Wednesday, March 13, 2013

My Thoughts on the Spike Lee/Homophobic/Twitter thing


So, I've read the tweets, articles and FB posts about the exchange between Spike Lee and blogger, Anti-Intellect over his classic film, School Daze.

Anti-Intellect tweeted that Lee’s film wasn't a balanced view of Morehouse College and it was homophobic, in fact, he noted that Spike was homophobic. Now, I read the tweets and I'm a bit lost here about the entire discussion.

Let me use bullet points to express myself:
  • School Daze was a movie, fiction. Since when did any film (fiction) has to accurately portray the real deal? School Daze wasn't based from a true story, nor a documentary. Spike made this film up, like most writers do.
  • If a writer creates homophobic characters, that make him or her homophobic. It seems to be the message here. Hell, if that's the notion, then I'm homophobic, a murderer, psychotic and a racist.
  • Also if a film has homophobic scenes, is that film homophobic? I don't think so, if it's a part of the story and characters.
  • What was the point of the argument? What was the initial outcome of this discussion. Spike is not going to change School Daze so what is the goal of this discussion?
  • The film is over 20 years old; Spike's earlier work. Who's to say that he didn't evolve from that time? I mean, 20 years ago, every superwoman I drew had thigh-high boots with heels and a choker. I know now that wasn't the right way to portray women in powerful roles. I changed, I'm sure he did too.
  • The notion that Spike should have created a counterbalance to the homophobic is very interesting. I understand there's a good vs evil theme in films. In School Daze, the issues of race and class were clearly the 'stars' of the film. But the anti-gay slurs weren't and it didn't have to have a counterbalance. As my friend, Wilson said on my FB post, real life doesn't always have a counterbalance, why should we assume movies would do the same
Look, I tried to understand the argument and the points that were made. But in the end, I still came up with lint. What was the point of arguing with Spike? What was the point of making this such a big deal? And what was the moral of the story?

This battle had no winner or an endgame. It was two individuals spinning into butter with no toast to spread it on.

If I'm missing the point, someone please help me see it.

2 comments:

Daddy Squeeze Me! said...

Anti Intellect is a controversial one if you have never read his blog

Bama Boi said...

I remember him from my days on BGC. I'll leave it at that because I can't find the proper words to describe the likes of his, for a lack of a better term, philosophy of things, which I appreciate anyone who has a voice; however, I'm coming up empty. I tried to find something, but I got nothing right now. He along with others who have the same style are an acquired taste perhaps?