NYT's Dargis and Scott on Black men in film leading to Obama.

The mainstream press is comparing icons, events or phenomena of African-American history to Barack Obama's meaning, real or symbolic, to North American culture. Each outlet is doing so in their individual ways, so that they can remind their audiences about President Barack Obama's meaning and relevance. It is rarely simple, or easy, or forgiving to try to compare the history of a people to a record of the films which were made about, for, or by them. The New York Times' film critics Manohla Dargis and A.O. Scott wrote a column that attempted this. It's also to forecast Obama's ripple effect.

Writing this kind of a column is rarely wise because is it so hard to do it well - with skill and style. This was well-written, providing vital and compelling cultural, historical and political context. In acknowledging only the titanic and iconic filmmakers and actors they omit many of the distinctive and unconventional talents. But Dargis and Scott wrote it very well, demonstrating a deep knowledge of their subjects and the critical, though conventional, players. I must level one criticism to the part that made me wince.

Referring to Obama as "only half-black" is strange and awkward. Why would you make a point of that? I doubt that I am the only multi-ethnic man of color or multiracial person who winces at that concession or quiescence. I imagine that to speculate on their reasons why they emphasized his bicultural heritage would only blow an even bigger hole in the large can of worms that that point has already opened.

A bigger question come from the proverbial left field: In the face of this fascination, it is interesting...even sobering, to have to acknowledge a morose and frightening story that reminds us of how far behind the audacity, promise and hope of which Pres. Obama is a new American symbol.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution ran a story about a documentary film that is at the Sundance Film Festival; it is vital and relevant because actor Morgan Freeman is paying for an integrated high school prom...in a Sundance documentary.

Somehow Charleston, Mississippi, where Freeman lives, has not kept pace with the rest of the United States' attitudes about people of different colors and different cultures finding friends and love among one another. The best way to summarize the crisis is to provide this excerpt from The Journal Constitution: "The heart of the film is candid interviews with black and white Charleston students, who speak passionately about the racism that lingers in their town. The filmmakers follow a core of students, among them a black boy and white girl who date despite her father's objections, a white couple whose friendship with a black youth causes them grief, and a black girl who suspects racism cost her the class valedictorian honor."

That out-dated attitude, that bizarre fear of miscegenation, must remind us of a critical - and chronic - lesson. North American culture is still immature.
Writing a well-intended, but arbitrarily organized analysis of how African-American men have been portrayed in American films in the last 50 years is interesting. Trying to connect that to Barack Obama's assent is a stretch - an interesting one.

It is morose that with a brown and biethnic man becoming the the president of the United States, that this remains.

What - or how does Dargis' and Scott's film analysis contribute to knocking down the fear and ignorance of which cultural divisions and prejudice are made? That is neither the New York Times' duty, nor Dargis', or Scott's duties. It's too important to simply be their duty. When you want the answer to the question of the ultimate responsibility, please go into your hallway, into your bedroom or into your bathroom. Look into the mirror.