Pssst! This post has been updated.
Have you ever woken up one morning and suddenly realised that an old and cherished friend doesn’t care about you or anything you represent, and actually either ignores or caricatures your existence?
Well, neither have I. But too many times I’ve realised that a director (or musician or writer or artist…) that I love like a friend actually creates art that exoticises, fetishises, or all out erases who I am.
I’ve managed to recover from the horror of finding that much of the music I used to like is grossly sexist, (see our little blurb about Jessica Hopper’s famous article on emo music here) but I’m still working on getting over my ex-friend Wes Anderson.
Before I identified as a woman of colour and started applying anti-oppression criticism to every inch of pop culture I could get my hands on, I loved Wes Anderson. But in my grand old age, I can’t excuse the racist caricatures that populate all of his movies.
Like Pagoda, the cute little Indian man in the Royal Tenenbaums (who also appears in Bottle Rocket and Rushmore) who exists solely to do Royal’s bidding, and has an adorable lack of morality. Or the slew of characters of colour - the Brazilian David Bowie (played by Seu Jorge who actually has quite an illustrious film and recording career); Vikram Ray, whose character’s main feature is that he was “born on the Ganges”; the Filipino pirates - in The Life Aquatic.
Characters of colour in Anderson’s films are always caricatures, hilariously exotic. Anderson uses “race as a novelty”, says salon.com, “suggesting an assertively white-kid view of the world.”
These characters are funny not because of their personalities or life situations - unlike Anderson’s white characters - but solely because they’re brown. It’s like Anderson is saying, “The pirates are Filipino! How hilarious is that??” Needless to say, I don’t get the joke.
As if that isn’t bad enough, Anderson also uses Asian cultures to demonstrate just how educated and well-travelled he is. It’s like the movie equivalent of “Some of my best friends are Laotian” and “I went backpacking in Vietnam.” The master of in-joke filmmaking, Anderson’s brown characters are like an inside joke for urban hipsters who’ve visited Little India a few times.
While Anderson devotees have brushed off criticisms of characters like Pagoda as being minor, and few and far between, it seems like things are about to get a lot worse:
Last week, Anderson’s new film The Darjeeling Limited opened. The film is the story of three American brothers who travel to India together after their father dies. Maybe I’m being prematurely judgemental, but the Darjeeling Limited looks suspiciously like “Pagoda: The Movie.”
It’s this that really gets my back up about the Darjeeling Limited:
This is what really breaks my heart: Wes’ track record with women of colour. Anderson just loves pairing women of colour up with dorky white dudes, shortly after dorky white dudes have been dumped or rejected by white ladies. Even though Rushmore’s Margaret Yang is the fullest of all of Wes’ colour characters, she is still paired up with the loveable/hateable Max after Ms Cross turns him down. It’s the same story with Inez, the lovely Latin American hotel cleaner in Bottle Rocket.
Once upon a time, when it was illegal in Canada for non-white men to marry white women (incidentally it was only in the 60’s that those laws were repealed both in the US and Canada), I imagine images of interracial relationships were radical statements. But these days, you can’t swing a cat in urban North America without stumbling across some form of cultural appropriation.
The interracial relationships in Anderson’s films are not radical. They simply reinforce racism’s most current and insidious form - they take cultural appropriation to the ultimate level by appropriating actual women of colour, a la Gwen Stefani.
In the words of Racialicious.com, Darjeeling Limited (and, according to me, aspects of all of Anderson’s films) looks like it falls into “the time-honored genre of White People Working Out Their Issues Against an Exotic Backdrop.” Still, I’d like to say for the record that I don’t think Anderson consciously sets out to reduce his non-white characters to ridiculous stereotypes, who are used only to enhance his white characters, and never allowed to stand on their own.
But the fact that the only role that people of colour can have in his movies are as sexual fantasies, sidekicks or deeply insulting cartoons suggests that, consciously or subconsciously, Anderson doesn’t think that much of real life people of colour. And between you and me, I’m not sure mine and Wes’ friendship can withstand that.
