The Oscars' Boycott: Agree or Disagree?

As many of you are aware, Spike Lee and the Smiths, Will and Jada, have opted to boycott the Oscars this year. For the second year in a row, no people of colour were nominated for a major award. There has been a great deal of chatter about this by both film makers and film critics, some of it quite thoughtful. As a novelist, however, my perspective on the situation is much different.

Novels and films are completely different art forms. This may sound obvious, but how often have you heard someone say "the book was better than the movie?" (That always drives me crazy) Writing a screenplay is nothing like writing a novel, and the only thing that ties the two together is story. The structure, however, and what the respective art forms can do, have little in common. If I were to suggest that a painting and a sculpture were the same art form, sculptors and painters would look at me like I'm nuts. And they'd be right to.

That said, most of the lead characters in my books are minorities. This was a conscious decision. If you follow this blog, than you know how I feel about social justice and equal rights and the responsibility of the artistic community, particularly writers, to not only see the imbalances of our society, but in some way to address those inequalities in our work. The easiest way to do this is to create minority characters and let them tell their story. Even if, as in my case, their story is set in a post-apocalyptic fantasy world.

WHY I AGREE WITH THE BOYCOTT

Spike Lee has been a significant film maker for a long time, even if his work has been somewhat uneven the past fifteen years or so. And I don't think he's boycotting the Oscars as a publicity stunt. He's been in the inside and has seen what goes on behind the camera. And, as the black producer Effie Brown pointed out on Project Greenlight this year, the problem is not limited to what happens onscreen, but what happens off screen as well. Hollywood is still largely run by old white men. And they are not going to be harbingers of change, not in a society where they hold most of the power. And though it has changed somewhat the past decade or so, the Oscars remain a very "white" event. (The average age of academy voters is 62. Nearly all of them are white.) 

In a time when we have candidates running for president who are clearly xenophobic and racist, as well as movements like #BlackLivesMatter stemming from decades of systemic racism, it is imperative that the artistic community gets it right. And for better or worse, Hollywood represents the most powerful artistic group in the world. They need to be leading the way. (And having a talented actress like Charlotte Rampling talk about "reverse racism" is so beyond idiotic that I refuse to call her an artist any more. Artists must be the soul of a moral society. I don't care how well you can act, if you're a bigot, you're not an artist.)

So in that, I agree with Lee, and his boycott.

WHY I DISAGREE WITH THE BOYCOTT

I've always liked Will Smith. He's a charismatic actor that has starred in a number of great movies. (Or great "bad" movies, like Bad Boys) But he's never shown himself to be an activist in any way, unless he's campaigning for the lead role in a Tarantino movie. Unlike Lee, they haven't earned the benefit of the doubt. The Smiths own a powerful production company. If they want more black actors represented at the Oscars, start making films that give them better roles.Or support films like Selma with their stardom and maybe some of their own cash. (They are uber-rich)

The Academy has proven that it will reward films by and starring people of colour. 12 Years a Slave was voted Best Picture just three years ago. I didn't see one this year. (I don't see as many films as critics, so again, take it for what it is, one novelist's opinion) I thought Michael B. Jordan was excellent in Creed, but it sounds like the producers didn't mount the proper campaign for him.

That's right, a campaign. To win an Oscar requires the proper schmoozing and marketing to all the right people, and if that campaign is poorly timed or executed, films will be left out. Insiders believe that this is what happened to Selma last year.

The other issue here, of course, is that representing minorities isn't just about people of colour. What about Asians? What about better roles for women, considering how many movies are made that still can't pass the Bechdel test? (Hell, I'll bet most Academy members don't even know what it is.) And yes, I know that women get equal representation at the ceremony, but that doesn't mean they're getting equal representation on the screen or behind the camera. (I see you, Jurassic World.)

The fact is, so long as the Academy is made up of a bunch of old white guys, and producers need to run political campaigns to get their films noticed, this is going to happen. And boycotting the ceremony does nothing to change that, particularly for those who have worked their entire life for this kind of recognition. (I'm thinking in particular about the parts of the ceremony that aren't televised. the awards for short films and documentaries, etc...)

