3 ms·

Most if not all of the discriminatory events in the film happened, just not in the same order or to exactly the same people. The major scenes that were made up

Most if not all of the discriminatory events in the film happened, just not in the same order or to exactly the same people. The major scenes that were made up whole-cloth were the ones with white people being anti-racist. You're twisting Johnson's words to say she didn't feel it; she was able to use a "whites-only" bathroom and didn't experience as much direct personal animus from her co-workers. That doesn't mean she didn't feel it, only that it didn't take certain forms. But twisting that is also to miss the entire point of highlighting this moment in history: She was great, but not singular - she succeeded in large part because she had a tremendously lucky break others were denied. Much like a poor person winning the lottery doesn't create upward economic mobility, a black women getting a good job doesn't end racism. (I already wrote about this at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14482955 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14482955 and I suspect there is some concerted effort to parrot talking points against the film as I've seen similar bizarre comments on many sites.)

skybrian 9y ago
I don't think calling these talking points is all that helpful. To put this in a larger context: most historical films are not very accurate and will irritate people who care (for whatever reason) about historical accuracy. Any movie that reaches people will generate a similar discussion about what really happened. But that's how movies work. You just have to let it go. If the movie makes you curious about what really happened, read the book.
- throwawayknecht 9y ago
  The concrete claim by the parent is "nearly all of the racist scenarios were fabricated out of whole cloth." It's not a "discussion of what really happened," it's a flat-out attempt to minimize well-documented racist behavior and systems. This is as if someone watching a Ken Burns documentary complained the narrators were not the true primary source authors.
  - skybrian 9y ago
    Agreed that "fabricated out of the whole cloth" is an exaggeration. Rather than go into it further, I think it's better to encourage people to read history and learn stuff than it is to get into the usual culture war about this.

skybrian 9y ago

I don't think calling these talking points is all that helpful. To put this in a larger context: most historical films are not very accurate and will irritate people who care (for whatever reason) about historical accuracy. Any movie that reaches people will generate a similar discussion about what really happened. But that's how movies work. You just have to let it go. If the movie makes you curious about what really happened, read the book.

throwawayknecht 9y ago
The concrete claim by the parent is "nearly all of the racist scenarios were fabricated out of whole cloth." It's not a "discussion of what really happened," it's a flat-out attempt to minimize well-documented racist behavior and systems. This is as if someone watching a Ken Burns documentary complained the narrators were not the true primary source authors.
- skybrian 9y ago
  Agreed that "fabricated out of the whole cloth" is an exaggeration. Rather than go into it further, I think it's better to encourage people to read history and learn stuff than it is to get into the usual culture war about this.