Melvin Van Peeble's Sweet Sweetback's Baadassss Song!

The production of Melvin Van Peeble's Sweet Sweetback's Baadasss Song by the Burnt Sugar The Arkestra Chamber, which can be found at the Burnt Sugar Archestra Site (http://burntsugarindex.com)

was a difficult thing for me to know how to categorize, which blog to put it in but I decided that film or video came the closest. I am afraid I can't risk this turning up in my course material but on the other hand, I felt strongly positive about it. First I thought to myself, you can't write about this. This is too scandalous. I often think that these days. I thought to myself would they dare to follow the territory of the film? Because the film was scandalous. I remember exactly how scandalous it felt to be sitting in the movie theatre watching that film way back in 1971 when I was all of 19 and when it broke new ground in the black film world and I was still just a little pup.

Looking back at it years hence one of the things that made me particularly uncomfortable was Van Peeble's performance in the role. I didn't know much back then about real people playing roles in movies so maybe I just couldn't make the necessary leap of imagination. It kind of reminded me of Richard Wright playing himself in the film of Native Son, which really didn't work for me either. In that case, Wright was much too old to be convincing in the part, and maybe too invested in making the material work. Maybe Van Peebles wasn't exactly the most convincing actor.

Somehow it just wasn't working whereas the strapping young man who plays Sweetback in the opera production is just perfect, one of those real beauties with long lashes (I can imagine). It's a type. There was this wonderful actor who played the lead role in Native Son in the stage productions of that period in the West Village. Maybe his name was Beau Rucker. He continued to turn up in productions of August Wilson's plays. Anyhow it is that type.

I was told by my teacher at NYU (Village Voice Film Critic par excellence Jim Hoberman) that Sweet Sweetback was a film that broke all kinds of records because the white industry doomed it to failure and yet the black community turned out en masse to see it (as Van Peebles the younger does such an excellent job of describing in Baadassss!--2003, Sony Pictures, his biographical film about his father). Well I was, myself, part of that black audience that turned out. But then I went to see anything with black people in it back then. I saw it all, just as a matter of course.

So I thought I will just take a little peek since it is right there on the web because truth be told I had adored Van Peeble's stage shows even at the time-- Ain't Supposed to Die a Natural Death and the other one, both of which I saw from orchestra seats when they first opened on Broadway. Saw a revival of Ain't Supposed to Die a Natural Death at the Harlem Repertory Theatre a few years back that was absolutely wonderful wonderful wonderful but the material is such that you just can't mess it up. Somehow I think it has escaped the notice of many people what a wonderful thing musical theatre can be. Don't know how the Orchestra made the leap but however I hope they will be able to continue. Of course this production was staged in France, no surprise because it would be difficult to do such a thing in the United States, still I think. Yet Peebles has that knack.

But Sweet Sweetback, well that was another matter all together. I think it was a sexist film, a humiliating experience for a young black woman such as myself who encountered lewd propositions on almost every corner of Harlem that I crossed. It was a crazy crazy time so far as that goes, and exhausting. I was never either raped or assaulted in the streets of Harlem, perhaps because I knew my way around pretty good. It was afterall my home. But in my view back then Sweet Sweetback had no redeeming qualities except that a black man made the film industry pay him. Rape has no redeeming qualities--regardless of the gender of the victim-- so far as I am concerned. That's just non-negotiable, the bedrock of being a feminist, which is what I was then and am now.

But the odd thing is that the translation to the stage is somehow irresistable. I had, in fact, begun to notice that musical theatre, for instance in opera, can support almost any kind of outlandish content provided the music and the sense of spectacle is there. The same problematic content is there in this production of Sweetback (they didn't skirt it) of what I can only regard as the sexual exploitation of a minor as the centerpiece but yet it is so beautifully and brilliantly performer by the Archestra that I have to give them a shout out. I can't defend it and I won't make any apologies. Nobody asked me whether it was a good idea. Nobody ever would but if you should happen across this note, then you'll know that my recommendation would be that you take a look for yourself, be careful about minors because the content is risque but if you can handle that-- with all the ridiculously bad pornographic crap floating around these days--to get a look at this, or a listen anyhow. Thanks Greg Tate.