I know I sound bitter. But it’s hard to get over such a betrayal. As a liberal arts student in the early ‘00s with a tendency towards hipsterism, I adored Wes’ movies. At 17 I sneaked into Rushmore, at 19 I memorised all the dialogue to Bottle Rocket, and at 20 The Royal Tenenbaums pulled me out of an extended case of the blues, and maybe, just maybe, preventing me from dropping out of university.
Anderson’s beautifully filmed and bizarre characters, who somehow made madness, dysfunctional families and alienation seem not only manageable but funny, were like friends who reminded me that I wasn’t alone. There were many times that Anderson’s movies comforted me with the message that yes, everyone gets lonely, and yes, there are still reasons to live through it. It was like Wes really got me.
But here’s the thing about Wes Anderson: he positions himself as an outsider, and his protagonists are always outsiders, painfully awkward and deeply deficient in social skills but also desperately seeking love (and you will notice that his white characters are capable of longing for love in a much more profound way than his characters of colour will ever acheive). But at the end of the day, what is so outsider about Wes? He’s an extremely succesful, wealthy, white dude. That’s not to say that rich white dudes can’t ever feel alienated. But to position yourself as an outsider, while making art that ensures that people of colour are truly outside, is obscenely fake.
There’s few things more horrible in pop culture than discovering that someone who let you inside is actually determined to keep you outside. Does anybody else have sob stories of artists they revered, who turned out to be total, oppressive jerks?
My mum always tells me to stay away from toxic friendships. In that vein, I’m not even sure I’m going to rent The Darjeeling Limited.
Wes, don’t even try to Facebook me. It’s time we both accepted it: it’s over.
Update!: Ooo, look, slate.com agrees with me. Read this great critique of Anderson’s upper-class white characters and working class characters of colour here.






Digg
31 comments
Oh, I wish this weren't true! But it is, it is, it is.
Posted by jessica
October 5, 2007, 9:48 AM
It seems that people of colour will never really be outsiders (in the way that Wes' white characters are) because they will always be befriended BECAUSE OF their otherness. At least this is what I have seen. They're kind of befriended out of novelty, like, "meet my little Indian friend" kind of thing. Which is a little awful in itself. If any of this makes sense.
Posted by Sarah
October 5, 2007, 10:21 AM
You had me going until "There’s few things more horrible....."
There ARE few things more horrible......
Posted by Me
October 5, 2007, 4:20 PM
First let me get out my (not-politically correct) rant before I actually say something from a calm, intellectual place: Yes, it is racist to display all over movie screens your fantasy of having a woman from another culture happy and willing to sleep with your pale ass, and then pretend that the sex with your fumbling, awkward body was actually good. Anyone with half a brain can see that you have no idea, and never will have any idea, what to do with a woman in bed. So I know it’s your fantasy, but please…leave us out of it.
Now that it’s out of my system…we all tend to defend our own, because “our own” defends an aspect of us. Why do I defend rappers even though they’re ridiculously misogynistic? Because they challenge the racism in society that a lot of people pretend isn’t even there…I saw a lot of comments on Racialicious’ website about how this guy’s movie aren’t racist, they have no idea what everyone is talking about…and that sort of pretense of innocence, is exactly what rappers attack and critique in their music, they challenge the subtle status quo (like his movies)…
And even just the idea of going after rappers for being sexist and equating their music with woman-hating, but not the fashion industry, religion, the nuclear family, the list goes on and on…is racist in itself.
So…who did I revere until I woke up one day? I will never admit this in person, but Dave Chappelle…his observations on racism are brilliant, he’s such a genius…but has anyone else noticed how sexist his show was? I don’t think a white show today could get away with that level of blatant sexism. And I want to love him, because the things he says about race are amazing, he knows how to find the contradictions in society and just rip them apart…but, why doesn’t he think women want those things too? Why doesn’t he see that what he reveals in his skits about how viciously white people treated black men…black men (and men in general) do to women, but just in a different way? To realize that he wasn’t interested in freedom for all, but freedom for black men, but women can stay right where they are…really crushed me. How can a guy THAT smart just miss the point so completely?
