Für neue Autoren:
kostenlos, einfach und schnell
Für bereits registrierte Autoren
98 Seiten, Note: 1,1
2. Theoretical Background
2.1 Representation and Discourse
3.1 Origin of the term
3.2 The Definition and History of the Concept
3.3 Stereotypes in the Media
4.1 Race as the Basis for Stereotyping
5. The Changing Depictions of Blacks in the U.S.
5.1 Depictions of Blacks in Cinema and on Television
5.2 Stereotypes of African Americans today
5.3 African Americans on TV in the 21st Century
6. The Wire
7. Analysis in Regards to Representation and Stereotypes
7.1 The Simultaneity of Transformation and Recurrence
7.2 Transformation of Stereotypes in The Wire
7.2.1 Discursive Practices of Representation
7.2.2 Changes in the Representations of Blacks
7.2.3 Character Analysis with Regards to Changed Stereotypes
7.3 Recurrence of Stereotypes on The Wire
7.3.1 Reappearance of Stereotypical Representation of Blacks
7.3.2 Character Analysis with Regards to Reappearing Stereotypes
188.8.131.52 Uncle Toms and Coons
184.108.40.206 Brutal Black Bucks
The Development of Race in the U.S.
Race as Justification for Slavery.
Race as Justification for Social Exclusion After Slavery
"The Game the Same. Just Got More Fierce."
An Interpretative Analysis of the Stereotypical Representation of African Americans on the US Television Program "The Wire"
illustration not visible in this excerpt
The Wire, David Simon's and Ed Burns' HBO show about the war on drugs in Baltimore and the de-industrialized American economy, has been praised by critics, authors and scholars. It was called the “best show since the invention of radio” (Brooker as quoted by Toscano) and compared to 19th century classical literature of Balzac, Dickens and others, and even Barack Obama named the show to be his favorite.
The Wire was broadcast between 2002 and 2008 and thus is part of the cultural representation of the years before Obama became the first African American president of the United States of America. That might seem to be just a chronological fact on the sideline, but can be considered quite important instead. That is, because media mirrors a society's development and its recent state of mind. With Obama in office, it might seem that America has had a significant change of mind in terms of its conduct toward African Americans. The Wire was widely praised to be a multicultural show, if not even a post-ethnic show, that avoided all forms of negative, stereotypical depictions of Blacks and included Blacks in numbers never seen before on TV.
Until today, the representation of Blacks in the media is something academics and journalists, political activists and authors write and discuss about. It is stained by the American past of slavery and segregation. Certain stereotypes and prejudices about Blacks have endured time and can be found in American society, among all races and all classes. However, The Wire with its huge number of Black characters along with their quality and depth, is seen as an exception from the usual TV program. The show was praised for its politics of representation, for putting Black characters in a drama, for including them in all depicted classes, all levels of hierarchies – Blacks are part of the street, the law, politics, the harbor, the media (Buehler 55) – and for the sheer range of Black roles that was said to make stereotyping nearly impossible (Morsch 216).
[ The Wire ] might be considered essentially as a black series; the bulk of its cast is black, drawing on scores not only of underemployed black actors but also on local nonprofessionals, as well; just as Baltimore itself is a predominantly black city. But as has been observed of its predecessor series, Homicide: Life on the Streets (1993 – 99), this very preponderance means that you see so many different types of black people (social, professional, even physical) as to utterly dissolve the category. Here there is no longer any such thing as “black” people any longer, and by the same token no such thing as black political or social solidarity. These former “black people” are now in the police; they can be criminals or prison inmates, educators, mayors and politicians; The Wire is in that sense what is now called post-racial […] (Jameson 370).
Hence, it is said that The Wire has been a breakthrough in the representation of Blacks on TV.
On one hand, Frank Kelleter claims that popular serial narration, such as TV shows like The Wire, have worked as a category to observe groundbreaking social and technological transformations since the 19th century (31). With The Wire being described as a Black show, dominated by Black characters in all classes and in all possible positions, it might be argued that the show has been an indicator for a change in the depiction and perception of African Americans in the media and in society.
On the other hand, it is argued that race still matters in the U.S. That is also valid for the media and their representation of Blacks. Since racism has not yet been overcome, it can be assumed that a show like The Wire can not yet avoid a mass medium's politics of racial representation without failing commercially. But The Wire turned out to be a huge success. How does its acclaimed groundbreaking changes in racial representation and its success go together? Although heavily praised for that, has The Wire really turned its back on stereotypical representation of Blacks? This is what this thesis is going to analyze.
In order to find out how far The Wire has maintained a negative and stereotypical representation of African Americans, I will first briefly explain what representation means and how it works in regard to television and the depiction of minorities on TV programs. This goes along with a short explanation of the terms discourse and hegemony. Both will not be actively used in the further analysis but are a sufficient introduction to stereotyping and to the analysis of stereotyping on U.S. television shows.
Second, I will give a summary of the history of stereotypes, its definitions and its applications with a special focus on stereotypes in the media. Stereotypical depictions in the media, especially in the U.S., are significantly influenced by race and its perception in society.
The perception of Blacks as racially inferior since the times of slavery has been influential on the history of African Americans in the U.S. until today. Race was made a justification for slavery, segregation, social exclusion of and disadvantages for Blacks. That is closely connected to Black representation in the media. What has been thought about Blacks was also reflected on air. Media, vice versa, has been influential on people's opinions ever since. With that in mind, the history of Black representation in American media will be discussed. In order to do so, American movies and TV shows since the invention of the cinema, and that of television, respectively, will be taken into account. This will be concluded with a description of African American representation in the media in the 21st century and a psychological study about prejudices and stereotypes about Blacks in the 21st century.
