The 1980's were a time of cultural combativeness and residing prejudices amongst the minority groups in America. More than a decade following the Civil Rights Movement (1954-1968), the racist and prejudiced thinking that men like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King fought to put an end too were still very present in society. This societal fluent prejudice and discrimination was made a recurring topic in numerous film and literature pieces. One piece being Spike Lee's 1989 film Do The Right Thing.
In this piece of work, Lee purposely uses the societal stereotypes that many minority groups were held too. In doing this, an atmosphere of undeniable tension and inescapable cultural warfare is created in this small, predominately black, Brooklyn neighborhood. And when not only cultures clash, but power clashes as well, a young black man is murdered by the hands of the police. The question then becomes: What could the "right thing to do" possibly be? Could it be violence? Or could there be another way?
In Lee's piece, once Radio Raheem, the young black man, is murdered by the excessive force of the white police men, violence ensues. An angry mob of distraught black people, with the white police men having fled the scene, target Sal, the man who had been in disagreement with Raheem and who the blame and anger was by default, passed on too. A garbage can is thrown through the window of Sal's pizzeria by one of his own employee's, Mookie, a young black man who knew Raheem and witnessed his death. This one act of violence ignites the already distraught mob and later leads to the loothing and burning of the pizzeria.
Malcolm X once said: "...I have to preserve the right to do what is necessary to bring an end to that situation, and it doesn't mean that I advocate violence, but at the same time I am not against using violence in self-defense. I don't even call it violence when it's self-defense. I call it intelligence." This stance on violence can be applied and considered when analyzing the actions of the mob and Mookie in particular. Mookie was the spark that provoked the mob to violence when he threw the garbage can through Sal's window. But was this violence justified? Could it really have been the "right thing" to do? And, in looking at Malcolm X's quote, one could argue that yes, the violence was in fact justified. The violence was in defense of a young man who is now dead because of people's unrest and prejudice. It wasn't in "self-defense" as Malcolm X states, but how is a man who is already dead defend himself from the injustices that took his life?
In the end, doing the right thing is not as black and white as one might hope. It's ambiguous. It's open to a wide range of morals and beliefs that varies from one individual to the next. So the question still remains: What could the "right thing to do" possibly be?
Helena, you've done a great job of getting your ideas down. In fact you have a mature writing style.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, consider this question to help clarify and/or elaborate on X's point. Even though Radio Raheems dies by the hands of the police, shouldn't the protesters rage be directed at the police instead of Sal?
Earlier Sal ominously foreshadowed he's going to "kill someone today." Did he? Was the protesters response appropriate? If so, how?
Respond when you can.
--Prof. Young
The protesters rage should have been directed at the police officers but seeing that they had already fled the scene, the rage and anger of the mob was put onto Sal. Sal had already been in disagreement with Raheem which the mob, having no one else there to physically blame at that point in time, needed an outlet to dispense their fury and anger over what just happened. And Sal was the prime target. And as to if Sal did in fact kill somebody, thats tricky. He was not the one who physically killed Radio Raheem, but his indifference and some what intolerance with the people of the neighborhood created this situational tension and cultural combativness that ultimatley did kill Radio Raheem. And lastly, I do think to some extent the protesters response was appropriate. The people had just watched one of their own fall victim to excessive police brutality that got this innocent young man killed. I don't however agree with the distribution of blame in that Sal, not the police, was punished for the crime despite it not really being his crime to begin with. Yes Sal did kind of put the events in motion with his own indifference but he's put no evidence out for us as readers to think that he would to go as far as the police men did and kill Radio Raheem.
ReplyDelete