Posted by Jaye
October 6, 2007, 4:12 PM
yes and no to everything everyone has already said.
I actually saw Wes's movie today and to be honest I enjoyed it. I did notice the marginal characters were for the most part played by people of colour. This sadly wasn't surprising. And one character in particular (the train stewart) seemed more like a cartoon than a real character. Although I did think that the Danny Glover in The Royals was a very strong character.
But my point, assuming I have one. Is that neither Wes or Chappelle are radical, activists or feminists. I have no doubt that they are intelligent and talented. I highly doubt that either is conservative politically. But they are not much different than the rest of hollywood. And they work in hollywood and therefore have conceded to the rules imposed in that industry. If Wes's work was really radical he wouldn't have been able to find such deep pockets to fund his movies.
I agree with all that was said about both men here. Chappelle is very funny, smart, quick and I'd be willing to bet that he isn't actually sexist. My guess would be that he largely addresses racism because he has felt its direct effects.
I'm not trying to rationalize their lack of action or awareness. I think i'm just trying to show that they are average people like the most of us.
Posted by peabody
October 6, 2007, 8:41 PM
I get your point about Wes and Chappelle succumbing to the rules of Hollywood…but part of Chappelle’s appeal is that he takes on the status quo, that he’s not just entertainment, he’s thoughtful and incisive and critical. His jokes are funny but they have depth. He’s along the same lines as Jon Stewart or Chris Rock…they seem like people not just out for the money (but money is good).
I guess I’m disappointed when people are willing to take on the hierarchy for themselves and others like them…but for some strange reason, they think that oppression and domination is perfectly okay for certain segments of society. I mean, if it’s still okay for us to be discriminated against…then what are you basing your own right to freedom on?
Posted by Jaye
October 9, 2007, 2:20 AM
Thea's post is up at Racialicious, where it has generated a pile of comments: www.racialicious.com/2007/10/08/wes-a...
Posted by Nicole
October 9, 2007, 9:28 AM
This is really disappointing--i agree, his films' charm tend to rely on empathy for the underdog, and the outsider. Yet he can't seem to extend that to his characters of color. It's obvious they don't exist for him.
I DO think it's done on purpose though, because it seems too freaking blatant!
Posted by Ana Casian-Lakos
October 9, 2007, 5:52 PM
As someone who has quietly nursed the Inez fantasy every time I've stayed in a motor-lodge, I feel compelled to explain myself. Wouldn't it be awesome, says my brain to my dick and vice versa, to meet someone who is incredibly attractive and at the same time not at all in your conventional day to day connotation of incredibly attractive, and for that person to have a similar reaction to you, and you both do something about it?
The racism starts where, exactly... ?
Posted by jed
October 9, 2007, 7:46 PM
Jed, the racism (and sexism) starts when all you see is something to arouse your dick, and not a full human being with thoughts and feelings of her/his own.
Is this definition exact enough for you?
Posted by Yolanda Carrington
October 9, 2007, 8:33 PM
When I see some pretty lady and I want to ball her because she's pretty (regardless of her color), it may make me a sexist but it doesn't make me a racist. I'll ball a white maid or a brown maid just the same.
I think that's really what Wes Anderson is saying in his films.
Posted by Buddy
October 9, 2007, 9:18 PM
Great comments everyone. This is something that I had not previously realized about Wes Anderson movies, but I have always had a slight aversion to how he treats certain characters. Thinking back to my original viewing of each movie, I think I finally know why. The following quote from the Slate article nails it for me. After describing the various caricatures included in his films, Weiner writes:
"Taken together, they form a fleet of quasi-caricatures and walking punch lines, meant to import a whimsical, ambient multiculturalism into the films."
It's so true it hurts.