Added Notes:  rehearsal notes and comments on the production by Melvin Van Peebles at http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JIq2FSg8TH8#!

Watching a Lot of Movies

Julie & Julia (2009), Director: Nora Ephron

The thing that was really a revelation to me this particular year, with all the usual trying to catch up with films nominated for the Academy Awards, etc, is Julie and Julia written and directed by Nora Ephron, starring Meryl Streep who is playing the cook Julia Childs.

I did just love this movie despite realizing all of its shortcomings and why other people I know couldn't be bothered to watch it or might find it dull or otherwise lacking. For one thing, it is completely and unabashedly what some might regard as upper middle class (Julia Child studies French cooking at the Cordon Bleu in Paris in the 50s I guess and her husband is a member of the United States Diplomatic Core in Paris and other European capitals).

Child is a tall and flamboyant woman to begin with so from the first scene she seems like a star. The other story, which anchors Julia Child's early career to the present is about a young couple, both very much New York based who have a cheap apartment in Queens but dine on the French food Julie cooks from Julia Child's published collection of recipes. Her husband is an editor for Archaeology Magazine I think.

Like Sleepless in Seattle (which this film reminds me of and which Nora Ephron also directed), the entire thing takes place inside of a bubble of such privilege and ease that I feel compelled to remind myself that this is not the real world. Of course, I just watched it on my teeny tiny old television and so could not enjoy all the care and attention that was put into presenting period costumes and sets, and the richness of the food. But I've got a pretty good imagination about these things. I added those in my head.

So it is one of those things that is somehow about whiteness, even though there is nothing even vaguely jingoistic or aggressive or xenophobic about it. It's just having a good time, like Ephron's Heartburn (which I just absolutely adored) in a female centered space. But there is an added quotient of caution so far as depth that I sense in light comedies today like everyone has to be very careful to make sure not to allow any of the various fears of our present world (including our increasing military commitments) to creep in. It is more alarming to me to notice that there is this pulling back then if there weren't such a pulling back. In a way, the best measure of how conservative a time is to look at the comic films of that time. Whatever it is that everybody was nervous about is usually completely elided. In this case anything to do with religion, race, war or poverty.

I mean how do you make a movie about New York City after 9/11 without some of that stuff creeping in. Julie is a middle level bureaucrat handling the cases of survivors of 9/11. We get to hear about them as an endless and depressing litany of complaints on her headset in her cubicle concerning insurance, illness and death. It becomes a kind of morbid joke, which was fine with me and actually I would have liked to see more of this kind of "black" humor. Although perhaps not quite right for anybody who had a more direct experience of 9/11, it was weirdly optimistic and sunny. Maybe this is a movie made by people who are thinking that perhaps our military response was overblown and therefore should not be addressed every time we see a movie. The Armageddon syndrome in certainly getting exhausted in many of the other movies I've been reviewing this year.

But it also it felt like from a commercial standpoint that the film was reaching for a particular niche, for an audience that would be eager and willing to ignore what was going on in the rest of the world outside their kitchens, or were simply exhausted by such matters, or who might later be interested in something like this in the ongoing market of dvd viewing via netflix and other services. I mean at any given time I've got about 200 films in my queue on netflix and nothing is worse than not being able to think of anything I want to rent. Pure hell.

I would imagine people rent films to serve particular needs and I would imagine how Julie and Julia could fit a wide variety of profiles for an evening's entertainment. Me I am always researching something and right now its biographical approaches to American artists, especially but not limited to women. Julia Child would definitely fit that mold. And I would imagine a great deal more can be said about her than was said during her lifetime. Although that might depend on who survives to run her estate.