When the path of stereotypical depictions has been shown from the start until the present, The Wire will be introduced in terms of its story and its themes and topics. Afterward, The Wire will be defined within the threefold discourses of African American media representation according to Herman Gray. Also, The Wire will be analyzed for stereotypical depictions of Blacks as defined by Donald Bogle.
Frank Kelleter has argued that serial narration depends on a twofold structure which includes recurrences of well-known structures in order to have a familiar setting for the viewers, and transformations of structures in order to built up excitement. Since The Wire has been praised for its new approach toward the depiction of African Americans, it will be analyzed for positive, changed aspects as well as for negative, reaccuring aspects in regards to those two criteria mentioned above as well.
In the end, this thesis will prove that David Simon's monumental 60-hour-long show may be an exceptional TV show but nevertheless works with long-known and well-established schemes of representation and stereotypes of African Americans. The praise it has received will be made understandable on one hand, but will be shown as incomplete and ignorant on the other.
While this thesis tries to give a fully comprehensible and coherent analysis of The Wire 's use of stereotypical representation, this has to be done using examples from the show. The show in its huge quantity in characters, storylines, developments, backgrounds and its sheer length cannot be analyzed in its entirety. Also, the theories and historical background information used to develop this thesis, cannot be regarded as complete. That is, because he information used has been adapted to the question asked in this thesis. Other focuses might change the theories and information needed. This thesis gives the best answer to the question posted with regard to its allowed extent.
Representation is a term that goes back to the linguist Ferdinand De Saussure and his model of langue and parole. While parole is considered the act of speaking itself, langue is considered to be the system of signs that language is made of (Hepp 28). In the abstract system of language, Saussure distinguished two basic parts. One is the signified, the concept of something that is described by speaking, and the other is the signifier, the sound by which it is described. Together they form the sign itself. Saussure pointed out the arbitrariness of representation in language in which the signifier, the word, has no direct connection to the signified, the concept, it describes (Hepp 29). The meaning of signs depends on culturally specific conventions (Hepp 29).
De Saussure's model works as a basis for cultural media analysis because it shows that signs and meanings have a relation within a certain structure, a specific system (Hepp 27). Their meaning depends on the structure, the culture, in which they are used. Signs such as linguistic signs do not reflect an objective reality, rather, they construct reality and mirror their specific culture (Hepp 30). We give meaning to things by how we present them – the words we use about them, the stories we tell about them, the images of them we produce, the emotions we associate with them, the ways we classify and conceptualize them, the values we place on them (Hall 2003 3).
Meaning is found to be similarly produced in specific cultures. “Culture is about shared meaning”, Hall argues (2003 1). Meaning can be shared through our common understanding of signs of language and their interpretation.
The process through which members of a culture use linguistic and other signs in order to produce meaning is called representation (Hall 38). There are two approaches of how to look at representation. One is the semiotic approach, the one that is concerned with the “how” of representation. It is known as the poetics of representation. The other one is the discursive approach which is more concerned with the effects and consequences. It describes the politics of representation (Hall 2003 6). The latter approachexamines not only how language and representation produce meaning, but how the knowledge which a particular discourse produces connects with power, regulates conduct, makes up or constructs identities and subjectivities, and defines the way certain things are represented, thought about, practiced and studied (Hall 2003 6). Representation and its politics have to be studied and seen in connection to their historical and cultural specificity (Hall 2003 6), their specific 'web of meaning', their discourse (Hepp 32). Originally, discourse is a linguistic concept, referring to passages of connected writing or speech (Hall 2003 44). In regard to Foucault's definition, discourse refers to “a group of statements which provide a language for talking about – a way of representing the knowledge about – a particular topic at a particular historical moment” (Hall 2003 44). This discourse, this web of meaning of a specific culture and time, influences representation. Representation is not a reflection of society but rather a sociocultural construction of a reality. This, again, is dependent on the so called discursive formation and the concept of the subject or subjectivity (Hepp 38f.). The discursive formation describes a totality of discursive statements that have the same strategy and refer to the same object. The matter of subject or subjectivity describes the position the subject has in the representation. Foucault argues that subjectivity itself is a discursive construction. No one can exclude his position from the context of the discursive regime he is part of. The subject itself is less important and less influential than the discourse in which it works (Ruoff 92). Therefore, representation is influenced by discursive formations as is the subject that the object of representation is presented to (Hepp 38f.). As an example, Hepp says that although porn must not necessarily be made by or for men specifically, the underlying male perspective could not be dismissed from the genre (Hepp 39). The same goes for American films and TV shows which can hardly be separated from the point of view of a predominantly white American society that contrasts numerous minority groups.
Reading sings is always connected to and influenced by power. Foucault says that ideas could only gain power through discourse (Hall 2003 48). He defines knowledge as power and argues that power grows out of the application and effectiveness of knowledge, not out of truths. The former derives from its historical circumstances and its surrounding discursive regime. Knowledge and power are thus dependent on historical and discursive circumstances only (Hall 2003 48f.). Foucault thinks of power as a circle. Power, he says, permeates all levels of society and existence and is “a productive network which runs through the whole social body” (Foucault 1980 119, as cited by Hall 2003 50).