Posted by Ruby
October 9, 2007, 9:31 PM
While I think there is great validity in all of these comments, I think there is a larger motif at work in Anderson's pictures. His films are all adolescent in their viewpoint. He treats sexuality, death, "otherness" etc. in an juvenile and simplistic way. His ENTIRE mise en scene is based on this viewpoint. I have to admit I have not seen his latest effort, but I assume it has this trademark pubescent feel. He's a teen that plays at making mature films. His immaturity toward race is just one aspect of his way of seeing.
Posted by Daniel Webster
October 10, 2007, 12:30 AM
you guys are tards. if i was more ineterested in this i'd probably count the ways.
Posted by charlie
October 10, 2007, 1:37 AM
Charlie, apparently you are developmentally challenged enough to read our comments. Good for you! Really! Good for YOU! I hope you come in first in the clever posts event at the Special Olympics. Maybe Governor Schwartzenegger can give you a medal.
Posted by DANIEL WEBSTER
October 10, 2007, 2:40 AM
What a waste of time. Go deconstruct deconstructionism or something.
Posted by OY
October 10, 2007, 2:56 AM
Oy (Vey)
Someone stayed awake in some half-baked philosophy class. Good for you! Maybe the Governor will give you a grant?
Posted by Daniel Webster
October 10, 2007, 3:02 AM
How dare Wes Anderson be a white male! And how dare he have a point of view.
Listen up! Artists are not accountable to the abstract moral theories of "feminism". Feminism as a critical theory is shallow, cruel, and reductionist.
Posted by instafaggot
October 10, 2007, 6:40 AM
Still, I’d like to say for the record that I don’t think Anderson consciously sets out to reduce his non-white characters to ridiculous stereotypes, who are used only to enhance his white characters, and never allowed to stand on their own.
YEAH! Let's get some more politically correct casting! To hell with point of view and narrative coherence. For that matter, to hell with candor about race! No one must ever be allowed to portray race in films unless the non-white characters are fully realized, sympathetic, and morally better than the white characters.
Posted by poopsie
October 10, 2007, 6:45 AM
I completely understand the bloggers reaction to Anderson's presentation of PofC, however I think their reading of the sex/race issue is a tad surface. If anything, Anderson's guilty of being lazy rather than bigoted.
First, Anderson's mode of storytelling often hinges on the presentation of distinctly "modernist" characters through "postmodern" storytelling. Royal Tenenbaum is a "caricature" in so much as a character taken out of the past, complete with the trappings of the "modern man," in this case colonial acquisition, Pagoda. Their relationship is not meant as a good thing. Part of the whole point of Royal Tenenbaum's character is to portray the sickness Royal suffers from his greed and aquisitivness, again elements of the "modern man." To a lesser degree, Eli Cash also suffers, trying to define his self by embracing a romanticized ideal of native american culture because he has no identity of his own. Are Pagoda, or the native american trappings decorating Eli Cash's apartment authentically voiced, or descriptive? No, they're fake, slightly unnerving and provide little solace to Royal or Eli. But that's the point.
Margaret in Rushmore and the latina maid (sorry, it's been a while since I've seen Bottlerocket) seem less the exotic, sexualized, colonized bodies, than simply the "other." In Anderson's case he opts to use PofC in sort of a lazy way to further emphasize their removal from the dysfunctional worlds that so twist his protagonists. The Luke Wilson/Schwartzman characters are hardly exploitative in the sense that the poster implies, except maybe in that they can be read as embracing alien sexuality as lesser alternative to that of their own race. However, I don't read this into the films.
Anderson certainly does take a certain joy in the aesthetics of the "other" or as the blogger and commenters note, post-colonial landscapes and their inhabitants. Yet, I can't condemn him completely because of the naivete and genuine affection with which he approaches the subject matter, coupled with his occasional self-aware admission that this is a fictionalized retrospective of a modernist world long past. Rather, I think he hopes to mine for archetypes rather than stereotypes, even if he ocasionaly falls short.
