of The Help, both book and film is that it betrays its own values. The core narrative is of a girl who is loved and who loves a person separated from her by bigotry. She knows this woman suffers insults and abuse in silence and wants to speak for her.
The protagonist Skeeter writes down black maid’s testimonials to repay the love she received from her nanny. Even I was touched when black nanny Aibileen Clark, played beautifully by Viola Davis held a white child on her lap and taught her to say, “You is smart. You is kind. You is important.” And I winced when Clark winced as she saw the girl’s body covered in dark bruises from beatings. Or when Aibileen tells Skeeter of her son being crushed by a truck at work and the white boss threw his body on the hospital steps and left. How she took him home and watched him die on her couch.
What drives The Help is the ethic that love makes us responsible for each other even when it means risking our social status. Love causes us to mirror and internalize the one loved which is why it is dangerous. It creates loyalties that crosses the law and threatens to collapse hierarchical societies. In 1960’s Mississippi love got people killed. And that’s where The Help betrays its principles. Yes there were deep intimate and decades-long relationships between nannies and families. But there was also ugliness, insults, abuse and rape. But instead of love being a force that opens Skeeter to the full depth and width of black life under Jim Crow, it becomes proof of her nobility. And since that is the goal of the narrative, the real violence of Southern segregation is missing.
We don’t see or hear of the rape written about by Harriet Jacobs or see in the DNA of Thomas Jefferson’s descendants from his slave Sally Hemmings. We don’t see the abuse of black maids so visible in the life of South Carolina’s segregationist senator Strom Thurmond who at twenty-two had sex with the black sixteen year old family maid, Carrie Butler and got her pregnant. He is the same man who gave a twenty-four hour filibuster, the longest by a lone senator in order to stop the 1957 Civil Rights Act. Thurmond’s motto could be, “Segregation in the street but integration in the bedroom!”
Instead The Help sells out its own values of love and identification with the Other in order to reflect the bourgeois tastes of its white middle class female audience. In doing so, it leaves the real history of black women in a historical vacuum. And critics are angry because few films explore African-American history and those that do, like this one, always center white protagonists. It is the white soul that is at stake, its redemption driving the plot as black people fade into the background. Instead of Skeeter’s love forcing her to recognize the terror and violence “the help” lived with it bathes her in the light of a white liberal messiah.
The white liberal messiah is a stock figure; it is a man or woman transformed through empathy with the oppressed black people. You see them in Avatar, Freedom Writers, Dangerous Minds, Amistad, Amazing Grace, A Time to Kill, Star Trek: The Next Generation and Mississippi Burning. The tradition of white characters gaining maturity by helping black people began with Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn. Finn a white boy risks himself to free runaway slave Jim, despite it being like “stealing” someone else’s property because Jim is “white on the inside”.
Since these characters and plot re-appear in American culture we can say it is a narrative institution; a story told generation after generation through which white audiences enter and learn how to relate to racism. In The Help, liberal messiah Skeeter raised money through writing and gave it to the maids. In real life, Stockett failed to live up to her fictionalized self. She was sued for $75,000 by Aibleen Cooper, the maid of her brother for taking her name and biographical details to create the character Aibileen Clark in The Help. Aibleen and “Aibileen” share a name, a gold tooth and life-events but Judge Tomie Green dismissed the case because it was filed after the one-year statute of limitations. Outside the court, Cooper aimed her disgust at Stockett. “She’s a liar,” she said. “You know she did it and everybody else knows she did it!”
The messiness of real life is an ironic contrast to the feel good ending of the movie. The image of Skeeter, Aibileen and Minny holding hands before she leaves Mississippi expresses the desire of the author, director and maybe even the audience for a final atonement. But the court case and angry critics show the wrong has not been righted and won’t be until we can tell our stories, our way and be heard.




Comments
I disagree that Skeeter is the viewpoint character through which we see the maids' predicament. Quite the contrary, the film makes clear that her motives for creating the book are at least 80% selfish. She seeks the maids beneficence as a means of self promotion that ultimately transforms into something else. As for the accusation of stereotypes in the presentation of black characters, I would appreciate some clarification. Having known several women who lived through similiar events, Abbilene and Minnie seemed authentic enough to me. I'm wont to deny your central thesis, however: that most movies dealing with this subject matter are perforce seen through the eyes of white characters; nor can I deny the one dimensionality of the film's ostensible villain. But I also believe you are perhaps going too far in an effort to over-emphasize elements in what is ostensibly (and I mean this descriptively, not pejoritively, as in the manner of the works of George Cukor) a largely effective "women's" picture whose central focus is the unexpected friendship between three distinct women. No single film can ever encapsulate the horror of the Jim Crow era South, any more effectively than any single film can encapsulate the Shoah. (I recall criticisms of "Shindler's List" that were not terribly far apart from your arguments here: that it didn't fully represent the breadth of horror of that time and place; it too utilized a white, non-Jewish character as its focus; and, as in most features about the Shoah, portrayed most of its Jews as generic and passive sheep.) The only other thing I will add is this: this is a Hollywood movie adapted with significant accuracy from a popular novel. It's based on the memories of a white woman, her family, and the maids that she knew. Is the valuation of our experience validated only by our status as vicitms? Truly, that limits artistic expression to a measure of political correctness that ultimately renders the aesthetic experience pointless. It's not medicine or a history lesson, it is simply a relatively effective - if only modestly ambitious - piece of pop art.
Thurmond's pretty hot. Maybe it wasn't rape.
This is not a documentary. It's a fictional movie that was made based on a fictional book. There's no responsibility to portray the rapes or "real history of the black woman". Because IT IS JUST A MOVIE! And an excellent movie at that.
I can tell that you're white.
Thank you to the two thoughtful responses. I almost agree with you Donald about Skeeter but a foreshadowing of her identification with "the help" was early in her intense curiosity about her nanny and rebuttal of Hillbrooke's proposal for separate bathrooms for black maids. It seems that an altruistic need was part of her idea but grew as she listened and wrote their stories.
But you and Kelly bring up a valuable question on the role of art. It does not have the same aesthetic or narrative duties that non-fiction does. A documentary or history must use evidence, cite the source and arrange it somewhat parallel to real life. Fiction can expand far beyond those borders.
It's not an aesthetic failing. The film's narrative structure is smooth and sleek. It seems to me a moral failing in that the horror of the past led to the horror of the present. A collective denial about the systemic violence that creates our privileges, few that they are is one of the causes for the lack of social change. Since Hollywood movies like "The Help" shape the public historical imagination, the pandering to chick-flick aesthetics leaves our ignorance intact about our own past.
I was born 1960 in Santa Monica, CA, My Grandmother's were both from the South and both were maids, but in Califfornia....I often, as a child went to work with them because they took care of me while my parents' worked, and both my grandmothers' were treated with respect and held in very high regards by their employers!!! However, they both told a very different story as far as their mother's and Grandmother's were concerned........ in the the South, and It was pretty close to the movie the help................ If you did not live it you can't comprehend the horror.
I rented this last night. Overall enjoyed the movie. It was nicely done. I was shocked to realize the Mississippi laws against african americans And also shocked to see the horrible culture treatment towards people of color. I cried when Constantine was looking at the pencil marks on door of skeeter representing her growth through the years. And of course when seeing mother's remorse stating Constantine has died. Its so shocking and sad to see mistreatment of people accepted. So it was refreshing to view the book being made and voices heard which couldnt have been heard safely. Well done.
Add new comment