Frankly, I think the Smiths are being hypocritical. Instead of boycotting, why not show up and talk about what needs to change. This can be done in a positive way. They're both stars. And don't just talk about the dearth of black nominations, but talk about equality. Talk about social justice and the importance of the artistic community getting it right. Talk about the need for better developed female characters and better roles for Indigenous people.

Even better, become active in the community. Do what Magic Johnson has done. Or Common. Follow in their footsteps and set the ground ablaze with what needs to be done.

If the Smiths really want to be activists, do something first. Let us see some of your riches go to projects that create change. Until then, your boycott is self-serving nonsense. 





 

The Power of Fear

No one understands the power of fear better than a novelist. No one. We use it like a mathematician uses a calculator. It is part of our DNA, part of what create, if only because we understand it to be one of the most powerful forces within humanity.

Some would suggest that love is more powerful, and certainly, all novelists try to show that love is indeed powerful and redemptive and is the better choice. But nothing replaces fear.

Nothing.

A character motivated by fear will do anything, and they won't be rational about it. That gives an authour a great deal of room to play with, not because it's a stupid plot device, which it can be, but because it's true. A human reacting out of fear is unpredictable, because what we would deem as "logical" no longer applies. Now in fiction, you still have to be careful, but if you emphasize how frightened a character is, you can have them do anything.

And people will believe it.

We all understand what it's like to be afraid.. We get it. We've been there. We've felt our stomach churn, felt our knees get weak, felt the jolt of terror run through our limbs. We've all felt it and responded in way that make no sense.

ISIS

Take the current refugee situation. Many people in the West are responding in fear. They are saying things about the refugees that have no basis in fact. But facts don't matter when someone is scared. Think about it. That horrible little group of ignorant murderers called ISIS has everyone dancing. And not in a good way. They have Christians suggesting that poor women and children should be denied a home. They have kind people suggesting that the world has changed, so no, they won't help anyone either. They have people who have never cared about the plight of any foreigner being given a huge microphone.

That is the power of fear.

Fear is, without question, the easiest and quickest way to control people.

Again, this is something every artist knows, but in the realm of the novelist, it is an ancient truth. The simplest stories, those of serial killers and yes, terrorists, expound on this like its play day at an elementary school. But even the more complex works rely on fear as a driving force within their works.

Most of the memes and anecdotes regarding ISIS and the terrorists have no basis in truth. And yet, people spread them anyway. They don't care if the stories are true. They don't care if the facts don't match up with the truth. They don't care if they're being led like bulls with a nose ring to be slaughtered. They don't care because they are afraid, and once you get people scared, you can do whatever you want.

The irony is that most of these people claim to be tough. They want more guns. More military. More freedom to do whatever the hell they want when it comes to protecting themselves.

And yet... they're full of shit. The same people who advocate for guns want no part of starving children and women and refugees due to the minuscule chance that one of those people may turn against them. This is the power of fear.  The ones who act macho and with so much swagger and scoff at "bleeding heart liberals," are the biggest cowards you'll ever find. That such a thing is illogical (A Visa makes FAR more sense for a terrorist) has no impact on them.

They are afraid.

They've been raised in fear. Soaked in it. (Why do you think they protect the 'right' to not only bear "arms," but carry automatic weapons. Because they're tough?) They are more worried about protecting themselves than listening to reason.

Or compassion.

This past week, a couple of local churches got together to sponsor two Syrian families. These churches are Mennonite in origin, and pacifists. A gun would never interest them, nor does military action. And yet, in the next two weeks, despite all the nonsense about terrorism and the fear being slung across the internet like a dog's drool, two families will have a new home in a new country.

They are not afraid.

Novelists understand this contradiction. However, we have to be careful. The obviousness of such things doesn't always translate to the page as believable. And when you write about fear, you can't simply illustrate what is so obvious in society. If you do, it will feel more like a Children's story than something for adults to consider.

So when you're doing your revisions, remember that fiction is unlike real life. Our job, as writers, is to provide a mirror for society, but if it's too obvious, too clean, people will reject your work because no one will believe it.

You can do it, but make sure it's subtle. Why? Because most people hate looking in the mirror, especially when they're under the grip of fear.

-Steve