A dominance of certain groups on discourse can be explained with Antonio Gramsci's definition of hegemony (Hepp 52). Gramsci says that hegemony is a complex state of social authority which is won through a combination of force and agreement by a so called historic bloc, built from all powerful layers of society (Hepp 52). This authority is said to lay foundations for the representation of all intellectual and moral questions and thereby constructs a social identity through a collective will of a majority instead of destroying differences (Hepp 52). This definition is used by Stuart Hall in order to define racism and its representation.
Racism for Hall is a “historically specific articulation of different economical, political and cultural elements in a discourse of exclusion of certain ethnicities” (Hepp 54). This leads to a definition of one's own cultural identity through the distinction from a certain “Other” (Hepp 54) and in return to a self definition of this defined “Other” (Hepp 55). This is also argued by W.E.B. Du Bois in The Souls of Black Folk, and Charles Cooley with their theories of the Double Consciousness (Du Bois 3) and the Looking-Glass-Self theory, respectively. Both describe that a group's self-percetion is influenced by the way it is seen by others.
“Representation involves processes of 'speaking for' and 'speaking of' those who are represented.” Through representation, the discursive definition of a group gets spread through society, and also through the media, depicted as mirroring the “real world” (Rayner 61). Media is a crucial means to gain knowledge about the world. While it can help to gain understanding, it also shapes our attitudes and beliefs about the world (Rayner 61). Television, as part of the media, is not an objective and trustworthy medium. It uses iconic images in combination with language in order to represent a three dimensional world in a two dimensional form (Rayner 62). Hence, it simplifies the world it tries to show. Media are formed by discourse and, at the same time, influence it. What they depict is part of a reality constructed by them and by cultural conventions that are arbitrarily defined. This is the general frame in which every sign of every text has to be read. Whatever is shown through a medium has to be seen in the context of its specific historical and cultural circumstances and the majorities forming the discourse in their society and hence defining who the self is and who the so-called “Other” is.
Every representation of minorities does not only show the current state of a society's discourse, but also influences the direction in which it is going. Difference is already stressed by it being shown. Hence, the representation of minorities is of crucial relevance to understanding a society. With representing difference,with making it visible, it always attains meaning as well (Hall 2004 112). This is created through an accumulation and repetition of such meanings. Only when certain connotations appear repeatedly in different contexts, depictions appear that deliver a certain stereotypical meaning. What a stereotype exactly is will be explained in the following chapter.
The term stereotype derives from the Greek words stereos and typos which mean 'fixed' and 'characteristic', respectively (Six-Materna 246). The term was originally used as a metaphor in printing and typography, “where it refers to text cast into rigid form for the purposes of repetitive use” (Pickering 9). From there, the term has been transformed from a technical term to one used in psychology and cultural as well as media studies and has been used in various ways with various definitions (Pickering 9).
The concept of stereotyping is mostly used in psychological studies and media and cultural analysis. In psychology, “the concept has been subject to extensive research that goes back to the 1930s” (Pickering 9). Walter Lippmann, a political columnist and writer for the New York World and the New Republic, introduced the term stereotype to social sciences, publishing the volume The Public Opinion in 1922 (Six-Materna 246; Pickering, 18). He described stereotypes to be beliefs and schemes positioned between the outer world and our consciousness (Six-Materna 246). In the 1930s, stereotypes were defined as fixed impressions not necessarily corresponding with reality that develop out of a judgment that lacks a closer examination (ibid.). More current definitions say that stereotypes are beliefs about traits of people of a certain group (ibid.). While that can be considered common sense, it is, however, not clearly defined if stereotypes are to be seen as per se negative, the way prejudices are (ibid.). Further, stereotypes are said to be a cognitive structure, an association, or a highly organized social category (ibid.). But stereotyping cannot be seen equal to categorizing. Lippmann describes stereotyping in a twofold manner: Stereotypes are giving orientation for the one actively stereotyping, and they are condemning the one that is stereotyped.
The psychological definition, however, is more precise. Categorization creates orientation. When categorization fails, this leads to stereotyping, which can be negative. In contrast to categories, stereotypes carry “quite definite ideological views and values” with them (Pickering 2). Although stereotypes, similar to categories, may bring a sense of order to the social world, they lack flexibility in contrast to categories (Pickering 2). According to Six-Materna, categorization is an identification of stimuli. The broader a category becomes, the more stimuli can be put into it. But the more stimuli fit into one category, the less distinguished the categorization becomes. Thus, broad categorization leads to imprecise categorization and, ergo, to stereotyping (247). Categorization is a central cognitive tendency that may lead to stereotyping. Certain categories are also shared in specific cultural spaces. The stereotypes deriving from that are called 'social stereotypes' (Six-Materna 246). People grow up with those social stereotypes and find it hard to avoid them. They belong to the realm of culture as a shared meaning as described by Hall and, moreover, to specific cultural discourses. The tendency to discriminate or prejudice, though, depends on the individual person (ibid. 247). Hence, categorization is in itself a neutral process without any judgment, which after all can lead to stereotyping, discrimination and racism.
