Tuesday, November 22, 2011

The Block Party That Everyone Should Revisit.

Dave Chappelle's Block Party” is a music doc featuring a star studded musical line up (The Fugees, Mos Def, Kanye West, The Roots, Erykah Badu, Jill Scott), Dave Chappelle, some kookie artists in a “floating” house, and even a fun crew that Chappelle invited from his town in Ohio. I already like music docs, so I didn't need much pushing—but “Block Party” was fantastic. It wasn't what people would expect when they hear his name—in fact, everyone that I asked about it had never seen it. These were people that not only had access but also interest in the craft, the man, the music, and the city. I wonder if the huge blow up over his last minute escape to South Africa made the film just a tiny blip on the radar. The film was made before this stint, in 2004, and it's easy to see why Chapelle would have been overwhelmed: this project was like nothing else he had put out (he hosted and wrote “Block Party”) and the second season of the Chappelle show was about to start—and probably bring on all kinds of the wrong attention. Because his work on the Chappelle show is so loud and over the top, it attracts a certain crowd that doesn’t really see it for what it is. They could very well watch the clips where he poses as all the different racial stereotypes(Pixie Videos) and think it's hilarious because it's portrayed in that way—and not even get the bit of sadness that's behind it. Dave Chappelle is a smart man, he knows what he's doing, but the frat boys who just want to yell/regurgitate offensive one liner quotes from the show don't and it loses the point.

Before studying Chappelle in this class I hadn't really cared for him. I had only seen clips of the “Chappelle Show” and got was he was doing, but felt like he was getting the wrong kind of attention, it almost made me uncomfortable with how far he was taking it. It wasn't even uncomfortable in the way you'd imagine, because my ideas of race are so different from many—but more on that later. However, upon watching the interview with him and James Lipton on "Inside The Actors Studios", I connected with him so much. Just the way he spoke in everyday language is reminiscent of how I speak (though not academically) and reminds me of where I come from. I wonder a lot if Ohio is the same as Pennsylvania. In many ways it is (I live at the border) and I'm always wondering about the whole nature vs. nurture thing. Not only did I love the way he conversed, but so much of what he was saying was easy going and real. It's easy to see that he never really wanted the attention he got. He just wanted to do what he loved and stay where he was (which is why he still lives in Ohio, even though he's rich bitch.). “Block Party” was simultaneously a comment on and precursor for the events that took place regarding the second season of his show.

I realize that the main point I'm supposed to be hitting in this review is the bigger picture of race. I understand how it's often revolting to see many of the viewers repeat Dave Chappelle's work back at him and miss the point of what he's trying to say (even though he's saying it in a funny way). I get that, because a little pit in my stomach forms like someone is being made fun of when I hear/see it. It's not cool to mock anyone and that's sort of how I look at it. I know right now you're thinking that this girl's just crazy. She's taken the whole point and widdled it down to Kindergarten principles. She doesn't get race. You know what? That's half of it. I don't believe in race. I think it's a completely fake construct created to further separate us and started as a means to differentiate class. A squirrel from Pennsylvania to a squirrel from Michigan to a squirrel from Illinois. As is a man. A squirrel is still a squirrel whether it's gray, brown, black, spotted. A human is a human, ain't no different. To differentiate us by “white man” or “black man” is just adding unnecessary qualifiers. NO QUALIFIERS!!! Even when it came to listening/reading Michael Eric Dyson talk about hip hop was difficult for me because I can't focus about difference when I feel like it's all just the same. Even “white people's” music and pop culture has always been dirty, we just hid it in lengthy wordiness and metaphors. Most of our songs are about pussy and drugs too, people just don't see it that way 'cause it's said different. Just as both genres/cultures have music that is touching and real. I'm really just sayin' that practically everything is the same thing just said/done a little different. People think it means wholey different—it doesn't.

Even though I don't believe race exists, I still can obviously see where the problems lie in Chappelle's everyday work and mission. It's been so long that people have been fed this bullshit and looking at the world wrong. Though I'm sure Dave knows that—it's obvious that he's smart, and how could you not be with both parents being professors? It's asking questions that help us grow and further as individuals.

