My Oldest Draft Post
There is currently a group writing prompt available as part of this year’s Blaugust: Festival of Blogging which has piqued my interest. It asks the question “what is the oldest draft post you have” and suggests that it is revived in some manner. I have dozens of draft posts in a folder in my Google Drive. Many are film reviews or film related. The oldest of which dates back to summer 2010. Rather than write a straight forward review of Blake Edwards 1968 comedy The Party, I rather foolishly thought at the time that I’d tackle the issue of whether the film is sufficiently racist to make it beyond the pale. Let it suffice to say that I quickly found myself bogged down in the complexities of the subject and thus never completed the blog post.
For those who are unfamiliar with the film, it is about an Indian actor who is making his first big budget American film. He is fired due to his incompetence, yet due to a clerical error is instead invited to a fancy party held by one of the film’s producers. The plot focuses on his naivete and the difficulty it causes him in navigating the social complexities of late sixties Hollywood. However, his inherent good nature and fundamental decency is a stark contrast to the iniquities of the film industry. Blake Edwards was an established film maker at the time and had already made several successful comedies, including Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961). The main issue with The Party is the casting of comedian and actor Peter Sellers as Hrundi V. Bakshi. An Englishman playing an Indian.
Below is the complete draft post as abandoned in 2010.
Is The Party Racist?
Racism can be defined in many ways. One definition is that racism is a belief that all racial groups are distinguishable by intrinsic characteristics or abilities. Hence, some such groups are therefore naturally superior to others. Racism then manifests itself as a set of practices that discriminate against members of particular racial groups. However, some would argue that such a definition is too simple and others may think it too broad. It can therefore be argued that if defining racism itself is potentially complex, determining if something is racist, can at times be similarly difficult.
I am reminded of something that African American comedian Reginald D. Hunter said many years ago in one of his routines. He humorously pointed out that he was often asked to arbitrate as to whether something is or isn’t racist by his white friends. One anecdote recounts how a white man stood on someone’s foot in a cinema. He immediately says “sorry I didn’t see you” and then realises that the guy who’s foot he stood on is black. Reginald D. Hunter was amused by this moral dilemma and jokingly said “was there hate in your heart when you said it”. I think this is a point worth considering when trying to determine if something is or is not racist.
Bearing this in mind, does this make the 1968 Blake Edwards comedy The Party, starring Peter Sellers as Hrundi V. Bakshi, an Indian man, racist? As there are so many subjective variables pertaining to racism, perhaps a better question to ask is do you think that The Party is racist? Let us consider a few points that may be of relevance and then try and determine whether they prove one way or the other:
Use of Brownface: Peter Sellers, a white British actor, plays an Indian character, which involves him using makeup to darken his skin—a practice known as “brownface.” This is widely recognized today as a form of racial caricature that perpetuates harmful stereotypes. The use of brownface has been criticised for reinforcing the idea that people of colour can be reduced to exaggerated portrayals by white actors, rather than being represented by actors of the same ethnicity.
Stereotypical Depiction: The character of Hrundi V. Bakshi is portrayed in a way that plays into several stereotypes of Indians, particularly in Western media. His exaggerated accent, clumsiness, and naivety can be seen as contributing to a caricatured and one-dimensional portrayal of an Indian man, rather than presenting him as a fully developed character.
Cultural Sensitivity: The film was made in the late 1960s, a time when awareness of racial and cultural sensitivity in Hollywood was far less than it is today. While some argue that the film is a satire or a critique of Hollywood's treatment of minorities, this defence does not fully account for the offense that people of colour felt.
Contemporary Reactions: At the time of its release, the film was generally well-received as a comedy and many viewers may not have questioned its racial implications. However, in more recent years, critics and audiences have reassessed the film in light of changing social norms.
In summary, while The Party may have been considered humorous and harmless at the time of its release, by today's standards, the film's portrayal of race is widely regarded as problematic and potentially racist due to its use of brownface and stereotypical depictions, irrespective of any emergent humour.
Further notes.
The film draws much inspiration from the works of Jacques Tati. Particularly; Monsieur Hulot's Holiday and Mon Oncle.
Shane Danielson in The Guardian described The Party as "A comic masterpiece - yet hardly the most enlightened depiction of our subcontinental brothers. Still, propelled by Seller's insane brio, this late display of blackface provided some guilty chuckles, and at least one enduring catchphrase (the immortal 'Birdie num-num')."
Blake Edwards has run into similar later criticism for the casting of Mickey Rooney as a Japanese character in Breakfast at Tiffany's.
The Party was hugely popular in India. The late Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was a fan and was very fond of repeating one of the film’s most memorable lines. When an irate producer shouts at Hrundi V. Bakshi “Who do you think you are?” Bakshi forcefully replies “In India we don't think who we are, we know who we are!".
In some ways, I’m rather grateful for this Blaugust writing prompt because it is a timely reminder that not all ideas translate into good blog posts. The entire post is poorly framed. It’s not a question of whether The Party is racist or not, because it essentially is. However, to apply Reginald D. Hunter’s test, I don’t think it had hate in its heart. The prevailing culture of the US film industry at the time just wasn’t sufficiently racially and culturally sensitive enough to do justice to the film’s plot and thematic aspirations. With regard to incomplete draft posts, I have numerous others that aspire to long form criticism and analysis. Re-reading them now, I remember why many of them remained as drafts. They are mainly ideas that don’t work or have not been thought through. However, rather than considering them failures, I prefer to think of them as examples of slowly gaining experience.
NB. I referenced this draft post five years ago in previous “Blapril” writing prompt.
