Performance for the White Neoliberal Gaze

In consideration of the discourse concerning the exploitation of Black trauma on social media and in other spaces, ask yourself why does it take Black people being murdered, brutalized, dehumanized, and disrespected (on screen and off) for white and non-Black folks to feel the smallest increment of “empathy” or a responsibility to be anti-racist? The applause for creatives across the spectrum including Tyler Perry, Aaron Sorkin, Steven Spielberg, etc., who use Black pain as a means of “education” in their projects upholds the white supremacist idea of white people constantly being the center of appeal and support, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that they are the ones who inflict harm and are the beneficiaries of the very trauma they aided in creating. There is no “justice” or satisfaction in constantly seeing Black stories used for capitalist gain whilst centering and protecting the comfortability of white folks. Popular films such as The Blind Side, The Trial of the Chicago Seven, and The Help, etc., all represent one of the biggest problematic bases of Hollywood: the white savior trope.

White saviorism is a facet of white supremacy which is centered on the neoliberal and colonial mindset where white people are the focus of every narrative as the savior or as a hero-like figure. The harm of this trope is embedded in the belief that Black and Brown folks need white people in order to pursue “equality” and liberation, when in actuality, the very same group (white folks) are not only beneficiaries of oppression and white supremacy, they also are active participants. Hollywood persistently seeks to have white characters as the protagonists in “struggle” stories. This occurs as through on-screen dynamics and those who are in creative control, as well as behind the scenes. White creatives and executives have the power and positionality to downplay Black and Brown experiences, while making their white central characters take the mainstage. For example, in the 2007 film Freedom Writers (based on a true story), actor Hilary Swank portrays Erin Gruwell, a teacher who comes to an “at-risk” high school in a predominantly Black and Brown neighborhood. One of the many problems with Freedom Writers is the fact that Gruwell is a Latina who is portrayed by Swank, a white woman. Through this film, she encourages her Black and Brown students to write while taking them on museum trips and often facing conflict with faculty whose racism and classism force her to defend why the students deserve access to educational materials. The problem of this film is not only the whitewashing of Gruwell and the casting, but also the purposeful centering of white men and women when it comes to issues which impact Black and Brown young folks and their families.

The same can also be applied to Aaron Sorkin’s The Trial of the Chicago Seven. Through the tokenization and the lack of proper development of the Black Panther leaders included as characters in the narrative, such as Bobby Seale and Fred Hampton, this film also positions itself as a white savior redemption arc. It focuses on the rest of the white folks on trial having moral dilemmas to deal with when in actuality whatever decisions result from the trial would impact Black and Brown folks and activists the most. The tone of the film alludes to the idea of justice being something which is tangible if you fight for it; never mind the complex unjust and racist aspects the United States justice system was founded upon. Furthermore, there is something to be said in regard to how the 1968 Democratic Convention, which the film and trial is based on, is whitewashed for the sake of appealing to the ideal of a democracy being possible in the United States through the stature of a neoliberal symphony of unification, color-blindness, and small performative acts which clean off the surface while the white supremacist rust remains the backbone. 

Similarly with films such as The Help and The Blind Side, one of the common tropes present is the idea of white womanhood being a saving grace for Black and Brown folks “in distress”. Not only are the white women characters portrayed by Emma Stone and Sandra Bullock depicted as motherly figures coming to the rescue, it should be noted that there is no loss for them whatsoever to do “the right thing.” Whether taking in a homeless Black person or telling Black folks’ stories for them, both characters symbolize how neoliberalism conveys white people doing the bare minimum as an extravagant and brave act. Through this lens, one must consider the problematic and harmful nature of white folks’ opinions being the only narrative that is centered and matters when it comes to the generational trauma and plights which Black and Brown communities are suffering through. As film is a powerful medium, one should not ignore the ways that this platform has been weaponized by white directors and filmmakers to push the ideology of social justice issues being easy to stop if folks were to simply “love each other” and “get along.” The “olive branch” that is often extended by white savior characters in films are actions which come at very little consequence and even require labor from Black and Brown communities in return.

White saviorism is not a “lesser” form of racism. This trope, through a realistic and cinematic lens, has been used in order for white folks to feel more comfortable in their covert and overt racism while being satisfied with a “feel good” ending. The purpose of these films is to soften and lessen the true impact and realities of white supremacy and racism, while more importantly, not bluntly acknowledging that white folks should not be telling these stories, let alone whitewashing these narratives. Black and Brown stories, experiences, and perspectives are ours and ours alone, yet the neoliberal gaze seeks to apply sameness for the sake of yearning to center a normalcy where well-intentioned white people are not held accountable for their actions. A normalcy where society and institutions award filmmakers for perpetuating Black trauma and viewing white savior films as an education or a new step towards diversity and inclusion. A normalcy where the comfortability of white folks further encourages them to not address or acknowledge how the very things they benefit from are centered on Anti-Black and Anti-Indigenous violence. Seeing the brutalization of Bobby Seale’s character (Yahya Abdul Mateen II) in The Trial of The Chicago Seven and the small yet abrupt moments that demonstrate what the party stood for in juxtaposition to the white characters and “activists” who received ample amount of screentime and character development speaks to how Black contributions and movements are capitalized on for profit and shock value in order to advance a story. Another example is Soul, where Disney yet again has Black representation (or tokenization rather) through the lens of dehumanization as they persistently transform Black people into ghosts, animals, etc. Whether one wants to admit it or not, this is not the time for you to be comfortable about your racism or the impact you have. There must be a realization that watching Black trauma films or white savior narratives is not going to make you anti-racist. Each sector of society plays an active role in Anti-Blackness and white supremacy; Hollywood is no different and built itself off of those very principles. 

So again, it should be asked, why does it take the oppression and dehumanization of Black people on-screen through a narrative for you to somehow feel sympathy? You live within a world which inflicts and causes violence against Black people around you, every day. Relying on Hollywood to make you comfortable represents one of the exact reasons why there is the continuous persistence of oppression against marginalized communities. Acknowledge these histories and the work you have to do. 

My humanity is not your redemption arc.