Browse Exhibits (24 total)

Sed fermentum aliquet nisi sit amet suscipit. Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. Duis maximus mi eget ante dapibus, non condimentum turpis mattis. Maecenas ut nibh rutrum, iaculis nibh vitae, ullamcorper diam. Aenean vestibulum scelerisque lacus, a feugiat nibh. Sed convallis nisi id est pretium semper. Nunc maximus suscipit turpis, nec mattis velit molestie sit amet. Ut nibh mauris, vestibulum et erat vitae, lacinia dapibus tortor. Proin vehicula at lacus imperdiet laoreet. Sed vestibulum, elit malesuada laoreet viverra, nisl tortor dignissim leo, ac pulvinar metus dolor at urna. Vestibulum nulla leo, luctus eget odio et, pharetra condimentum tortor.

Overview Essay

This exhibit “Black Representation in Film” examines the history of Black representation in film from how Black people were first portrayed when cinema first began as it was at first largely controlled and created for and by White people. And how this history of Black representation has led to and impacted how modern-day Black representation looks like today. This exhibit is divided into five sections Early Cinema’s Representation of Blackness, Race Films, Blaxploitation, Modern Black Representation, and Contemporary Challenges of Black Portrayals in Film. The first four pages of the exhibit were divided into four different eras and genres of filmmaking to show how the representation of Black people in film changed over time based on the events both socially and politically from that time that had an impact. Especially when Black filmmakers and actors were allowed to be more involved in the creative process of filmmaking or created their sub-genres. The last section Contemporary Challenges of Black Portrayals in Film discusses the modern-day obstacles that still exist in Black representation in film and how even with progress there is still room for growth and what can be done to allow for more Black representation in film.

Through analyzing the history of cinema it can be seen how cinema was used as a way to impact America’s social and cultural perceptions of race in our society. This was done through the depictions of Black people in cinema based on stereotypes and caricatures that were reinforced in early cinema and still are present in our lives today. In the exhibit Early Cinema’s Representation of Blackness, I have chosen three films as my items that represent the earliest depictions of Blackness that discusses the concept of the societal and cultural construction of race. When cinema first began, it existed in a society where it was still a largely held belief that there was a biological difference between races. This race science was used to treat Black people as an inferior race compared to the White race who were seen as biologically superior. In Early Cinema’s Depiction of Blackness, the first three items are films that show how media, specifically film media was used to reinforce the cultural construction of race. “There is no biological distinction that correlates with our collective understanding of racial difference. There are phenotypical differences across the global human population, eye color, height, hair texture, skin color, etc. But those are physical expressions of allelic differences in our shared, identical DNA. The concept of race is a product of history, culturally constructed and institutionally affirmed as part of a much larger hegemonic system… Anglo-European whites manipulating meaning to subjugate and control people of color, and Black people in particular (but not exclusively), to further their own economic and political goals” (Sharman 2020).

During this period, Black people still did not have equal rights and it was only a few decades after the end of slavery. Where films like The Birth of a Nation (1915) were used as propaganda to spread the notion that free Black people who now had access to voting and holding political offices and the Reconstruction era that followed the Civil War were a danger to the South and White people as a whole. “Feature films were more powerful, more ubiquitous, and, in effect, more veracious than other media, however. Griffith seared images of degraded Negroes into the minds of millions. A whole new generation of consumers of American mass media was fed the same old stereotypes to shape images of African Americans” (Baker, 1998, pg.36). The films of this time reintroduce through cinema the concept of otherness that Black people were biologically inferior and through racist imagery such as blackface, stereotypes, and caricatures that Black people and Black culture were violent, savage, dangerous, hypersexual, and non-intellectuals who were happier when they were enslaved. “In both popular and scientific literature African American men, in particular, were depicted as savages who harbored a bestial lust for White women. These depravities, many believed, could be curbed only by sadistic tortures and lynchings. The routine violence perpetrated by lynch mobs was always portrayed as justice served in the name of chivalry and the "protection" of White southern women” (Baker, 1998, 36). The Birth of a Nation inspired the revitalization of the Klu Klux Klan in the 1920s showing how media has an impact on societal perception of race as it inspired more discrimination and violence to be committed against Black people because of media influence.

