Fresh Prince of Bel-Air- Gangsta Carlton

Cultural Text:
The Bet



Gangsta Transformation



Who won the bet?



Analysis:
My cultural product is non-binartistic in realms of race and gender. The realms of race and gender intersect also with the concept of class in my product, with race as the subordinate subject, and using class as a dominant subject position. Gender also plays a huge role within the concept of what a certain gender should act like within a certain race. Class can trump authenticity of race because people racialize class. Upper-class doesn’t have the same experiences as lower class, therefore if one comes from another class than the majority of their race, can be seen as less than, or not belonging to a race. My argument is that money equals whiteness, and through my clip of Fresh Prince I will show how these realms intersect through diversity within pan-ethnicity, racial formation and intersectionality. The first observation of my product is what does it mean to be black? I want to discuss what society defines as being more socially black and why this has come to be. According to Omi and Winant, they describe race as something that is a very real, a classification that has both cultural ramifications as well as enforces a definite social order (54-55). So knowing this we know that the race definitely does have an order of organization to it. Carlton and Will show the diversity of blackness within pan-ethnicity. Here we are watching two individuals trying to prove that one is more “black” than the other. One explanation of where this notion of thought about blackness comes from is in Yen Le Espritu’s article, “Beyond Dualisms.” Espritu talks about how societies organize themselves around binaries, and these binaries help to organize structure and power. “Thus, white/male/professional/citizen constitutes the norm against which black/female/laborer/ alien is defined (108).” This helps to understand how Carlton is going against the group that society has placed him in. This goes further into when Espritu is discussing how Asians are neither/nor and both/and, this relates to Carlton completely. Although the majority of people Carlton associates with are white, he still is not accepted by them as being white, despite some of the mutual characteristics and rearing that has taken place. The same goes with blacks, when they see Carlton they think he is trying to act white, so they feel he is not embracing his blackness, therefore they don’t count him as being black. Carlton creates this almost “third space” discussed, for himself, because he doesn’t quite fit into either category (Espritu, 108). Later in this clip we see Carlton go through an image formation. When he takes off his stiff blazer and sweater vests and trades them in for a bandana, baggie pants and a gold chain. He talks with street slang, and had a swagger to his walk. When Carlton first arrived to Jazz’s apartment he said things like, “ oh just give me time to acclimate myself” and in response to that sentence one of Jazz’s friends replies, “Acclimate, that sounds like a school word, I don’t like school words.” Then later we see Carlton using terms such as, “sup” and “homies.” Along with this new slang, the others give Carlton the new name of C-Note, and Carlton embraces this new identity. In this clip we can see Omi and Winant’s theory of racialization occurring. Racialization the process of racial formation means an ideological and historically specific project where racial ideology comes from pre-existing conceptual elements. The end of this clip is a scene between Carlton and Will and they are both trying to figure out who won the bet. Carlton states to Will, “You always act like I never measure up to some rule of blackness you carry around.” This quote relates to the theory of fussion and fission in panethnicty. Because although Will and Carlton are both lumped as black, doesn’t mean that there isn’t a discrepancy between the two, as well as a bond. In the end both Carlton and Will feel judge by each other, and Will feels that because Carlton is of upper-class that he looks down on Will and thinks he is less intelligent. While Carlton feels less black. This ending conversation perfectly concludes that even within the same race there is still the division of class and race, and that from both ends of the spectrum, all feel that money trumps authenticity of blackness.

The Family Stone: Dinner Scene

In the film The Family Stone (2005), the writer and director Thomas Bezucha analyzes what it means to be “normal” by going beyond the binaries of race, class, sexual orientation and disability all in one scene: The dinner scene. Although these categories are all “socially constructed, (that) is not to say that that category has no significance in our world” (Crenshaw, p. 375). To find a mainstream film that actually addresses more than one dichotomy in any aspect of the movie is extremely difficult. Usually mainstream Hollywood sticks to only addressing the intersectionality of two things at a time. Bezucha, however, addresses intersectionality through the characters of an interracial, gay couple in which one partner is deaf. The character Patrick who is a gay Black man and his partner, Thad, who is a white, deaf, gay man are attempting to adopt a child. Bezucha also casts Sarah Jessica Paker, a mainstream Hollywood actress, as the character of Meredith, whom he describes as, “ultra-conservative white women from Manhattan,” to pose the question of what is “normal.” Meredith’s viewpoint of what is “normal” is limited to being a white, heterosexual, able bodied person, in a hegemonic household. The dinner scene takes place in a all white household, where Thad is one of the sons of the host and Meredith is a guest of his brother.