Posted by Michael
October 10, 2007, 8:44 AM
Jaye - I totally agree with you on the rapper stuff. I really hear you on this: "And even just the idea of going after rappers for being sexist and equating their music with woman-hating, but not the fashion industry, religion, the nuclear family, the list goes on and on…is racist in itself."
I think this is a totally personal thing, (and I know other Shameless bloggers don't agree!) but I find it easier to deal with the sexism/misogyny in rap music because it is so blatant - sexism in "white" music (like rock and roll or indie rock) is so insidious and slippery that it seems cruel. On the other hand it's easy for me to identify the sexism in rap music. And I also feel like there's this huge history of sexualised violence against black folks in the US, and that the over the top violence in the lyrics is a complete response to that. I think that feminists should also be anti-racists, and that feminists should respond first to the history that contributes to sexism in rap music, and second to the sexism itself.
Posted by Thea
October 10, 2007, 8:47 AM
Poopsie - there's a big difference between being politically correct and not creating art that is hurtful or hateful. It always surprises me how often people respond to critiques of racism/sexism/...by saying that people need to chill and stop being so politically correct. In my view political correctness is about finding ways, usually through language, to hide your own hatefulness because these days it's not socially acceptable to be hateful. What I'm asking for is for Wes Anderson, and directors like him (which makes about a million people) to wake up to their own privelege, and stop being racist - not pretend not to be racist.
Because I bet that films with people of colour, made by non-anti-racist directors, where all the POC are "fully realized, sympathetic, and morally better than the white characters" is pretending not to be racist. Like the stereotype that all Native North Americans are wise and noble? Or the belief that East Asian women are submissive, sweet and innocent? A film with characters like that would sicken me just as much as a film where all the bad guys are black.
What I'm asking for is that POC be portrayed as human beings, who can be likeable or dislikeable or whatever, but just complex - or at least, just as complex as the white folks.
You say that my critique removes Anderson's right to have a point of view: if your point of view is that people of colour only exist to bolster the development of white folks, well then, your point of view is racist. I don't wanna have nuthin' to do with it.
Posted by Thea
October 10, 2007, 8:56 AM
Thanks for all the comments, this is really amazing.
I'd also like to say for the record that here at Shameless we don't like it when people use ableist language like "tards" and "developmentally challenged" to describe each other's comments. Come on now, we're all creative and grown-up (enough). Let's find better ways to respond to each other.
Posted by Thea
October 10, 2007, 8:57 AM
I will probably be bashed for this, but I am so tired of this rhetoric.
Wes Anderson is writing/creating from the perspective of a skinny white man because....wait for it....he's a skinny white man. His work shows a fascination, if not a super high level of sensitivity, for different ethnic groups. But I would hardly term what he does as racism. I think that word gets overused and thrown around far too lightly. Ask the people involved in the early days of the Civil Rights Movement what real racism is. Get a grip.
And as for Anderson's "fantasy women of color". Well, ever other rap song I hear mentions black men and white women in some misogynistic, sexist, and/or negative tone.
I am a white person with an open mind. I let these female-hating, supposedly racist remarks go because it is a waste of my time to overthink it. I will tell you what does get me. The damned double standard. "People of color" can overanalyze everything that a white person puts out there as potentially racist, but there is never a word spoken when a "person of color" does something equally racist. I know racism still exists, but it exists in many different forms. Not just whites against everyone else.
So don't watch Wes Anderson movies. Your loss.
Posted by Sarah H
October 10, 2007, 9:32 AM
Wes Anderson is a bright, funny guy that unfortunatly tells a variation of the same story, over and over again. His characters are usually failed elitests that are trying desperately to cling to some sort of belief in themselves that they are indeed "special", while everything in their lives is telling them they are actually in fact "losers".
That's what I have a problem with...his world is all too precious and ultimately (after four movies) starting to wear a bit thin.
I would point out that all his "white" characters that ultimately end up with ladies of "colour" achieve the Hollywood dream of "Happy Ever After" endings with these ladies, not with the cold, white, ice princesses that tortured and shunned them. What are we to make of that? Should white ladies boycott his movies because they always appear as aloof while ladies of colour appear warm, accepting and loving?