Race films and Blaxploitation films eras are when Black people began to gain creative control in the film industry. They began to create a Black film industry where it was meant to be made for a Black audience. These films were made during a time when Whiteness was still socially considered the norm, but it was innovative to make films that aimed to depict Black lives as the center of these stories and films. “Without a doubt, the African American political, scientific, philosophical, and aesthetic movement of the interwar years changed the fabric of American culture. For the first time there was a concerted effort to challenge the derisive and stereotypical images of African Americans produced by blackface minstrelsy, magazine publishers, and racist science” (Baker, 1998, 140). Blaxploitation films began in the 1970s and were influenced from a post-Civil Rights Movement era where they now had legal equal rights, but still felt largely ignored in receiving representation that they enjoyed in pop culture and media. These films during these two eras aimed to humanize and empower Black people, but they received criticisms from the Black community on what they considered to be good representation. Race and Blaxploitation films by some audiences felt they leaned into only reinforcing stereotypes of Black people and were not considered respectable representation of Blackness, but some creators in their efforts of representation still leaned into Eurocentric standards they had colorism in their films based on how they portrayed lighter and darker skinned Black people in their films.

Modern Black representation emerged from a generation of filmmakers who begin their careers making acclaimed independent films. They work their way up to working with mainstream studios giving them access to large budgets and general audiences for their films. Many contemporary filmmakers have worked to depict to improve the representation of Blackness on screen by wanting authentic depictions of the lives of Black people in their films. Some of these filmmakers have addressed modern-day racism also known as colorblind racism. “Rather than dodge complicated themes about race and identity, the film grapples head-on with the issues affecting modern-day black life" (Smith 2018). Filmmakers do not want to portray stereotypes but also do not want to de-racialize the Black characters they are portraying on screen. Modern Black representation aims to show a positive portrayal of Black people and culture whether or not their story has examinations of race or inequalities modern filmmakers do not want to shy away from portraying diverse forms of Blackness. Even with this progress, there are still some contemporary challenges with Black representation, especially for Black women. Black women are rarely leading ladies and the majority are portrayed based on Eurocentric beauty standards that shame darker-skinned women and their natural hair. How can a group be truly represented if they are not the creative forces making representation? For there to be true diversity in the film industry there needs to be diversity both on and off the screen with Black actors, writers, directors, and producers working on these films.

In conclusion, Black representation in film has existed since the beginning of film and has changed alongside the development of film and historical events. The existence of Black representation in film began when films were made for and by White people and solely for White audiences to enjoy. During, a time in our history when racism against Black people was still largely accepted in our country, and believing in race science and biological differences between races was still considered the norm. This influenced how Blackness was portrayed in films.  Leading film scholars identified five categories of Black stereotypes that would influence how Black people would be represented in every other era of film that was discussed in this project. Black representation struggled in the era of Race films and Blaxploitation where films that aimed to be made for and by Black people wanted to create films that inspired Black audiences and give humanized portrayals of Black life. But this led to debates about what is considered acceptable of portrayals of Blackness and Black filmmakers were leaning into stereotypes that White filmmakers were using in their films. These Black-centered genres faded out when White filmmakers took over the genres. But that innovation has inspired contemporary filmmaking today to once again have Black filmmakers take control of Black representation and the stories of Black experiences within a film. Overall, there is still progress to be made for representation as there are still prevalent issues of colorism, texturism, and stereotypes that are affecting what is being represented on screen. Part of the solution to give equal and diverse representation of Blackness on screen is to have Black creatives on and off the screen helping to create diverse Black representation in film.

Works Cited

Sharman, R. (2020, May 18). African Americans in Cinema. Moving Pictures. Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://uark.pressbooks.pub/movingpictures/chapter/african-americans-in-cinema/

Field, A. N. (n.d.). Black Cinema at its birth. The Criterion Collection. Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/6845-black-cinema-at-its-birth

Haughton, A. (2021, February 16). The history of Blaxploitation Cinema. Viddy Well. Retrieved April 27, 2023, from https://www.viddy-well.com/articles/the-history-of-blaxploitation-cinema

Baron, Z. (2018, July 30). Spike Lee just made the movie of the year. GQ. Retrieved April 27, 2023, from https://www.gq.com/story/spike-lee-blackkklansman-profile

Martin, S. (2021, June 24). A Look at Liberal Racism and Representation in Jordan Peele's Get Out. GUAP The Home Of Emerging Creatives. Retrieved April 27, 2023, from https://guap.co.uk/a-look-at-liberal-racism-and-representation-in-jordan-peeles-get-out/