The scene starts with Patrick and Thad being asked if they have a preference for the race of their child. This was a great way for Bezucha to address the complications of how race intersects with the adoption of a child for an interracial couple. Because of racial formations, this question would never be posed to a couple with the same race. It is assumed that if both prospective parents are white, that they would be adopting a white child. Bezucha goes beyond the binary with this by having them respond by saying that it does not matter the race of their child, as what is more important to them is the opportunity to have a child. This is significant because it is talking about a homosexual couple adopting a child, which is going beyond the binaries of patriarchy.

Bezucha then goes a step further by addressing the intersection between an interracial couple and class. Thad explains that his deafness has not been a problem in the adoption process, but rather their economic status and the fact that they are in an interracial relationship have more been areas of concern. This addresses how class intersects with adoption processes as a certain amount of money is required to adopt a child. In essence, this means that only middle or upper class couples can adopt. The second half of the dinner scene is where Bezucha does a great job of addressing intersectionality in a family setting. This scene clearly shows how Patrick and Thad’s family goes beyond the binaries by accepting them for who they are. He does this most effectively by showing the contrast between the Stone family as a whole, and the character of Meredith.

It is most effective to analyze the way Bezucha represents this by breaking it down into sections. Bezucha first addresses intersectionality between sexuality and disabilities by defining what homosexuality is. Meredith views homosexuality as something that is undefined. She poses the question as to whether or not Thad and Patrick “believe in nature v. nurture” in terms of the whole “being gay thing.” This implies that being gay could be due to the environment in which one lives or is raised. The definition used by Bezucha is then given by the father character who says that their family views “sexual orientation as a genetic predisposition much like handedness.” The way Bezucha defines sexual orientation is in a direct intersection with disability. Bezucha also goes beyond the binaries in this particular part by addressing the belief that homosexuality is a choice, and how that belief is incorrect. In writing this scene as he did, he is also addressing how Thad’s sexual orientation is intersected with his disability and that neither of them is a problem nor can be separated from each other.

The family as a whole, around the table, does a great job of making Meredith’s offensive language into a joke i.e. talking about the drapes in the house and how they are not fashionable and would never yield a gay child. However, in doing this the mother makes a statement saying she hoped that all of her sons were gay. From this Bezucha addresses the intersectionality between sexuality and race. Meredith is confused about how a mother could hope for a gay son and makes the statement, “how can you hope for a child to be challenged. Life is hard enough as it is. Why would you want to make it more difficult. Patrick you understand.” By addressing Patrick within this statement, Meredith is addressing the intersectionality between sexuality and race, as well as, the fact that racism exists in our society. Meredith is pushing the “essential black subject,” as Stuart Hall describes in his piece New Ethnicities, that all Black people are the same and have the same experience onto Patrick at the same time as acknowledging that racism exists. However, while Bezucha does not address the racism in this portion as much as he does at the beginning of the scene, he does show the intersectionality of the two by having Meredith address Patrick as being a gay Black man. Gloria Anzaldia would call this a borderland for Patrick, floating between being black and gay, as well as being part of an interracial couple in society, yet, that is the only way that Bezucha address racism.

After realizing that she has offended the whole table, Meredith tries to defend herself by saying “that she just thinks a mother would want her child to be as ‘normal’ as possible.” Thus, Bezucha ends the dinner scene by connecting race, class, sexuality, disabilities all into one intersectionality that, for Meredith, encompasses not ‘normal.’ Meredith then is told by the family to stop and that she has said enough. After Meredith leaves the room, the mother looks at Thad and Patrick to tell them that they are more normal than any other person around the table. Bezucha is incorporating Crenshaw’s argument that, “the most critical resistance strategy for disempowered groups is to occupy and defend a politics of social location rather than to vacate or destroy it” (p. 375). Thus, Bezucha embraces their intersectionalities and goes beyond the binaries to represent that everyone should.