In 1954, the psychologist Gordon Allport defined stereotypes as “an exaggerated belief associated with a category. Its function is to justify (rationalize) our conduct in relation to that category” (Pickering 10). This implies that all images and notions connected with those generalized individuals or groups are shared in the interest of the social group among which they are used. Mostly, these notions and images are rather “simplistic, rigid and erroneous based on discriminatory values and damaging to people's actual social and personal identities” (ibid.). Pickering points out, that this is the case because those discriminatory views make it easier for groups to reduce specific cultural or behavioral features of other groups which might be hard to understand or even contradictory (ibid.). Another reason, as mentioned by Pickering, is that such a view of outstanding groups makes it easier for the inside groups to feel as one entity without making any difference between inner subgroups (ibid.). If a social group or category is stereotyped as inherently lazy, stupid, childish, or dishonest, the ascription acts not only as a marker of deviancy, making it marginal to the moral order, but also a revalidation of that which it is measured against and found wanting. This twofold movement is integral of the ways in which stereotypes function as a term of social control (Pickering 5)
Stereotyping is a matter of marginalization of groups against normative values and established conventions. This includes a mostly negative judgment about differences (Pickering 5). Those judgments are an expression of power. Stereotyping as a form of exclusion leads to an automatic inclusion into the structures of power and dominance of those living on the margins of, but still within a society (Pickering 5). Stereotyping is a way of reducing outside groups to basic traits in order to make it easier to make up one's mind about them, and this can be done by a group of individuals functioning as one entity united by the difference to the other one. In basic terms, stereotypes unite one group by means of judging and excluding another.
Regarding stereotypes as easily erasable and thus hardly harmful, trivializes them and their effects on society and people's lives. The definition of stereotypes as beliefs about groups and their traits may give the impression that stereotyping is connected to a lack of knowledge or education, or to an imprecise representation, and that it could be erased with a correction thereof. That is not necessarily true. Even an empirical falsification of existing stereotypes does not consequently lead to a vanishing of them (Pickering 12). Politically and socially, stereotypes constrain people of ethnic and social groups from being able to fully engage themselves in a society of a dominant group spreading and using those stereotypes. Stereotyping may thus easily and oftentimes lead to or involve hostility and discrimination.
Stereotypes are easily trivialized due to their simplicity. Quoting Teresa Perkins (1979), Pickering points out that “'all typifications are simplifications since they select common features and exclude differences'; to this extent 'all typifications are undifferentiated (and in that sense they are also erroneous)'” (13ff.). Perkins goes on to say that while stereotypes such as that of the 'happy-go-lucky Negro' of colonial times seem to be simplistic, they are rather abstract and operate on “a higher level of generalization” (Pickering, 13). That is because the obvious description of the stereotype of the 'happy-go-lucky Negro' includes the African's assumed simple mindedness and warmheartedness but implicitly led to the assumption of his general inability to be serious and able to govern himself (Pickering 13). This, back in colonial times, was used as justification for the British imperialism and colonialism. Thus, the complexity of a stereotype and its implicit meaning can lead directly onto the path of political ideology and economic exploitation, human cruelty and racism.
Such practices of stereotyping have increased when the encounters with other cultures have as well, through “industrialization, urbanization, and massive population movement, or through overseas European expansion and the development of colonization and imperialism” (Pickering 7ff.). This will be seen later on in regards to African Americans, who have suffered from the dichotomy of being depicted as either an obedient “Uncle Tom” character, or a hyper-masculine and violent “Brutal Black Buck.”
Pickering offers an insight into two basic features of stereotypes that might be forgotten when reducing it to its mere simplistic definition. First, stereotypes are not only simple, they also have a complex side to them. They tie together contrary features under one ideological umbrella that depends on its discourse. Second, the extent of the consequences of a stereotype such as the one about the 'happy-go-lucky Negro' in the imperialist times, shows what devastating effects it can have.
Stereotypes can be seen as especially crucial for they are enhanced by the media. In times that are more and more complex and complicated, there is a growing need for objective, unprejudiced depictions of facts and events. This need is compromised with the increased perception of the world through the media (Pickering 19) which does not erode stereotypes but rather enhances them (ibid.). Lippmann says, that stereotypical media depictions are “a serious problem in opinion formation and reproduction.”
The “inadequate and manipulated media representations” are, according to Lippmann, not necessarily that way “because of 'any malevolent plan', but because for sound, commercial reasons they follow 'the line of least resistance' in relation to existing prejudices”, as for instance in the journalistic amplification of stereotypes about foreigners (Pickering 18). Thus, it is not only hard to change an existing stereotype, it is rather impossible when the media avoids taking economic chances by trying to change it. Although this may be regarded in relation to Marxist theories of capitalistic interests, this could only be verified concerning production and advertisement. But apart from the latter, the media also depends on people, their opinions and their agreement with the media. So Foucault's or Gramsci's definitions of discourse and hegemony, respectively, have to be considered for both of them include society in its entirety and not just economic interests of producers.
Pickering points out that “it is pointless trying to gauge whether or not [stereotypes] are accurate”, in regards to Lippmann's differentiation of necessary categorization and instrumental stereotyping. “What counts is how they circulate, and with what consequences [...]” (Pickering 25f.). In order to analyze those questions proficiently and sufficiently, it is needed to bring back the historical concept and context of stereotypes to recent analysis. We need to overcome the obsessively present-centered orientation of much of the work on stereotyping […]. Such critical treatment seems at times to be imprisoned within a view of the world bounded by its attention to the present, permitting no view from its narrow cell of the sweeping panorama of the past (Pickering 49).
This is especially needed since we have already heard that stereotypes are resistant to change. In order to find stereotypes in a current context, as intended in this thesis, it is crucial to point out stereotypes about specific groups in the historical contexts in order to see how, when and why they may have changed or if they are still intact and in use.
