Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
I'm finding it tricky to determine my exact reaction to the movie. I love fluffy, fun and silly (bonus if has absurd moments which POTC 2 has) summer blockbusters, and that's what the movie is. I love them because I can just sit back, munch on popcorn, giggle and have a relaxing couple of hours. I can turn off my brain (which is good because it helps me ignore problems with plot, bad writing, etc.) and just have a good time. Over the years I've accepted that Hollywood generally is not the place to look for wonderful representations of anyone regardless of sex, race, sexuality, background etc.
However I'm really distressed by the representation of the aboriginal Caribbean residents, the Calinago or Caribs. I recall enough from history class to know that the Calinago were not cannibals. Now I totally get that POTC 2 is a silly movie that isn't in any way claiming to accurately portray anyone. And certainly it's not like the British and the East India Trading company are portrayed in a good light.
But I was sort of flailing around about my reaction because I still feel really uncomfortable about the movie (despite having fun during all the non-cannibal scenes), so I did some research to see what other reactions are. I was particularly interested to see how the descendants of the Caliango responded to the movie. It turns out that the President of the National Garifuna Council of Belize sent a letter in 2005 to The Walt Disney Company calling them to task for the erroneous representations and noting how damaging they are. I found a link to that letter here. I find this part to be of particular note:
Our Calinago ancestors were a warrior race who migrated to the lesser islands of the Caribbean from the Amazon region of South America and, as with any warrior race, they engaged in ritualistic practices to encourage fearlessness among warriors. They fought to the death to defend their islands against invaders in the colonial era which followed the arrival of Columbus to our shores, an unfortunate event that changed for the worst the natural evolution and development of indigenous societies of the world in the period that followed.
The myth about cannibalism was started because the Calinago were not intimidated by the European invaders and waged war in the defense of their territory and way of life.
I understand that the movie is a very over-the-top silly experience (and I love that sort of thing!), but I do think there's a way the filmmakers could have represented the Calinago without resorting to - and perpetuating - very harmful myths. For example, the pirates could have thought the Calinago were cannibals, but we - the audience - could have known differently and laughed with the Calinago at the stupidity of the pirates. Subtitles would could have accomplished this (and I noted that there were no subtitles when the Calinago spoke, making them essentially voiceless in the movie).
This issue really dampened what is otherwise an enjoyable movie. Johnny Depp is the highlight of the movie as usual. Orlando Bloom was fun to watch and has a great back (see I'm capable of appreciating the surface stuff!). I like women dressed up as men, so even enjoyed Keira Knightley (it's interesting that the filmmakers definitely tried to make her more appealing to modern women, yet did not take the same care with the Calinago). Norrington also rocked. And I loved the three-way fight!!! I also had fun with all the slashy subtext.
I guess I can't fully turn off my brain during a fun movie. And I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
On a different subject, I'm very very very very excited because a week tomorrow is when I arrive at
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
savoytruffle's for a pre-Writercon visit. And then it's Writercon!!!!!!!! *dances*ETA: The celebrations for Italy winning the World Cup are still going strong here. I imagine that it must be insane in Italy!
- Music:Neko Case's Fox Confessor Brings the Flood
- Mood:
distressed
Profile
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
cordelianne- cordelianne
Designed by chasethestars
chasethestars
Comments
It would be a safe and simple world if we never inadvertantly hurt other people's feelings, but we do. The thing that separates the jerks from the decent schmucks, as I'm sure we all strive to be, is whether they think about the *actual* effects of their actions on other people and or whether they dwell on the nicer story that they had in their head when they started.
There *is* definitely a difference between being ignorant and being hateful, but ignorance only coasts so far. "That's not how I meant it at all!" is only half of the solution. The other half is "I am very sorry." If you just keep explaining things away by citing intentions, then you never actually give any value to the objections. You aren't taking the problem seriously. Also, by letting intentions negate actions, the only people who ever get called on their hang-ups about race are white supremicists, who aren't likely to change, anyway. How are we ever going to learn anything from each other if we act like we are incapable of doing anything bad, 'cause we never meant to?
By the same token, my point is not that the filmmakers are irredeemable racists, but that the portrayal they offered up is racist. This distiction is an important one, because it leaves open the possiblity of discussion and change. It also allows the viewer to distinguish between enjoyable parts of the film - Jack Sparrow running down the beach fey as all get out - and disturbing parts of the film - he's running because he's being pursued by cannibal stereotypes.
Do you get what I'm driving at?
So yes, being sorry is an important part, although it did occur to me our well intentioned offending person could insist that what he did or said *wasn't* offensive except to very thin skinned people, and so refuse to apologize. For instance, a woman called me once to say she was reporting me to the Prosecutor's Office for inciting cruelty to animals, because of something I'd written in a column. (I write a humor column. That's widely known, and yet for some reason people who lack a sense of humor keep reading it.)
I did not, nor will I ever, apologize to her, because she's one of those people who simply takes offense at the drop of a pirates hat, without taking anything in context. (Let me be clear that this is NOT the case with you.) And yet she'll go to her grave thinking I'm a terrible cat hater -- as if there could be such a thing. In a case like that, it becomes an "I'm right" -- "No, I'm right" situation in which a truly subjective listener probably won't understand what all the fuss is about.
I'm nit-picking; the cannibal question is nothing like the scenario I described because, whether it was meant to be or not, even thick skinned people would have to admit parts of "Pirates" were offensive. My problem is that I take 911 calls for a living, and after spending 8 hours with that crap (on a related note, all of us do *not* strive to be decent schmucks), the serious part of my mind shuts down, and refuses to take offense at anything. What it all boils down to is, just because I don't mind something doesn't make it all right. In that, we can agree.