Representations of multiple intersectionalities in mainstream Hollywood films are very minimal and difficult to come across. Yet, Bezucha addresses four intersectionalities within one scene of a movie, in an intense, inspirational movement for everyone to go beyond the binaries and address the issues with what is ‘normal’ in our society.


Questions to consider:
1. How does Bezucha represent the 'mainstream' ideals of normal? What body does he use to pose the question of normal? To challenge the ideals of normal? After watching this do you see your ideals of normal being challenged?

2. How does Bezucha go beyond the binaries in this scene? Do you think he could have went further?

Survivor: Race Season

I focused on the first two parts of the season premiere.
Part 1:

Part 2:

The thirteenth season of Survivor began by dividing the players into four racialized tribes: African-American, Asian-American, Latino-American, and Caucasian. The premise of the show was to set up a “social experiment” to see how the various groups interacted with each other and others, as well as how they would compete, both as a team and as a racial group. By looking at the show with both panethnicity and intersectionality in mind, one can see the significance in going beyond the binaries in a show that was meant to be very binaristic.

The show began by forming racial binaries. Focusing on the season premiere, when everyone was first meeting and getting used to being divided up racially, it became evident how non-binaristic race is. There were a variety of reactions to the racial divisions among the groups. Some felt they had to represent their people and prove how adequate they were. The African-American tribe chanted "Represent! Represent! Represent!" They were excited to break down some of the stereotypes associated to their race. "We have to step up to the plate…We don't just run track!" Others felt they were not a united group solely because of their race and felt a little apprehensive about being divided this way. One contestant from the Asian-American tribe stated that he was “a little worried that it might play out to caricatures and stereotypes."

Panethnicity plays a big part in observing the show. For example, the Asian-American tribe consisted of four different ethnicities. "We're a mixed group ourselves within the Asian community" states one of the contestants. Though as a society, Americans often group all Asians together as a single unit, the variation within that “race” is very apparent. There are many countries represented in the “Asian” population with a vast array of cultures and customs. Interestingly enough, two of the contestants in the Asian tribe were Filipino. Though by many they are seen as Asian, many would actually consider themselves Pacific Islanders, offering others a large distinction from being Asian. This however introduces aspects of panethnicity.

Many of the “Asian” contestants voiced how they were more than simply Asian (an aspect of intersectionality to be further discussed), but united in a collective effort for the game. Though any team would hopefully work together with a shared goal, the shared social link that they are accustomed to being associated with, offered an additional uniting factor they are probably used to through ideas of panethnicity. Yen Le Espiritu points this out in her article, Asian American Panethnicity, stating “Despite their distinctive histories and separate identities, these ethnic groups have united to protect and promote their collective interests. They need not do so always. But…for certain purposes, panethnic organization takes precedence over tribal or national affiliation” (Espiritu, 2-3).

Panethnicty can promote group consciousness but looking at it with intersectionality, one can also see the importance of claiming multiple aspects of oneself, rather than being grouped into a single unit. Intersectionality is looking beyond the binaries with a multifaceted lens. It looks at the multiple positions one has that are not congruent with the status quo (largely a well off, healthy, white, heterosexual male). It looks inclusively, not exclusively, at race, gender and class, allowing individuals to encompass a wider picture of who they are.

Examples in the show are apparent when the groups are formed and team members do not automatically click just because they are of the same race. There are more elements to themselves that have effects on their appearance to and attitudes of others. The oldest member of the Asian tribe felt a bit like an outsider in regard to his appearance and lifestyle and how he would be seen by his fellow tribe members. "I've never been accepted by the Asian community. Take one look at me! This is a very dangerous position to be in."

When looking at collective consciousness with panethnicity, one must ignore or dismiss the variety of elements that make an individual, or intergroup differences. With intersectionality, all those aspects are taken into consideration in order to discourage a marginalization of multiple significant factors. Though Kimberle Williams Crenshaw focuses on violence and the intersectionality of women of color, she points to the importance of intergroup affiliation and recognition in her article Mapping the Margins. She promotes the dismissal of an “either/or proposition” when looking at individuals and “the need to account for multiple grounds of identity when considering how the social world is constructed” (Crenshaw, 358).

