
I've been writing about the film Precious since back when it was still called Push, mostly because I read the original novel back in the '90s and couldn't believe someone was trying to turn it into a film, but also because the accumulating buzz had it that director Lee Daniels had created something amazing.
I agree, but I'm also interested in the ongoing anti-Precious backlash, summed up thusly by the New York Press' resident contrarian Armond White:
Not since The Birth of a Nation has a mainstream movie demeaned the idea of black American life as much as Precious. Full of brazenly racist clichés (Precious steals and eats an entire bucket of fried chicken), it is a sociological horror show.
Which brings me to the reason for today's post: a column by the Capitol Hill Times' Charlie James, a veteran African-American community activist and writer, who addresses Precious in the latest installment of his column The Bottom Line:
There is very little that happens in black America that I am unaware of: I see the good and the bad. But I know from personal experience that there are far more black men and women doing positive and uplifting work than there are those who have reached the depths of depravity and despair. That is why I cannot watch movies like Precious (regrettably, I did see The Color Purple) because I know how powerful these shows can be in distorting the truth about what African-American men and families are all about.Yes, there are people like Precious in many African-American communities—unwanted, unloved and abused. But right next door are the same kind, young women with similar problems who receive the love and nurturing they need, but their lives do not make a compelling story like Precious does. I see the same thing in the literary world, where there are a lot of books being printed about abused black women overcoming major obstacles. In almost every account their abuser is their father or another male figure in the family. You will be hard-pressed to find many books about black fathers who fight for and protect his family.
You can read James' full column, which also includes some powerful autobiographical passages, here. For now, I'm all about the Precious, about which James concludes:
Precious' story is a miniscule part of this larger story, and because the other stories are not being shown, her story may come to represent African-American families in the consciousness of those outside the African-American community
Which reminded me of this quote from the New York Times:
Sapphire, the [African-American] author of “Push,” said it was too late in the day to worry that the film’s themes and images were somehow stigmatizing or inauthentic. “With Michelle, Sasha and Malia and Obama in the White House and in the post-‘Cosby Show’ era, people can’t say these are the only images out there,” Sapphire said. “Black people are able to say ‘Precious’ represents some of our children, but some of our children go to Yale.”
I was also reminded of the eloquent screed posted in the comments thread of my original Precious backlash post, from a woman named Stella, which you may read here.
One of Stella's best sentences: "Let art be art." Which is easy enough to say when the art in question doesn't make you feel that your entire race is being demeaned, but still: Any argument about Precious has to make room for acknowledging the achievements of the African-American artists behind the film. Beyond that: Charlie James acknowledges that girls like Precious exist, but seems ready to keep them silent for the greater good. What must it be like to survive something so ugly and damning you're forbidden from even recounting it? Answering that question is one of the many accomplishments of Precious.
2
3
4
8
9
10
14
15
16
17
19
22
24
He's pointing out that African Americans don't need to see the film to know what's happening.
30
31
Comments (31) RSS