A lot of this has to do with identity. Angelina Jolie could self identify as a woman of color if she wished. (She is included here) with other multiracial people. Her mother, Marcheline Bertrand, was born to a Québécois father and an Indigenous (Iroquois) mother. Her father is a Czechoslovakian-American. Meanwhile Mariane Pearl was born in France to a Dutch father and to an Afro-Chinese Cuban mother. Here is an article that Mariane wrote about her mother (and her background), The woman who gave me my strength.
One argument goes: "Whiteness is a system of dominant power---not an ethnicity, since being white is about rejecting one's ethnicity---and those who are excluded from that system (people of color) have no access to that power. That is what it means to be white---to be dominant on all institutional levels over POC."
Mariane Pearl has fairly recent ancestors from 4 continents. She has devoted her life to bringing understanding of different people to people across the globe. She has stories on women of color from around the world who are working against adversity - sometimes against the patriarchy. (See Global diary...Liberia, Global diary...Cuba, Global diary...Cambodia). Is she rejecting her ethnicity? If so - which one? If she harnesses the power of Hollywood and the media - is not she - a person of color - accessing that power? Is that supposed to be good or bad?
She has her articles in Glamour. They are sure to get an audience of people who have bought into the stereotypes created by the dominant culture. It's where the money is. The same with this movie. It seems like a duel purpose movie - one being some amount of global human understanding - the other - for the movie to succeed in the dominant culture.
To be a part of the dominant power system - it's easier if you think that the dominant power system is a good thing. It may be that "being white" (as some define it) is to identify with the dominant culture - the more one identifies with it - and is determined to succeed in it - the more one becomes a part of that power system. It is easier to have that identity if you look like other successful people. Hence - the argument to have an actual French speaking northern European/Cuban (in this case - Cuban means Latino/Afro/Asian) person play the part.
For more and more people - race is not clear cut thing - if it ever was. I think that there is a lot of good in that. Halle Berry (who a lot of people were advocating for the part because of her black and white background) said, "...why should it matter what color anyone is or what heritage they identify with? If people would just learn to look at everyone equally and stop trying to label one another the issue of what we are all made of would be null and void...We are all members of the same race, the HUMAN RACE!".
I expect that the last thing that Mariane Pearl wanted was for everyone to be dissecting what all haplogroups she belongs to. That seems to be the emphasis that some have put on it - regardless of her ethnic or other identity (and some only see it as a black and white question). Is Mariane rejecting her ethnicity - or is she embracing them all? Were any French speaking, Caucasian/Cubans considered for the part? Is it about access or is it about money? Is it a matter of the producer giving the role to his partner in life - regardless of her heritage? Is Mariane happy about it? Is Mariane Pearl a good role model for others? Maybe - maybe, probably not, both, probably, yes, yes and no - it would definitely have sent a more positive message to young people of color to see someone who really did have a Caucasian/Cuban or European/Latino heritage to see the part go to someone who reflected that culture. As it is - the movie creates the illusion of someone with a partially Latino background - and for some - that isn't enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment