MovieChat Forums > Song of the South (1946) Discussion > I don't see how this movie is racist.

I don't see how this movie is racist.

posted 9 years ago by Lunda2222
28 replies | jump to latest

True it makes a picturesque idyllic southern place and glosses over any racism that was rampant at the time.

But by that logic The Sound of Music (1965) must be racist because it does not mention the Nazism that ran rampant in Austria at the time. Oklahoma! (1955) must be racist because it does not mention the situation with the Native Americans in that state.

Basically any movie which portrays a place as idyllic without pointing out some flaw in the place must be bad. That includes any 60'ies show's like Leave It to Beaver (1957).

If it had portrayed black people in a stereotypical light or look down upon people because of the colour of their skin, it would be racist.

But the argument that this movie is racist boils down to "It's racist because it does not mention any racism". That's Like arguing that a recipe for lamb is really a recipe for fish because it does not mention fish.

It`s far easier to start a war than to end one.

[–] cabal24 9 years ago

But by that logic The Sound of Music (1965) must be racist because it does not mention the Nazism that ran rampant in Austria at the time. Oklahoma! (1955) must be racist because it does not mention the situation with the Native Americans in that state.

There are a number of people who would say all those movies you mentioned are indeed racist.

I do not happen to be one of them.

[–] darkartist1977 8 years ago

To me the most racist thing in this movie is a racial slur that is exactly what it is. And that is a small figure made of tar called "tar baby".. This is a racist slur that is most def not used today. However i honestly didnt know it was a racial slur until.i started reading up on it

[–] marktayloruk (2504) a year ago

That was the name in the original story - one of Brer Rabbits few mistakes !

[–] MCguy (1148) a year ago

Tar baby was revised to be a racial slur.

[–] An_Animator 9 years ago

Most people who say Song of the South is "racist" have never actually sat down and watched it all the way through. They've only seen clips on Youtube or are just going by the word of other people who have never actually seen the movie.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cgrill8 9 years ago

And that's the problem. Though Political Correctness and the sue happy 90's... politics have seeped into every core of our lives... and it did NOT used to be that way. Thanks to 'one side' of the isle we have crap like Happy Feet 1 & 2, The Lorax, and other movies similar... that nothing but propaganda environmental crap. We are afraid to discipline our OWN kids under our OWN roof, among other things.... the fear of appearances and how you THINK others perceive you and your actions... have been ruling our country for far too long. It's the real beginning to social oppression I've ever seen. From an era where teens were getting away with everything under the sun nearly (60 - 70's)... are the people now governing us. I have a real issue with that...
I don't have an issue with this movie. I LOVE it. We do have a copy... and it's...'ok'. Really wish we had a Blu Ray version. I read from time to time to little kids at school for work... I'm seriously thinking about picking up my old Disney Record/book with the Tar baby story in it to read, do the voices, and teach about being patient and non-violent actions. Next time I go, I'll see if I can do it or not... And when I get to the part where Brer Fox & Bear MAKE the Tar Baby... I'll ask them WHY it's not a person... best part in the whole movie. Glad I still have that little record book from when I was a kid... :)

And I'll make certain points, like they're southern, like US, and they talk like WE do. And how Brer Rabbit is always 'looking for trouble' and how he loses his patience when something he should is NOT real doesn't sing back! And how the fox and bear are just acting like the animals they are... simply wanting to EAT. I mean I just read to them a book where the main character (a gingerbread man) gets EATEN at the end of the book! And how Brer Rabbit gets out of his mess at the end. And how someone might be that crafty trying to get out a REAL mess in a real life situation.
If it happens, I'll let you know here...

3rd generation American from a long line of Gottscheers... it was Drandul, dude!

[–] Capt-Cupcake 9 years ago

I don't see how this movie is racist.

It's not. This movie isn't even a little bit racist.

[–] Buzz-Duh 9 years ago

There is literally NOTHING Disney could have done with this film that wouldn't cause it to be scrutinized and banned by the P.C. Police in this present day. The only way a movie involving American Slavery will be accepted is if there is a glaringly obvious message revolving around slavery being a terrible, racist piece of history. Even though this was the way of life for millions of black people over 250 years in America, not even a harmless piece of fiction simply using the setting can escape the racial hypersensitivity the U.S. will never grow out of.

[–] just1Hitch 9 years ago

It is not "a movie involving American Slavery". It is set after the Civil War and slavery is not seen or even mentioned anywhere in the film.

 Excuse me for talking while you're interrupting.