Identifying Race

            The beginning of forensic anthropology places its roots within the murder of Dr. George Parkman, a physician and frequent donator to Harvard University, in 1849. It was believed that Harvard Chemistry professor John Webster had borrowed money from Parkman, and in an attempt to escape his debt, murdered Parkman. The newspaper had reported a mutilation in which Parkman’s body parts were found in the anatomy laboratory, in the septic tank, and in the furnace. Left with only skeletal remains, Harvard anatomy professors Jeffries Wyman and Oliver Wendell Holmes pieced the skeletal structure back together and identified Parkman by his dentures, confirmed by the mold provided by his dentist. However, the first official applied study of forensic anthropology was by Thomas Dwight, now considered the father of forensic anthropology (in the United States). Dwight had written an essay titled “The Identification of the Human Skeleton. A Medico-Legal Study”, as he was one of the first Americans who had discussed the possibility of identifying skeletal remains. He eventually took over Wendell Holmes position as Professor of Anatomy at Harvard and researched the ways in which you could determine age, sex, and stature from one’s skeleton. However, it wasn’t until 1912, with the start of one of the largest atomical collections by Dr. T. Wingate Todd and Dr. Carl Hamann, that race had become an identifiable feature. Ohio had made it mandatory that professors preserve the cadavers dissected by their medical students, therefore Drs. Todd and Hamann used this opportunity to document all the cadavers that entered the university. This included the documentation of age, sex, ancestry, stature, weight, cause of death, and more. By studying the patterns shared by over thousands of the cadavers documented, Todd was able to differentiate limb proportions between African Americans and White Americans, along with discovering many age estimation features. This was the beginning of modern-day race identification for forensic anthropologists. Although throughout history there had been many attempts and false studies associated with race identification through the use of bones such as the cephalic index (1700s), the measurement of skull index associated with race, race identification in the forensic context didn’t start until quite some time later (1900s). Around the same time forensic anthropologists began to identify race, “The Race Concept” was published. The race concept identifies race as a societal construct, given that no “race” shares one set of the same physical/biological characteristics. There is way too broad a spectrum of physical characteristics across “races” for any one race to fit into specific racial categories. However, this raises the question, “If race doesn’t exist, why are forensic anthropologists so good at identifying it?”

            Forensic Anthropologists identify race through skeletal morphology. However, it appears forensic anthropologists may not be as good at identifying race as thought prior, “In examining human genetic variation on a worldwide scale, Lewontin’s (1972) study of human variation using classic genetic markers has been cited as evidence that differences among human groups are too small to allow accurate classification. Lewontin estimated that 85% of human genetic variation is found within populations, 8% is found within populations of the same race or regional grouping, and only 6% is found among races or regions” (Ousley, Jantz, & Freid, 2009). Many of these genetic markers were found to overlap. However, studies of Howells craniometric data on human craniometric variation on a world-wide scale have resulted in consistent results. Though Howells data was consistent with Lewontin’s estimates, they had found strong geographic patterning that has made itself present at an early age. Due to Howell’s craniometric data seeming relatively consistent and accurate, “studies have used discriminant function analysis (DFA) to classify one individual at a time from known samples into Howells’ groups, and their results seem to seem in agreement with those of Lewontin (1972)” (Ousley, Jantz, & Freid, 2009). Howells data includes 30-50+ samples (Male) from multiple different continents/regions including, but not limited to, America, different areas within Asia (Philippines, Japan, Ainu, Andaman Islanders, Buriat, etc.), Africa (Teita, Bushman, Dogon, Egypt, etc), Europe, Polynesia, SW Pacific, and more. It should be made clear that DFA should be used with caution when attempting to classify remains that do not have representation in the reference populations. It has been said that “As has been pointed out, DFA will classify any and all measurements and individuals, whether or not the measurements are correct, even if the measurements come from another species or a soccer ball” (Freid et al., 2005; Ousley et al.,2007). DFA measurements are typically made from 10 variables, therefore, several multivariate statistical methods allow for much more accurate data. Multivariate classifications “of craniometrics within traditional races have found significant variability, such as in American whites (Ousley and Jantz, 2002), African groups (Spradley, 2006; Spradley et al., 2008b), Hispanic groups (Ross et al., 2004; Slice and Ross, 2004; Ross et al., 2005; Spradley et al., 2008a), Native Americans (Ousley and Billeck, 2001; Ousley et al., 2005), and East Asian groups (Ousley et al., 2003)” (Ousley, Jantz, & Freid, 2009).  Multivariate craniometric data is the most modern approach to race identification, given it relies on numerous measurements and large sample sizes from modern Americans and other populations around the world. So, although “race” identification is advancing in it’s accuracy, it still remains quite unreliable in the larger scope. Often when race is identified it appears to be more of an educated estimate in an attempt to help narrow down possible victims, but it is not used as a definite answer.

