Overt, Covert, and Is That a Gun in Your Pocket?

[onyxlynx]

As I mentioned a day or two or possibly six ago, there was a post by laughingrat , mostly about a movie about LARPers. I think I have in fact seen the trailer. Eh. Anyway, toward the end of the post, Rat mused:

"You know, the thing about movies from 1900ish to 1950 is that they're full of sexism and racism. But somehow, with only a few exceptions, they didn't manage to be nearly as full of shit as the movies full of sexism and racism being put out today."

I noticed this because with a few exceptions there are no "screwball" comedies after the late '40s, and I've long suspected there is a connection.

Mind you, I don't necessarily know where or what that connection is.

(The least likely reason is that Cary Grant took roles more befitting his age and acting chops, and there was only one Cary Grant.)

Comedy is a deeply conservative art (damnit, I need footnotes!); some of the things that trigger laughter are perceived incongruity (something not as it should be), sudden misfortunes of others, and people digging themselves more deeply into trouble.  Comedy is a safe way of upending the universe because it dictates that the universe be restored at end.  In "proper" order.  Remember all those happy ending marriages in Shakespearean comedy?  

I do not believe there is a conscious massive conspiracy to reinforce and strengthen what would be considered hierarchic social structure.  Most of the action on that front is unconscious, subconscious, and "the way we've always done things."  The way this kind of social structure perpetuates itself is through constant repetition.  Media--literature, music, performance art, radio, TV, newspapers--do the job of repetition.

Aaaaannnnnddd...  this will require plagiarism research.  I am pretty sure World War II had an effect on visible and invisible racism and sexism.  Also, the process of recycling and remaking had already begun back in the silent era.  The late '40s saw (middle and upper-class, and in some cases working class) women being forced into domesticity strongly discouraged from working outside the home.  One of the possibilities, paradoxically, is that naming behavior patterns as sexism and racism makes them more visible and more obvious,  I'm going to hope that that's not it.  But my brain is shutting down at intervals, including during the noisy game I was playing to distract myself.  Oooops.

Comments

[pitseleh]

I think I see what you're getting at here, and with some clarification, I agree. I think that you're being a little bit too vague about the classification of comedy because comedy is inherently is an incredibly diverse medium whereas, as far as I can tell, you are referring very specifically to romantic comedies that were made under the Hayes Code.

Due to the fact that they were made under the Hayes Code, they had to swing back at the end, because that was part of the Hayes Code. If they did not swing back at the end, they were not allowed to be distributed, and thus made no money. Not making money made the people in Hollywood very angry. This had nothing to do with comedy as an inherent medium. In fact, if you look at other comedy being made during the same time period-- for example, the dregs of vaudeville and Borscht Belt comedy, which was the most popular at the time outside of film-- the door very rarely swung back, as it were.

I would not say that comedy is either an inherently a liberal or a conservative medium. I would say that comedy is, however, an inherently comedic medium. I would agree that romantic comedies coming out of a time when the incredibly conservative Hayes Code was in effect are incredibly conservative in some respects, especially in the respect that you refer to, with everything returning to "normal" at the end. I would go further and say that romantic comedies of today still follow this formula because their predecessors have influenced them, even though the Hayes Code is no longer in effect. I don't think that has anything to do with inherent properties of comedy, though.

[onyxlynx]

I really need a force field around my machine that will not let me post stuff when I'm half asleep.

You have good points. Also, I really need to research this subject. Lots of research (this has been a threat since the late '80s).

The only good the Hayes Code did was to inspire the occasional creative sidestep. And sharpen receptive ears for innuendo. Phooey.

[rhi]

I have some links you may want to look at:

Disappearing Women: http://marthawells.livejournal.com/423363.html (some interesting movie comparisons in the comments)

France Marion, Queen of Early Screenwriters: http://www.roguebladesentertainment.com/2011/07/frances-marion/

And now I'm reminded I need a Nora Charles icon...

[onyxlynx]

Thank you! I had gotten the impression that Anita Loos was the only woman screenwriter in the silent era. Now I'll have to hunt down that book (probably at the main branch). (I saw The Big House once. I think I grafted memories of it to other movies.)

noracharles has a Nora Charles icon, so you'd need a different one. ;-)

[rhi]

You're welcome! And I'm sure I'll manage something.

[franzeska]

Interesting theory. My strong suspicion is that racism and sexism of the past are either so alien as to be invisible or so blatantly unacceptable that they warrant nothing more than a little eye rolling and self congratulation that we're better now. They're almost quaint.

Modern sexism and racism, on the other hand, remind us of everything that's still wrong now. No veneer of nostalgia is going to excuse even one tiny particle.

However, I agree that the romantic comedy specifically is a genre that has taken a dive into the toilet some time in the last couple of decades.