[–] cgrill8 9 years ago

Actually twice we see the black workers singing as they walk to and from the fields... and sing as they go (even though the music we hear is NOT those people singing-funny in its own right-... we don't even SEE their mouths move to the music if I remember correctly too!). But the fact is, we are supposed to brain washed that the war was SO bad. Everything pertaining to it IS bad... and we're only to believe all the 'bad' word of mouth how bad the 'workers' were treated, therefore we can't see anyone in the SOUTH after the events of the Civil War of ANY ex-slave being 'Happy'. That's the rub. No, there really is NOT anything wrong with the movie. And even MY history teacher in High School (from way too long ago) taught us after the war was over, many slaves didn't know WHAT to do or WHERE to go. Some, who DID have a bad 'farm' experience, left for the hills, tried to do better for themselves, made a name, helped in bettering inventions and foods etc. etc. while others stayed and were happy right where they were! They do NOT teach this in schools anymore! Why would they stay, you ask? They're families already had a 'home'. Were going to be paid for their work from now on. They had established churches, and communities. They backed each other up... some DID stay, some DID leave never wanting to look back. So to show the black kids of today for ANYONE to simply be 'happy to be alive' after being freed from slavery as one of the results of the Civil War, just 'isn't right'... Like I said, THAT'S THE RUB. They'd rather instill hatred, and 'down for the fight' and 'against the man', or 'against the country' whatever whatever... unfortunately despite how LONG ago that was... the THOUGHT of that era instills hatred on 'the other side' like you wouldn't BELIEVE. From my point of view... no one is grateful for 'being alive' or from ancestors that survived that era, thankful for being in a free country, or joyful or thankful for having 'black' (since we all seem to be talking in 1 dimension here) well to do business people, teachers, professors, doctors, lawyers, CEOs, VPs... and what not, that we have NOW. They can vote, buy cars, rent Apts, buy houses, get all kinds of jobs (where available) Forget the hard work and what you have based on your skin color, nothing like continuing the hate for what happened over 160 years ago when none of us where alive, just to keep a kids movie made by Disney from being released to buy with OUR OWN FREEDOM if we want it or not... so OUR freedom to buy or not it stifled by the very company that made it over 60 years ago.
'nuff said

3rd generation American from a long line of Gottscheers... it was Drandul, dude!

[–] Buzz-Duh 9 years ago

Well said. Kind of like how Roots never showed Africans selling their own people to white American purchasers. Instead we only see the Africans getting hunted and captured by invading Americans.

--
Youngblood II: Racki's Revenge

[–] stevenackerman69 9 years ago

I think it had to do with the images of black people and the way they were portrayed that made it seem racist. Of course, I feel this film should not be shelved because it is a great film.

[–] zwolf 8 years ago

I don't think it's racist as much as it's woefully misrepresentative. The black characters aren't really depicted as bad or stereotypical -- they're the best people in the film, and Uncle Remus is the wisest, kindest person in it, and he's trying to do the right thing despite resistance from the white people who don't understand the little boy's problems as well as he does. I don't remember any black characters in the film who were anything less than good, noble, and lovable. So I don't think it's racist in terms of the characters.

The problem is that it makes the segregated South look like a wonderland of fun for all involved... which it certainly wasn't. Black people were not happily living in poverty as second-class citizens, and everybody wasn't getting along just great. That's the problem with the film -- a misrepresentation of the situation, rather than racism directed at the characters.

That said, there's enough good in the film that Disney should confront and discuss its problems, rather than hide it away and disown it. They could address what they did wrong, and what they got right. I think it should be released, but with some DVD bonus features where it's flaws and historical place is discussed. Warner Brothers did that when they released some of their old cartoons that had racist stereotypes in them, and it can be helpful.

[–] Furienna (3345) 5 years ago

The problem is that it makes the segregated South look like a wonderland of fun for all involved... which it certainly wasn't. Black people were not happily living in poverty as second-class citizens, and everybody wasn't getting along just great. That's the problem with the film -- a misrepresentation of the situation, rather than racism directed at the characters.

Sigh... Did you miss that this is a movie for kids? There was no way that we would see anyone get raped or lynched or anything! If it makes you feel better, you can just imagine that terrible stuff happened "off screen". But it wouldn't be a good thing to show that to your kids. Although it was much closer in more serious Disney movies from the '90s, like in "Pocahontas" and "The Hunchback of Notre-Dame". But in the more light-hearted "The Princess & The Frog", there was only a subtle reference to Tiana's background making it harder for her to get funds to start her restaurant. And that is in a kids movie from as recently as 2009! So you can't expect a kids movie from 1946 to be more explicit.

We don't really know that all the black characters in "Song of the South" were happy either. Some of them probably were satisfied, because they all knew how hard it would be for any black person to find a better job anywhere else. However, there was probably sadness and anger behind the scene. But it was only wise to not let any white person know if they weren't satisfied. Because they would not be allowed to complain about their situation, no matter how hard it could be. So that is a darker and maybe a more realistic interpretation of this movie: if it seems like a black character is "happy", he/she might be keeping up a facade in front of the white people just to survive!

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

i agree that's no reason for writing off Song of the South. but i disagree that the Sound of Music ignores nazism.it is full of references to the nazis. At least one of the household servants is a nazi, and so is Liesel's boyfriend. And the family has to run away from the nazis at the end.

[–] strntz (12286) 6 years ago

Not speaking for the original poster but I've used that same The Sound of Music reference over at the Gone With The Wind board. Perhaps what that poster meant is that during the time the TSOM was taken place in, the Nazis had already set up concentration and death camps and were exterminating Jews at that time. Nothing about the Holocaust was mentioned in that film, but we don't hear Jews complaining about TSOM.

[–] liscarkat (18446) 7 years ago

You don't see how this movie is racist because it isn't racist, regardless of the tiresome explanations of the poor quarter-wits who insist that it is. Rejoice in your superior intelligence!

[–] marktayloruk (2504) 2 years ago

Why don't people simply ignore these chip.on the shoulder troublemakers?

[–] strntz (12286) 5 months ago

Of course it's racist - there's no way a black man could be well adjusted, intelligent, and a gifted singer and story teller, not to mention be liked by white folks and befriend white children and teach them about good behavior.