            The process of identifying race, however, does add to the idea that race is biological and not a social concept. Though it is used with good intentions and to help the identification of those who have passed, it still remains rather controversial. Many Forensic Anthropologists agree that “the successful assignment of race to a skeletal specimen is not a vindication of the race concept, but rather a prediction that an individual, while alive was assigned to a particular socially constructed ‘racial’ category. A specimen may display features that point to African ancestry. In this country that person is likely to have been labeled Black regardless of whether or not such a race actually exists in nature” (Sauer, 1992). This debate had actually begun in the field of zoology, in which the argument was made that attempting to define race on the basis of more than one or two characteristics impossible. In the 1960s, C. Loring Brace and Frank Livingstone had stated in Montagu’s The Concept of Race, “From whatever viewpoint one approaches the question of the applicability of the concept of race to mankind, the modalities of human variability appear so far from those required for a coherent classification that the concept must be considered as of very limited use. . . To dismember mankind into races as a convenient approximation requires such a distortion of the facts that any usefulness disappears” (Sauer, 2009). Brace and Livingstone’s statement was not received well by the anthropology community in the 1960s, it waged a rather bitter controversy. Geneticist Dobzhansky had voiced his view on the concept of race in the 1966 AAAS symposium, stating “If races did not exist they would have to be invented. Since they do exist they need not to be invented, they need to be understood” (Sauer, 2009). A paper delivered at the 1987 American Anthropological Association meeting had revealed that 50% of the 147 physical anthropologists surveyed within the United States agreed with the statement, “There are biological races within the species Homo Sapiens.” However, as of today it seems there are very few physical anthropologists who support the idea of race and the ability to separate the human population into four or five racial categories.

            Today most physical/forensic anthropologists refer to the category of “race” as “ancestry”, given it described a more accurate image of what they are aiming to identify through the remains. Though many forensic anthropologists agree race is a concept, they must identify race from what they concluded about the skeletal remains’ ancestry. This is because race is a key feature in missing person’s reports, along with sex, age, and height (stature). Identification “is a two-stage process. The first stage involves the construction of a biological profile and the second is an attempt at a positive match. The latter ideally involves comparing some individualizing data from a missing person to similar data recovered from the skeletal remains, such as dental records or X-rays” (Sauer, 2009). The first stage is important in generating a narrowed down list of possible missing persons based on matching features identified from the remains such as “race”, from there, forensic anthropologists are able to match those missing persons reports with specific skeletal features (dental features, medical history, etc.).

            Although forensic anthropologists might have had a controversial past in terms of racial identification and the acceptance of the race concept, it appears most all modern physical/forensic anthropologists are avid supporters of the race concept and the identification of “ancestry” rather than “race”. It must be made aware that although forensic anthropologists do identify race, it is in accordance with the missing person’s report requirements in order to narrow down possible victims.

In this exhibit we will be overviewing the history of racialized politics and media that allow for the continued disparities in minoritized people today in the American health-care system. We will be dissecting how the implications of systematic racism have affected people in the near past and continue to affect the Black community in the present day.

We will be separating our media into five sections that focus on different facets of the health-care system. Our sections will vary from the History of Race and Black and White Binary, to the Disparities of Black People, Pregnancy Bias and Social Implications of constructive ideas all within the American health-care system. 

We decided to focus on disparities in the health-care system because of how important it is to have access to affordable medical care. The goal is to bring awareness to the lack of people who are working in medical fields that actively know how to best serve the Black community. Unfortunately, there have been numerous accounts of Black people who are being underrepresented and underserved in the United States. By separating our data into five sections with specific topics, we are hoping to break down the negative experiences of the Black community and give light to the lack of justice in the medical community.

Depicting how blackface has been used in recent films and other forms of Media. I am trying to look into these occurances and see the reactions from viewers, the creators of the content, as well as looking into the history of blackface in America.