Julia Child has been dead a few years, still has successful cook books and an archive of television programs available for viewing. She also wrote an autobiography in which she documented her romance with the man she married, which also provides fodder for this script.

The film presents an extremely comfortable world and I found it particularly welcome to look at a film and not have to prepare myself for the shock of some unpleasant reminder that nowhere and nothing will ever be safe again.

At the same time, I am painfully aware that this is just the kind of film about white people that black people are always lamenting is never made about any of us. Why do white women get Julie and Julia whereas we black women get Precious? It's not as if we don't like to cook and go to France. Moreover, where the hell is the white Precious? Would she ever even get beyond reality television or Judge Judy?

Moreover, why is this story about this incredibly important woman (I am assuming) so damn light? Isn't there a basic unreality to this kind of presentation of happiness? And the people who want there to be films like this about black people, are they aware that this is essentially a women's film, a romantic comedy, with a very specific and narrow target audience? If one were to do the same kind of film about black couples in love with strong ambitious women dominating their relationships as a comedy, would there be a sufficient audience, black, white or whatever? That would be the scenario if feminism had actually succeeded in this country, which it has not. Indeed, quite the opposite.

As for Ephron's version here, I feel compelled to say that there is an unreality to all this lovey dovey happy romantic comedy stuff with zero bite that is finally offensive. Personally I like the genre of romantic comedy, always have. Just saw one Sidney Poitier did--For Love of Ivy and actually that was what Guess Who is Coming to Dinner was as well. But it drives me a little crazy that people can't be shown as believably in love without suspending all disbelief, and wasting everybody's time essentially exploring an entire universe that has no practical application. It is almost as if you can't have any politics or homeless people in such a film at all for fear the center will not hold.

Yes, this film is a breathe of fresh air in comparison to all the other competition for the year of 2009. It is so fluffy and light that it almost reminds me of the old genre films of the 40s when films were always made for a particular niche audience--women's films, Westerns, war films, mysteries and crime noirs, comedies and so on. This film seemed very satisfying as a women's film made for people who adore Meryl Streep and eager for yet another opportunity to wallow in her splendid gifts. The story of this tall fabulous not very pretty creature who found the expression of her genius in French cooking and the writing of cook books, and in the hosting of a strange cooking show broadcast on American television in the 60s--it tickles the fancy.

In my timeline for the 60s, the publication of Julia Child's masterpiece The Art of French Cooking in 1961 belongs there. The 50s and the 60s were important times in the affection for things French among a certain class of Americans who were set upon upward mobility. My family participated in that affection. I went to France on the S.S. Liberte for the first time with my family in 1961. I was nine and I have never had such a wonderful time in all my life since. The food was absolutely splendid. The ocean was bracing. The company was convivial and racially progressive. I remember having my first taste of French wine during this trip. All meals were served with a bottle of white and a bottle of red and replaced as they emptied. Anyhow, this film recaptures those happy days for me.

The lovely young Julie who sets for herself the task of working her way through Child's first book of recipes in the course of a year and writing about it for a blog in order to find herself and her voice helps to establish for me the possibilities of blogging, and it corroborates the satisfaction I feel in doing it.

Of course, I am assuming that most blogs will turn out to be a total waste of time, polluting the verbal airwaves or whatever they are but I know that I am blogging because I am a writer and it is the most natural thing in the world for me to write all the time about everything. After all these years of teaching writing, I find it difficult to imagine that anyone who isn't very serious about writing could continue to produce and add to a blog in a persuasive manner year in and year out. It cannot be maintained unless life is simplified of its many meaningless distractions.

So I like this movie, am surprised I liked it so much, and surprised I haven't heard more about it. My neice who began me on the path of blogging and who helps me with all my web concerns also loves to cook. I am looking forward to introducing her to this film and perhaps Julia Childs' recipes. There was once a time when I was young when I loved to cook.