By watching this episode of Survivor with both panethnicity and intersectionality in mind, it is easy to see the relevance and importance of both. It is often instrumentally helpful to be grouped as a race with various ethnicities in order to form a larger collective consciousness. However it is also important to recognize intergroup affiliation in attempts to discourage the marginalization of individuals as containing a single quality when they are really quite multifaceted.

Showing first minutes of this clip for presentation:

Miss Jay Alexander

This particular text moves beyond the binaries in its display of gender constructedness, transgender identities and intersectionality. The binaristic view of gender divides humans into two distinct categories, without the possibility of an intermediate or “other” category. Thus, in our society, one has two options when filling out the paperwork at the doctor’s office- male or female. Rachel Alsop’s article “Natural Women and Men” argues that “the notion of normal masculinity is tied, not to biological nature, but to a psychological characteristic of rationality” (Alsop, 13). Though the majority of individuals are able to fit neatly into these categories- the presence of individuals that do not implies that gender is not so neatly arranged and is actually fluid. Miss Jay is a prime example of the fluid nature of gender. Miss J. was born with the body of a male, but she leans more towards the behavior that is classically considered feminine. Miss J. obviously does not fit neatly into either the category male or female, and instead occupies the gray area in-between which is commonly referred to as the “third space”.
This text can be readily used as a non binaristic view of transgender categories. In the book Vested Interests Garber explains that “the ‘third space’ is that which questions binary thinking and introduces crises… the ‘third term’ is not a term. Much less it is a sex” (Garber, 11). According to this view the “third space” contradicts and surpasses the gender binary; male and female. As evidenced by the clip, Miss J. Alexander is an occupier of this third space. She was born with the physical parts of a male, but with the mentality of what society would consider female. Miss J wears clothing typically associated with females, including high heals and dresses. Miss J also uses makeup and uses qualifying and descriptive words that are associated with female speech patterns. Thus Miss J inhabits a space somewhere between male and female, showing once again that gender is fluid and not set in stone as society has always treated it.
Miss J is a homosexual African American which places her into two distinct minority groups which have their own separate problems and agendas that are often in conflict with each other. In hip hop culture, which is a predominantly black form of music, there is an exceptional amount of homophobia expressed. One particular song comes to mind “Boom, Bye Bye” in which hazing and other violence against homosexuals, including murder, is promoted and even encouraged. With this type of message emerging from African American’s it conflicts and hinders the progress of homosexuals in the black community. Also as a male, Miss J. comes under even more fire for her sexuality as society has proclaimed that males are supposed to be masculine. Miss J is a member in all of these groups which conflict with each other, which makes her experience completely different from white homosexuals, and straight African Americans.

"Supermodel" music video--RuPaul

Beyond the Binaries...
RuPaul literally uses hir transgendered, racialized, and sexualized body to disrupt the dichotomous construction of social categories. First and foremost, s/he demonstrates the multiplicity and flexibility of genders by rejecting the idea of having to choose between identifying as a man or a woman. In essence, hir physicality demonstrates the point that "the most critical resistance strategy for disempowered groups is to occupy and defend a politics of social location rather than to vacate and destroy it" (Crenshaw, 375). Taken with Rupaul's subtle illustration of race and class as important factors influencing hir social location, it would appear that s/he is ultimately trying to illuminate a) the fluidity of gender and b) the diversity of black and trans experience (Hall).

Furthermore, hir adornment of a blonde wig raises interesting questions about the distinction between traditional "white" standards of beauty and "black" standards of beauty. For example, is Rupaul unwittingly validating the so-called "dominant" group's equation of blondeness with physical attractiveness? Or is the wig a subversive prop designed to challenge and reconfigure traditional American standards of beauty? If the latter question is more accurate, then Rupaul is cleverly demonstrating for hir audience how "beauty" is ideologically applied to certain segments of the population.

Conversely, Rupaul affirms the constructed nature of race, gender, and sexuality, particularly through hir presentation of class/wealth. For example, hir exaggerated walk, elaborate hairstyles, and montage of outfits all symbolize a highly glamorized portrayal of "supermodel" feminine beauty. This enactment leaves in tact those stereotypes of female supermodels, and by association, drag performers as the ultimate, idealized images of womanhood. Furthermore, it does nothing to challenge the stereotypes characterizing maleness OR femaleness.