Wes Anderson is not racist, he's a humorist with a very narrow point of view hard wired into his psyche. Besides, humor is very simple: it either makes you laugh or does not. No amount of monday morning quarterbacking can change your initial reaction. There is no such thing as the "right" laugh and the "wrong" laugh. It's an involuntary reaction. It simply is. So...if you loved Wes Anderson before but have over analyzed yourself out of loving him, well, that's your own fault.
Great art is messy, just like life.
If you don't want to be offended? Watch PBS ;)
Posted by Jim Jim
October 10, 2007, 10:07 AM
Sarah, I'm definitely not going to bash you. That's not what this is about. It's about giving people space to represent their opinions in a respectful way that allows us to understand each other better.
Its interesting to me how extremely different people's reactions are to racism and sexism. I think sometimes its just so hard, so exhausting to look at everything through critical eyes. Sometimes you just want to watch a movie and listen to music and not think about who's being insulted or hurt by it.
But I think it is unfair to say that people of color overanalyze everything that white people do and never comment when a person of color behaves in a racist way. firstly, there are probably 4 billion people of colour on this planet. so its pretty difficult to know what they're all doing and thinking.
secondly, i think some people of colour, some even on this website, have a lot to say about racism that exists within their own communities and between communities of colour. for example, I know that many Korean and African-American community leaders were very outspoken about the racism that boiled over between their communities during the LA race riots.
whoa, that was long. i'm out.
Posted by tuval
October 10, 2007, 10:15 AM
As an upwardly-mobile caucasian man, I was really offended a few years back when SOUL PLANE didn’t have any white people in the lead roles! I fly 70k miles a year and I have never, ever seen a brother in the cockpit! Bad casting! Bad casting!
And just think, the plot line of GUESS WHO’S COMING TO DINNER could’ve been greatly simplified if Sidney Poitier and Isabelle Sanford were white. Spencer Tracy wouldn’t have drank as much and he wouldn’t have hit that car at the drive-in restaurant. He could've gone on for the rest of his days looking down on African-American people.
Posted by Derrick
October 10, 2007, 10:36 AM
In an age when people are leaving nooses strewn about to make their political arguments, I don't see the need for scrutinizing every inch of pop culture to find racism. However, if you would like to continuing propagating the stereotype of liberal academics as humorless killjoys, please, do go ahead. I wouldn't want to oppress you.
-WD
Posted by winston delgado
October 10, 2007, 10:46 AM
I think Wes is very conscious about race and deliberate in his choices. He's being ironic and making fun of the racism of romantic exoticism and orientalism in western culture. contrasting older colonial values with modern global values. He shows old scholl racism with the butler and etc. and shows new school racism with the fake geto play in rushmore and - Whats that chick in the royals that travels the world sleeping with guys?
Posted by josh
October 10, 2007, 11:54 AM
Seriously? You are serious? Really?
Posted by Sasha
October 10, 2007, 12:25 PM
Josh - I think Wes is trying to make fun of racism, but I just find that as a white dude who (according to me) clearly doesn't have an anti-racist outlook, he's really failing. In fact, it's all the more obnoxious because by making fun of racism, he's insinuating that he's above racism/not racist, when I find that he really is. If nothing else it indicates an extreme lack of self-awareness.
WD - Your critique is often applied to pop culture analyses. On this blog before people have commented that "if this pop culture the only thing you have to complain about, then things must not be that bad" and "shouldn't you people be focusing your attention on more blatant forms of oppression?".
I understand that critique, but just because I choose to write a post about race in movies, doesn't mean I'm not also thinking about and worrying about the nooses lying around everywhere. I also believe that pop culture influences our lives in a very strong and usually invisible way. As cultures pop culture forms an integral part of our values systems, and so to me is worth scrutiny.
I want to thank everyone for their comments - it's great to have so many different points of view squaring off.
Posted by Thea
October 10, 2007, 12:32 PM
Leave a comment
This story is closed to new comments.