Stereotypes are hard to change, they are part of a specific social memory and they are inter alia transmitted via media. Still, they do not necessarily depict what is real or what can be found in society. They are a matter of what people or institutions in power want to be seen in contrast to what is wanted as the norm in a society. Thus, the depiction of stereotypes is “ not so much with the theoretical question of a knowable social or historical 'real' as with the experientially knowable consequences of symbolic representation.” Rather it is a “questions of who is speaking of whom, at what cost and in what terms” ( Pickering, 50f.).
In order to be able to properly identify the possible use of stereotypes about African Americans on The Wire, or the lack thereof and the reasons for both, it is necessary to analyze the American history of race in regards to Africans, African Americans and other people of color that can be seen as Black and stereotyped under the same conditions.
In regards to stereotypes, especially when focusing on a topic concerning the United States, the concept of race has to be mentioned and put into historical context. Race is a rather modern idea and even a modern term. It did not exist in the English language until William Dunbar used it in a poem in 1508 (PBS, Ten Things, 2003). Race, as defined by Hazel Rose Markus and Paula M. L. Moya in their 2010 volume Doing Race, is a complex system of ideas and practices regarding how some visible characteristics of human bodies such as skin color, facial features, and hair texture relate to people's character, intellectual capacity, and patterns of behavior (22).
Character as well as behavioral traits in races are mostly considered negative. They are inter alia put upon certain groups in order to justify their exploitation or denigration (ibid. 21). Similar to stereotypes, as defined above, the concept of race was and is used to subordinate groups and secure a certain organization of power. The traits assigned to and beliefs about certain races can be seen as stereotypes in use, both socially and politically.
The idea of race was invented in the 16th century in order to justify the exploitation of west African slaves (Metzler XI; Weizmann 10). Until today, the idea of race is in use, even in official institutional documents and data such as the American Census that demands Americans to categorize themselves into one or more of at least five racial categories which are: “White, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander" (Census.gov). Race in the U.S. has always been a matter of power. The concept of race has been used to create a contrast to the dominant group of people with white skin. The American nation and its culture have both long been regarded as white. Especially the Africans have been important to the notion of whiteness. Blackness has been constructed as an opposite to whiteness as well as in order to enable whiteness and vice versa (Smethurst 563). Until today, race remains a crucial aspect of life in the United States, especially for African Americans (Meagher 237). In Appendix A, I will summarize the African American experience in the US along the lines of their social situation which would go into too much detail for the thesis itself.
All in all, regarding the historical development of African Americans in the US, it has to be considered that their encounter with North America and its inhabitants and immigrants was a forced one, and one that was based on their exploitation. Until today, Blacks carry the weight of their exploitation and discrimination economically and socially and in regards to certain stereotypes about them. Blacks have long been seen as less intelligent, less able to live by themselves and more criminal, violent and animal-like, especially in relation to sexuality. In how far such stereotypes have found their way into our media, especially TV and films, and if they have survived until today will be analyzed in the following.
Racial difference, as constructed as it is, is part of the core of American society (Mittell 2010 314). The definition of and the conduct toward race are always in a state of flux. Racial representation in the media plays an important role in the study of racial difference. The representation of difference is always a representation of identity, for representation of minorities or subordinate groups always shows how they are positioned in relation to the dominant group which is mostly the white, heterosexual male adult (Mittell 2010 306).
Although empirical falsifications of stereotypes do not necessarily change them (Pickering 12), the depiction of African Americans has changed significantly throughout history. These changes reflect the changing social climate for Blacks in the U.S. (Benshoff 78). As described in Appendix A, African Americans have gone a long way from slavery and a status of lesser humans to their constitutionally guaranteed status of de jure equality in American society. Nevertheless, stereotypes and stereotypical depictions of Blacks in the U.S. have not completely vanished. Stereotypes that have been implemented for centuries can hardly be erased by a few laws and amendments and some political campaigns. Stereotypes that have been that consistent could even rise again, as Pickering explains: The degree to which stereotypes of black people [...] have proved resistant or responsive to change has depended on the social and historical circumstances in which they have operated, their rhetorical status in cultural processes of meaning-construction, and the extent of the self-rewarding emotional, moral, political or other investments which their perpetrators have had in their long-term preservation. Stereotypes remain fairly stable for quite considerable periods of time, and tend to become more pronounced and hostile when social tensions between different ethnic […] groupings arise (Pickering 12).
According to Pickering, it should thus be possible to find long lasting stereotypes about Blacks in the media, even until today and especially on the rise in times of racial crises.
Television, as a cultural product, depending on institutional structures and the audience's attraction to it, is a medium highly involved in discourse on every level of society. This is also mirrored in its politics of representation. In general, Gray argues that [...] contemporary television representations of blackness are linked to the presence and admittedly limited influence of a small number of highly visible black producers, writers, directors [and other Blacks involved] […] along with the structural shifts, cultural discourses, and institutional transformations of the television industry […] (Gray 2000 282).
Also, shows produced or written by this limited number of Blacks do not necessarily have 'Black topics' and shows with 'Black topics' mostly have white producers, writers, and directors (Gray 2000 282f.). Television productions construct a point of view. “Not surprisingly, this point of view constructs and privileges white middle-class audiences as the ideal viewers and subjects of television stories” (Gray 2000 283).
In the following, I will analyze the historical development of Black stereotypes throughout the history of movies and TV in order to afterward search for remains of those stereotypes in The Wire.
The depiction of Blacks in mass media begins with the invention of mass media and their widespread availability. In the 1830s, tabloid newspapers and theater shows became affordable for the poor masses. Production-wise, Blacks were completely excluded, and as consumers and audiences they were not the target group and hardly present. Blacks were included as artists in shows, although only at the price of being made fun of. If Blacks were not playing other Blacks on stage, whites were mocking Blacks in the famous and popular Minstrel shows (Wilson II 72f.).
