The American youth subculture in the 1950’s was quite different from that of the previous generation who were very much involved in the second world war. This new rock and roll generation, that lived in a time of economic prosperity had time on their hands and were exposed to rapidly changing environment here in the states. The expansion of suburbs and the new face of urban cities redefined the appearance of America at the time. Juvenile delinquency, including gang violence, vandalism, and loitering was thought to be a great threat to the older generation of the time as sexuality and rock and roll seemed to be very much on the rise. African American musicians were thought to be fueling the fire with highly explicit and sexual overtones in their music, and this music was considered to be “The devil’s music”. During this time in American history the civil rights movement was well under way and the desegregation of schools was prominent in the headlines.
Blackboard Jungle (1955) illustrates the rise of juvenile delinquency in an inner city school where the teachers describe it as a “garbage can”. This is attributed to the severe behavioral problems of the school’s students and their unwillingness to learn in a classroom situation. Racial themes are prevalent throughout the plot and the relationship between the teacher, Richard Dadier and Sidney Poitier’s character, Greg Miller is one of strong tension and eventually friendship. The in-class article by Beth McCoy “Manager, Buddy, Delinquent: Blackboard Jungle's Desegregating Triangle” focuses on a triangular relationship between the white male protagonist, the black male character, and the white woman. The conflict between Dadier and Miller starts off on a sour note as he meets the African American student at first smoking in a school bathroom instead of being in line with his classmates. After reprimanding the student he realizes that Miller is insubordinate in class, quite intelligent, and a leader amongst the other students. Dadier’s accusations that Miller threw the baseball at him during class and that he went to the principal over Dadier’ racial comments were unfair to the student and show Dadier’s own racial dilemma, singling out the class’s only African American student.
The real triangular relationship to focus on in the movie is the one between Dadier, Miller, and the delinquent white youth in Artie West. West is the villain in this situation due to the fact that he had Dadier mugged in the ally way, he threw the baseball in class, told the principal that Dadier used distasteful racial remarks in the classroom, and even harasses his wife into a deep depression which caused a premature birth. West’s attempts to scare Dadier away from the school are thwarted by the pact of friendship made by the white and black protagonists. Not until the end of the film do we see this “buddy” relationship between the teacher and student. This friendship is symbolic because it shows an interracial relationship springing up during the time of desegregation, signaling an understanding rather than indifference.
I personally enjoyed this movie and it’s always interesting to read some of the crazy stuff that comes out of these articles. What I found to be interesting was the fact that McCoy thought that West’s character showed traces of homosexuality in that he over-obsessed over Dadier, led his peers in a gang, and that he participates in homoerotic banter with his classmates. He witnesses Dadier speaking to women in the movie but his focus is strictly on Dadier.
Do you think that West’s character is a homosexual or that this is just completely over-analyzed by the article‘s author? Do you believe that the social triangles within the film should have West or Miller as the “other” or the negative influence of the film? Does the “buddy” relationship between Miller and Dadier remind you of Lethal weapon?
I think you put it very nicely at the end, about how West's character being a homosexual could have been an over-analysis. I just didn't see it, the whole time I was watching the movie I just thought he was a little twerp at best. The only real aspect of this analysis of West's character that I can really agree with, other than the triangular relationship thing, would have to have been when the author of the article made the statement regarding his lacking of a penis and his attempts to cover up the lacking with phallic objects, like the knife, or the baseball, objects that apparently make him feel more manly. I found this trait of lacking, whether it be a penis or not, was very congruent with West's character right from the get go. The way he would glare at the teacher, Dadier, and his general presence, emitted a very threatened feeling, meaning he saw all the other male characters as direct threats to his own image, or life even. This I assume to be largely fear based, which further causes me to assume that West probably had an abusive father or brother, thus causing him to feel the need to assert his manhood into other aspects of his life, places like the streets or school, places where that possible abuser is not. Whether or not some of you guy's find this possible is of no great consequence, this was just a fleeting thought of mine, however, I find it much more tangible than West being a homosexual.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the film. Although it still had some laughable dialogue. The first scene with Anne Dadier, had some great unintentionally funny dialogue; "...and the baby will have your looks and my brains". Josh Edwards was a character that stood out to me though. Mainly because he was so sad and pathetic. You knew from the minute he talked about those records that they'd ultimately be destroyed. Anyone else notice the over foreshadowing in the bar with Dadier and Edwards? But overall I still enjoyed the film, one of the better films we've watched so far in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the analysis of West was over done, especially about the lack of a penis. That really lost me. I find Nic's approach to understanding West's behavior much more believable. I would imagine most of the students at the school to come from homes like that. West was definitely the negative influence in the triangle theory. It's hard for me to picture Miller as the negative influence following the realization that West was behind all of the negative events.
I agree with everyone else, I think West being a homosexual was over analyzed, and in a sense insignificant to the film. What is more interesting to me is the triangular relationship in the film. As Matt explained, the threat to Anne Dadier is removed once it is understood that West is the racist and delinquent, allowing Miller and Dadier to become buddies. I feel like the films we have watched there is a constant transference in the concept of who is a threat. If we aren't to be afraid of nuclear bombs, we should be afraid of motorcycle gangs. The fact that the social group defined as a threat actually changes in the timeframe of this film is I think is important. I'm not really sure what it means to have the threat in this binary narrative shift from blacks, as seen with Dadier's belief that Miller is the delinquent in the beginning of the film, to juveniles. Maybe someone else has some thoughts on the importance of this?
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that the article vastly overanalyzes the film to obtain the "West is gay" agenda, It's kind of interesting to roll with the idea. This was a time of desegregation and a time for equality to grow between the races, and this movie takes the time to paint the only black character as one of the good guys. At the end of the film however, we see all of the students, including the black one, come together and redeem themselves. That is, all of the students except for two, one of them being West. If West truly is gay, then this means the movie is making a statement, a statement saying "Okay, black people are in, but gay people are still no good." If this is the case, then the movie loses the credibility to today's audience as a noble film, combatting injustices. Thankfully, I don't think this is the case. The film does not seem to be actively putting forth the effort to paint West as a homosexual, and I did very much enjoy the film, and it's unintentionally hilarious dialogue.
ReplyDeleteI like Stop Making Sense's comment about how these movies seem to constantly be telling us what to be afraid of. It really reflects the 50's society's uncontrollable sentiment of worry. Atomic bombs, motorcycle gangs, rowdy youths, it's as if nobody cold make up their minds about what the threats really were, and that they just needed something to blame to make everyone feel better.
Matthew, your post gets interesting near the end, when you relax your voice a bit. Bit too much summarizing before that. Good, careful summarizing, but it's ok to loosen up and put the ideas in your own words.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the whole thing about West being homosexual was a bit of a stretch, or at least not really convincingly established. But I think Tom's thought experiment to just roll with it has some very useful results. The same thing troubles me. The message really does seem to be ok yay, now black people are in and yay us for making a feel-good liberal movie, but white working class kids with unsettled masculinity of whatever sort are still out.
And yeah, sns's point about the perpetually shifting threat is very well-taken.
What is really good about this entire discussion is how you are all trying on the various ideas presented in the discussion, and disagreeing with them in part but also using the parts you can buy to go a bit deeper. Yay, you!