Michel Gondry directed “Block Party”, which is one of the most confusing things about the doc. I associate him with movies like “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” and “The Science of Sleep”. I wonder if Chappelle's ever seen them? It's an interesting thing to ponder on about. Gondry also directed the White Stripes' (otherwise known as my favorite band of all time) music videos. The musical tie to his work was probably what led to his being the director. He's got movie and music video experience, which is exactly what the film was (but live). The man is as white as white gets though. The couple Chappelle also interacts with and throws his block party in front of their home are also very white. That is, if we're taking as “white” as meaning anything at all—stupid qualifiers. Chappelle also comments on the crowd while on stage (eg. Moslty black, 19 white, no Mexicans) but why? Is it because it's the elephant in the room? It makes me also wonder if showing all (and the only?) white people he invited and then also worked with to put it on were somehow trying to level the playing field when it came to the crowd. Was the projected viewer audience a “black audience” or did he try to put it exactly in the middle to actually (though artistically/metaphorically) make a comment on the whole thing. Perhaps that should be left up to you—to me it really doesn't matter much. I only look forward to see what Dave Chappelle will do next.

9 comments:

  1. very passionate review. I can clearly see that you care about the issue. And while I agree with and enjoyed reading your review I would have wanted more about the movie. Now this probably would have made your review long and I thought that the angle you were going at was great but not much about the movie was in here. And by that I don't mean who the director was and information about Chappelle. What I would have really liked to see was your take on this movie (the subject of race) and incorporated some of the performances. Or more of the people that Chappelle met. How would they fit into this review? I think that would be a great area to explore.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I can see you were very into writing this, but Jaclyn makes a point about keeping it in regards to the film. Yes, you can go on a tangent about race, but be sure to bring it all back to the film and how the film is juggling the issue you raise. You abruptly end your tangent and then go back to the film, which makes me think your tangent wasn't really necessary in terms of it's length. I'd suggest shortening it to a few sentences, because within your tangent you make a very valid point. And I don't think you're crazy!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for the feedback guys! Yeah I realized the piece ended up leaving the film. I often take directions too far in one direction, focusing on the prompt's mention to consider statement and how it was responding to critics/issue of race and if it was effective. It was actually more difficult for me to write this part, as I don't like discussing the subject of race (even though I guess I am passionate) because I just get too pissed off that all these people believing this shit are so stupid and my frustration ends up snuffing out any sort of words--so finding these words, kinda hard.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Although you do definitely stray away from the subject at hand I don't feel as if it's not useful to the review. I think if you just use some parts of the film which exemplify your opinions on race or imaginary construct of race it would strengthen the piece. Maybe you could mention how the broken angel duo had a preconceived notion of what hip-hop was based on a similar manifestations of schemas that people have towards race. Some reference points to the film in that section it would smooth it out nicely. Other than that you're a very entertaining writer and I enjoyed reading this.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I really enjoyed the amount of personality and opinion that you put in this review. Instead of going in to just the movie and the music, you really delved into the race issue. It's a nice change of pace as opposed to most people, who like to step kindly around the topic. I would have rather seen it turn back into a review of the movie, like Alfredo and Jaclyn have said. It feels like you get a bit off track with your opinion, and if it would have been brought back to a specific scene from the movie, this review would have really blossomed.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I really liked the content that filled your review. You write from both your head and your heart and it is really cool to see where your feelings and thoughts lie in the formation of your opinions on the screen. Your take on race, however relevant to the film, is also cool to read about. It's very valid. If you broke up your paragraphs so there was less bulk text, they would be easier to read. Also, be wary of explaining the assignment in your review. Perhaps the review can be a standalone review regardless of whether or not it was an assignment. You know? I really relate to your thoughts, though. You support them well. Well done.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have to agree with everyone. A lot of critical thought in this review. After reading the first few paragraphs, it seems like you are setting up for a lengthy essay, but eventually you picked up on the movie again. I hate to suggest cutting the non-movie stuff, because it seems so fitting.. maybe if you could find a way to relate it to the movie more it'll feel more like a movie review than a biography.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I very much like your review. It is insightful and though provoking. I can see that you really put some time into writing it. I somewhat agree with the comment stated that you went off to much on a tangent with your race argument. If you could find a way to tie in the movie just a little bit more into that argument it would not have been such a tangent and fit well in your review. I did like that part though and though it was one of your stronger parts in your review. I also really liked your closing paragraph as well, leaves us with a question to think about.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Great review. I can agree with the comments on saying we could have used a little bit information on the movie, since this is a movie review, but the background information on Dave and your personal opinion definitely strengthen this piece. I also didn't this movie much about race personally, aside from the few joke, but overall I thought this was a great feel-good type of documentary.

    ReplyDelete