With the appearance of the first movies at the end of the 19th century, the firststereotypical depictions of Blacks could be seen on screens (Wilson II 74). From its inception, U.S. cinema has worked within a dominant ideology of “white patriarchal capitalism” (Benshoff 78). American movie productions reflected the dominant attitudes towards Blacks in the U.S. Blacks were victims of stereotyping in movies as early as 1896 and 1897, when Thomas Edison's The Watermelon Contest and Sambo and Aunt Jemima were published (Benshoff 78). Back then, after the end of slavery, the old derogatory and exaggerated images of Africans from the antebellum South with which slavery had been justified for over 200 years were still in use. The first stereotypical depictions in the first movies appeared in the same year in which Plessy vs. Ferguson was dealt with by the American Supreme Court, 1896 (King 101) which legalized segregation and second class citizenship of Blacks in the South. The change from the system of slavery and complete subordination to the constitutionally legalized segregation in the southern states of the U.S. ruled by Jim Crow laws, and the informal segregation in the northern states did not necessarily mean that depictions and stereotypes changed (Hall 2004 187). Mostly, similar to the minstrel shows beforehand, Blacks were enacted by white actors with black faces. These blackfaces and the stereotypes put into films basically remained unchanged for the first half of the 20th century. In retrospect, the era of Plessy vs. Ferguson is the era that basically shaped the upcoming years in regard to the status and the representation of Blacks. The social consensus on the role of Blacks, the discourse, did not change from slavery to its end and to segregation thereafter, the Supreme Court ruling and the media depictions of Blacks give a clear impression of that.
There were basically two capacities in which non-whites were depicted inferior to whites: intellect and morale. Wilson II. argues that working-class whites needed reassurance of their being part of the superior race. In order to satisfy the audience's needs and make them feel as being part of the society, film producers gave them what they wanted: The clear cut depiction of Black inferiority. Especially Griffith's Birth of a Nation of 1915 was a strong statement on racial differences. Griffith told the story of the birth of the American nation as the story of the founding of the Ku Klux Klan, fighting for the honor and purity of the white race and white women especially (Hall 2004 135). Blacks were clearly depicted as intellectually and morally inferior, either as obedient or as “lazy, ignorant, vicious, and rapacious” (Benshoff 80). Also, The Birth of a Nation implied a strong message against interracial sex (Wilson II 76) since the villain was a mulatto lusting for white women (Benshoff 80). Black representation was stuck in the dichotomy of either being obedient and dumb or violent and threatening. Griffith underlined the stereotypical representation by cutting scenes out of the movie which portrayed Black families that would have made them more sympathetic to the audience. That was a common way of estranging Blacks from audiences and to underline their status as villains, and it still is, even today (Benshoff 79).
Griffith's movie is considered as the birth of modern movie making. Griffith, for the first time in movie-history, used certain techniques of cutting and editing and enabled a whole new way of storytelling with pictures (Hall 2004 135). The birth of modern films is heavily connected to Black stereotypes that were dominant in Hollywood for eras. The stereotypes used by Griffith are some of those that Donald Bogle identifies in his study of 1973, Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies & Bucks: an Interpretative History of Blacks in American Films. Bogle speaks of five basic African American stereotypes constantly used in American movies in the first half of the 20th century and even thereafter:
- Uncle Tom is a character that shows the Black man as socially acceptable for and obedient to the whites. Uncle Tom represents the “good Negro”, the goodhearted and loyal servant to his white master. No matter how unfairly and humiliating he is treated, he maintains his goodhearted, obedient, submissive and selfless behavior. For the Tom the white man is the answer to all of his problems. This makes him very popular with the white audience (Bogle 3ff.).
- The Coon is the “most [...] degrading of all black stereotypes”. He is a character that represents the Black man as funny and entertaining and an amusement object. Coons are portrayed as “stumbling and stuttering idiots”, as unreliable, lazy, harmless and good-for-nothing except for eating watermelons, shooting dice and butchering the English language. Similarly to the Uncle Tom character, he is obedient and loyal and thus not a threatening stereotype of a Black man (Bogle 7f.).
- The Tragic Mulatto is an attractive mixed-race woman who is shown as lovable and sympathetic. She is a rather emotional and selfish, savvy and seductive nymphomaniac. In the end, her socially unwanted mixed-race heritage and her miscegenistic behavior seal her faith and lead to an inevitable tragic end preventing her from an otherwise “productive and happy life” (Bogle 9).
- A Mammy is a corpulent and grumbly Black maid. She is a character similar to the Coon but fiercely independent and of a different sex. Mostly, she is middle-aged, desexualized and serves as a mother-substitute. Although she shows a certain amount of self-esteem through her rather rough commentaries, she is a loyal and obedient servant and thus close to the character of a Tom (Bogle 10).
- The Brutal Black Buck is the strong, bad, angry and violent Black male. He is rebellious and equipped with an exaggerated sexual desire and lust for white flesh. On one hand, his physical violence could be an outlet for his suppressed sexuality. On the other hand, he is depicted as “over-sexed and savage, violent and frenzied.” The fear of the Black sexual powers, in terms of stereotypical representation, derives from Griffith's representation of the Brutal Black Buck as a sexual savage. Originally, this myth derives from the times of abolition and the fear of miscegenation and the degeneration of the white race (Bogle 10ff.).