Also, consider the relationship between Rupaul's (trans)gender, sexuality, and class. This particular cultural text could be construed as further validation of the stereotype that gay males, especially gay male drag performers, are preoccupied with superficial symbols of status, wealth, and beauty (hint: check out the hair, the fashion, the superstar treatment/behavior depicted throughout the video).

Ironically, Rupaul both defends and undermines hir "politics of social location."

Question: In what other ways do you see Rupaul going beyond or maintaining binaries? How do race, class, gender, and sexuality converge in your examples?
Video:

Penelope Cruz Beauty Advertisment

A 30-second commercial featuring Penelope Cruz for L'Oreal Hair Color. This example will be the central focus and support for my argument of how language and ethnicity intersect to racialize people through the theory of intersectionality.

What is intersectionality?

The theory of intersectionality aims to introduce the notion that different identities such as race, language, class, gender and sexuality closely interact with each other to shape the multiple dimensions of an individual. The objective of this concept is to highlight the many ways in which the experiences of individuals can be captured by examining the different ways in which they intersect and construct the political, representational and structural identity of a person. Rather than polarizing each aspect of an individual on the basis of class, race, language or gender, intersectionality acknowledges how these elements collectively converge to construct a person’s social identity.


How can we discuss the relationship between language and ethnicity using the theory of intersectionality?

We can discuss the relationship between ethnicity and language by understanding how intersectionality incorporates the many different characteristics of a person in order to describe their entire identity. Thus, a person's gender, sexual orientation, accent or native language, ethnicity and class all are equally important when understanding the "whole" of an individual. Ethnicity and language become linked because language often prescribes the ethnic origin of a person. Whether the hint is because of their accent or their foreign language, linguistic distinctiveness can often shed light to a individuals ethnic identity.

In addition to this argument, language can also play the antagonist role when incorporated into the social phenomenon of "optional-ethnicity". When a person's phenotypic features give them the ability to "travel" between ethnic groups, this transition or privilege can be labeled "optional-ethnicity". We can understand the relationship between language and optional-ethnicity by acknowledging how language trumps the "power of choice" that certain people receive because of their phenotypic features being similar or consistent to the majority (whites). This mainly occurs when people trying to "pass" carry with them linguistically, a thick or unique accent because of their native tongue. The presence of difference in language revokes the privilege for ethnic choice. The media example above is a prime example of this theory, and we can see why Penelope Cruz is a great illustration of how this theory works in real life and within popular media.


How is the media example non-binaristic?

The cultural text of the commercial featuring Penelope Cruz qualifies as non-binaristic because it expands beyond the common notion that ones identity is a fixed category. The commercial is an prime example in that it showcases the theory of intersectionality, and helps us to comprehend how the identity of an individual can be seen as a fluid and flux characteristic, and how ones ethnic identity can be determined by different attributes such as language, sexuality and class.
Instead of remaining exclusive to the properties of race, sex, class and gender, one can also understand the formation of a socially constructed identity by analyzing the relationship between ethnicity and language and how these characteristics frequently converge to verify ones racial identity.


Quotes/Resources:
Below are some quotes from well known scholars that help us to better understand how the intersection of language and ethnicity collectively converge to racialize people in a socially constructed world.

1. “The focus on the intersection of race and gender only highlights the need to account for multiple grounds of identity (such as class, language, ethnicity, etc) when considering how the social world is constructed” -Kimberly Crenshaw

2. “Ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity- I am my language. Until I can take pride in my language, I cannot take pride in myself. Until I can accept as legitimate Chicano Texas, Spanish, Tex-Mex and all the other languages I speak, I cannot accept the legitimacy of myself" -Gloria Anzalida

3.“… Ethnic identity flies in the face of the common sense notion of ethnicity many of us believe in- that one’s ethnic identity is a fixed characteristic, reflective of blood ties and given at birth. However, social scientists who study ethnicity have long concluded that while ethnicity is based in a belief in a common ancestry, ethnicity is primarily a social phenomenon, not a biological one” -Mary Waters

--Camille E.