Hall says that although stereotypes have changed over time, these basic depictions have not completely vanished even until today (Hall 2004 136).
There are two opposing categories of those stereotypes. On one hand there are the characters of the Mammy, the goodhearted Uncle Tom and the comedic Coon, all of them rather obedient or at least relatively harmless, who underline the common perception of white supremacy. On the other hand, there are the Tragic Mulatto and the Black Buck which both “suggest a psycho-sexual dimension to social prejudices”(Benshoff 79). Especially the Black Buck reflects the white man's fear of the Black male and the sexual revenge on white women for the slave owner's cruelty and the social and sexual suppression.
As a reaction to The Birth of a Nation, Black film makers produced The Birth of a Race (1918) which failed commercially but foreshadowed a first wave of Black films from the late 1910s to the 1950s. During the years of Jim Crow, political and economic powers took care that Blacks could neither gain knowledge about film making nor raise money. Since the cheaply produced Black movies were successful with Black audiences nevertheless, the production companies involved were taken over by whites. Afterward, the films were freed of all social and political implications (Benshoff 81). While the so-called race films that were produced adapted other common genres and featured Black actors, other conventions were not changed at all. For example, the common color code of Western movies was kept. The good ones, here the Black ones, were dressed in white and the bad ones in black. A certain irony can be seen in the switched roles with the reaffirmed color codes which implicated the established stereotypes (Benshoff 82).
The depiction of Blacks slightly changed during Hollywood’s heyday in the 1930s and 1940s. Especially between 1930 and 1945, Hollywood reacted to new social realities and changed up the depiction of non-whites. Black were no longer shown as criminals and threatening, of low morals and low intellect, but instead as obedient characters who “knew their place” (Wilson II 78). Mostly, though, the movies were segregated in regards to actors due to the production code mandate against miscegenation of 1934. The mere presence of Blacks, especially of Tragic Mulattoes and Black Bucks, would have implicated the possibility of mixed-race intercourse (Benshoff 83). If any Black actors appeared on screen, they could be seen as “domestic workers, waiters, and porters”, as dancers, singers, or “happy, faithful and sometimes lazy slaves.” (Wilson II 79f.). Hall describes their rare appearance in the movies as playing the obedient and loyal maids and helpers for whites (2004 136) and hence as Uncle Toms, Coons and Mammies.
The 1940s then were the era of Black musicals such as Porgy and Bess and Black entertainers such as Cab Calloway (Hall 2004 137). Hollywood produced all-Black movies in order to avoid implications of miscegenation with mixed casts but also to prove its liberal understanding of art. However, all of these movies were produced and directed by whites and showing the same old stereotypes (Benshoff 84).
WWII led to a change in the attitudes of whites towards Blacks that mirrored itself in the depiction of Blacks in movies (Wilson II 87). In 1943, e.g., the movie The Negro Soldier promoted the inclusion of Blacks in the army. Although it was an army propaganda movie, it was so popular that it was shown in regular theaters as well (Benshoff 85). In the 1950s, there was a rising awareness of the race problem, which was only depicted from one point of view, the white one. Stories about Blacks were told from white perspectives, and whites even played light-skinned Blacks, so that the ban of mixed-race kissing could be avoided (Benshoff 86).
During the Cold War, the “social problem film” quickly vanished. Then, films were dominated by the communist threat and McCarthyism. America had to be shown and represented as a perfect union with the better system and the better people (Benshoff 86). This was the beginning of the era of actors such as Sidney Portier. While Portier was a Black man cast to play the main characters in a number of motion pictures, he was completely white-washed. Portier was shown as a Black man without embodying any Black traits or stereotypes. He was intelligent, educated, conservatively dressed and well articulated (Hall 2004 137). Portier embodied a Black man living by white standards who could not possibly be a threat to the existing societal system. Portier on one hand opened the door for Black actors in mainstream movies, on the other hand he was not seen as Black and could thus not consequently advocate for Blacks whose majority's real living conditions were not mirrored by Portier's roles at all.
At the same time, television became the most important medium of the American society (Benshoff 90). From the start, Blacks were the largest non-white racial presence on network television. From 1948 on, Blacks were regularly seen on CBS's Toast of the Town which would later be the Ed Sullivan Show; and also from 1954 on, on NBC's Tonight show. Black presence on TV and in the movies was paralleled by their slow social integration evidenced the Brown vs. Board of Education case of 1954. But a court decision did not change society as a whole. The mere presence of African Americans in schools and on screen would not result in a satisfactory TV portrayal of diverse Black realities (Wilson II 99). Black history and the current state of society were not depicted at all, so that the African American background completely vanished from TV (Mittell 2010 315). However, the early 1950s on TV were far more inclusive than the upcoming eras would be (Mittell 2010 316).
When in 1951, CBS introduced a television version of the radio show Amos'n'Andy, it was a small revolution. It was the first show with an all-Black cast on TV, notably before the Civil Rights Movement (Wilson II 100; Benshoff 90). Even though the actors played Blacks in all possible professions, they were still depicted as objects to mock, mostly “lazy buffoons and cowardly crooks” (Mittell 2010 318). When introduced to a live audience, the male actors were called “boys” by the producers (Wilson II 100). The term “boy” was reminiscent of how Blacks were spoken to in the days of slavery in which adult Black men were not accepted as adult males. The actors were not taken seriously by the producers and thus not by the audience. The show, although very popular, started a controversy over the depiction of Blacks as having questionable intellects and morals (Wilson II, 100). Amos'n'Andy was removed from TV with initiative of the NAACP that sued CBS in 1951 (Gray 2000 286; Mittell 2010 318). The show is representative for 1950's American television in which Blacks could be seen only as maids, cooks and in other lower positions, stereotyped as Mammies, Coons and Toms. Blacks were depicted as obedient characters in order to maintain the social framework of white supremacy (Gray 2000 286). After the end of Amos'n'Andy in 1953, many Blacks who saw the show as an employment opportunity, feared that this would be the end of Black TV presence (Mittell 2010 318). They were close to the truth. During the late 1950s and the whole 1960s, Blacks on TV were as rare as Blacks in the cinema. And if they were present at all, Blackness was basically ignored, Blacks were depicted as ethnically white (Gray 2000 287). Mittell lists two reasons for that. One was that southern affiliates tried to keep TV segregated, the other was that advertisers feared to have their products being connected to Blacks (2010 319).
Due to the CRM of the 1960s and its political and social accomplishments, an independent depiction of Blacks became possible for the first time. This can be seen as the first revolution in the representation of Blackness in the U.S. after Amos'n'Andy (Hall 2004 143). With a radicalization of the CRM in the second half of the 1960s and the formation of the Black Panther Party (BPP) in 1966 (King 163f.), a demand for a new type of Black character in films appeared (Benshoff 88). The “sophisticated, heroic Black male character emerged” (Wilson II 87) and came to life in the so called Blaxploitation movies. These movies included a nearly all Black cast and a rather militant posture. During the zenith of the CRM, such films showed Blacks taking revenge on whites. Huey Newton of the BPP called Melvin van Peebles' Sweet Sweetback's Baaadassss Song of 1971 the “first revolutionary Black film” (Benshoff 88). The film tells the story of Sweet Sweetback, a hustler, sexual stud and cop killer. Thus, it tells the story of a Black Buck, told from a Black perspective instead of from a white one. Since whites, still the economically most interesting target group, had little interest in such stories, the topics chosen led to a lack of financial support for independent Blaxploitation movies. The genre was taken over by white producers and exploited for financial reasons. The movie economy was in crisis back then and Black audiences were considered better than none. Gangster movies and crime thrillers with a new Black Buck character, flashy and violent, were produced (Benshoff 88). The NAACP and other Black groups as well as intellectuals intervened and questioned the type of Black character represented (Benshoff 89). With the rise of critique and the decline of success, the hype of Blaxploitation movies ended with the end of the 1970s.
Simultaneously to the rise and fall of Blaxploitation on the big screen, more Black presence could be seen on TV, with Blacks being featured in supporting and even in leading roles. In most shows, there was only one Black character who was depicted as rather white than Black apart from the pigmentation of his skin within an otherwise all-white cast (Mittell 2010 320). white critics considered that a sign of an integrated society which would not need any further change while Black critics decried the erased racial identity. They called these Black characters “white Negroes” (Mittell 2010 320).
As a reaction, more “relevant” and “authentic” depictions of Black people were demanded (Gray 2000 288; Mittell 2010 320). The popular comedy show All in the Family that started in the early 1970s caused a controversy about the depiction of racial prejudices. The show features the racially bigot character of Archie Bunker who often argues with his liberal son-in-law Mike. The producers aimed at a liberal youth target group. Instead, racist Archie Bunker turned out to be the most popular character (Mittell 2010 322). The show's producers argued that the comedic depiction of prejudices would lead to less prejudices and that it would be clear that the show made fun of them. The NAACP even awarded the show for that (Wilson II 52). Psychological tests, on the contrary, proved that people tend to watch a show and follow its arguments based on their own level of education and prejudice. People, first of all, only watch what suits them and, second of all, they only follow the arguments they agree with. This is called selective perception and selective exposure, respectively. With regards to
 Taken from a dialogue between the characters Dennis Wise and Slim Charles. The Wire Season 03 Episode 04 "Amsterdam"
 Retrived from http://www.g33k-e.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/The-Wire.jpg, March 9, 2014
 A detailed historical account from the times before slavery until today will be available in Appendix A.
 For detailed information about what controls and forms discourse, see: Foucault, Michel. Die Ordnung des Diskurses. Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag. Frankfurt/Main, 2003.
 Referring to the terms of Bogle which will be explained in detail later on.
 A further analysis based on Marxist theories may be interesting as well but would neither fit my theoretical approach nor the supposed amount of pages given forthis thesis.
 For further information see Appendix A.
 A strategy that was also common in the colonies and former colonies of European powers in Africa. For further information see Manthia Diawara. African Cinema: Politics and Culture. Indiana University Press,1992
 See Appendix A for further information.
Der GRIN Verlag hat sich seit 1998 auf die Veröffentlichung akademischer eBooks und Bücher spezialisiert. Der GRIN Verlag steht damit als erstes Unternehmen für User Generated Quality Content. Die Verlagsseiten GRIN.com, Hausarbeiten.de und Diplomarbeiten24 bieten für Hochschullehrer, Absolventen und Studenten die ideale Plattform, wissenschaftliche Texte wie Hausarbeiten, Referate, Bachelorarbeiten, Masterarbeiten, Diplomarbeiten, Dissertationen und wissenschaftliche Aufsätze einem breiten Publikum zu präsentieren.
Kostenfreie Veröffentlichung: Hausarbeit, Bachelorarbeit, Diplomarbeit, Dissertation, Masterarbeit, Interpretation oder Referat jetzt veröffentlichen!