VivLeighFan

People have voted to remove Lillian and Dorothy Gish's name from a college theater

127 posts in this topic

https://mb.ntd.com/trustees-vote-to-remove-actress-name-from-school-theater_325897.html

The reason is because Lillian starred in The Birth of a Nation, the most racist film ever made and I don't blame them. I'm a black person myself and I personally like Lillian Gish especially for her performances in Broken Blossoms and Orphans of the Storm but I am aware and disappointed that she starred in that film. It's extremely sad that one of the most influential films is also the most racist.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of control, unrelenting, over the top BS political correctness.  Welcome to planet Pop Tart! :wacko::angry:

political-correctness-has-gotten-so-out-

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what about john huston's unforgiven?....it is supremely stupid for liberals to attack the past for it cannot be changed. this is an unfortunate petty judgmentalism of the left and they deserve the multitudes that they will lose as a result of such hateful idiocy.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is going to be a complete ****show.

Wait, did I just say that out loud? :unsure:

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you cannot ask for respect while giving none. Lillian Gish disrespected for starring in one film is not just.

it is unfair and petty and yes even hateful.

I accept that Birth of a Nation is racist having never seen it.

the hateful pettiness of the left moves me to question the genuineness of their professed motives which for decades they have been claiming is tolerance and civil justice.

can Lillian Gish apologize for appearing in the film?

no, she is dead.

can Hattie McDaniel apologize to the naacp for appearing in GWTW or song of the south?

no, she is dead.
 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Priggishness is a failing not limited to any political philosophy.  And did not originate with the Civil Rights Movement.  Hateful pettiness can be found everywhere.  I notice it a lot here.  One thing lefters have, I notice, is enough patience not to get exasperated with it in others.  The logical fallacy, is to take extreme examples of priggishness and use it (as is often done by conservatives) to delegitimize honest objections to intolerance, bigotry, and racism.  I have long held that the concept of political correctness was developed by racists and bigots to allow them to parade their prejudices as legitimate.

  • Thanks 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, slaytonf said:

Priggishness is a failing not limited to any political philosophy.  And did not originate with the Civil Rights Movement.  Hateful pettiness can be found everywhere.  I notice it a lot here.  One thing lefters have, I notice, is enough patience not to get exasperated with it in others.  The logical fallacy, is to take extreme examples of priggishness and use it (as is often done by conservatives) to delegitimize honest objections to intolerance, bigotry, and racism.  I have long held that the concept of political correctness was developed by racists and bigots to allow them to parade their prejudices as legitimate.

certainly they do under the first amendment.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, slaytonf said:

Priggishness is a failing not limited to any political philosophy.  And did not originate with the Civil Rights Movement.  Hateful pettiness can be found everywhere.  I notice it a lot here.  One thing lefters have, I notice, is enough patience not to get exasperated with it in others.  The logical fallacy, is to take extreme examples of priggishness and use it (as is often done by conservatives) to delegitimize honest objections to intolerance, bigotry, and racism.  I have long held that the concept of political correctness was developed by racists and bigots to allow them to parade their prejudices as legitimate.

Was Liilian Gish herself a racist?

Well say goodbye to the Lillian Gish Sandwich, it used white bread. 

sandwich_recipe.jpeg?w=600

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm also a black person. And if we remove all the names of people who appeared in racist films or sang racist songs, we may as well just take all names off of all buildings. Because no one is perfect.

You could make the argument that the majority of films made, now or them, are racist, sexist, or some other -ist. I think its very simplistic to consider Birth of a Nation (1915) "just a racist film". This film was revolutionary in the technical aspect of filmmaking, of box office, and of turning the film industry into a major business. And I say now because just a few years ago a newer film called "Birth of a Nation (2016)" and it was also quite racist.

People can name buildings after anyone they wish. And remove them if they wish. But, all you're going to end up with is a very bland, boring culture.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, VivLeighFan said:

https://mb.ntd.com/trustees-vote-to-remove-actress-name-from-school-theater_325897.html

The reason is because Lillian starred in The Birth of a Nation, the most racist film ever made and I don't blame them. I'm a black person myself and I personally like Lillian Gish especially for her performances in Broken Blossoms and Orphans of the Storm but I am aware and disappointed that she starred in that film. It's extremely sad that one of the most influential films is also the most racist.

Wouldn't they rather put blame on someone who, you know, wrote and directed it??

That's like blaming Billy Idol for showing up in Adam Sandler movies.

1 hour ago, NipkowDisc said:

I accept that Birth of a Nation is racist having never seen it.

I've never seen the whole thing, but I've seen the early-talkie DW Griffith short made to promote "Abraham Lincoln" (1930), where Griffith did everything but apologize for the pro-Klang plot.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said:

certainly they do under the first amendment.

 

Just as others have to condemn them for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gish won me over with her performance in "The Comedians," a 1967 drama set in Haiti and based on the 1966 novel by Graham Greene (it also starred Richard Burton, Elizabeth Taylor and Peter Ustinov).

Gish's character (pictured below with a Haitian authority figure played by Raymond St. Jacques) got roughed up during her visit to the Caribbean nation. The acting great was in her early 70s at the time, too.

Image result for lillian gish the comedians

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GGGGerald said:

People can name buildings after anyone they wish. And remove them if they wish. But, all you're going to end up with is a very bland, boring culture.

A novel position.  Permit me to think it a sick view of human society that its value or interest must be based on hatred and persecution.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always preferred Broken Blossoms. Despite the crude yellowface, it's a really good anti-racism movie.

broken-blossoms-hi-res.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not too many "lead" roles for Lillian up to that point, so she probably looked at the role( and movie) as more "career move" than a personal social commentary.  As then(and more so) acting, and the still fledgling movie industry and film acting had one of the largest unemployment numbers of all professions, that ANY role in ANY movie was work,  and with bills to pay and eating to survive was certainly MORE important than how society MIGHT react to a movie and it's subject matter some 60+ years later. 

To condemn the Gishes for their incidental connection to something that at the time wasn't considered controversial is like also condemning the CAMERA MAN who shot the movie for earning a living.  Or like me condemning my good friend JOE, who's of German ancestry, because of what the Nazis did to the Poles in WWII. 

Sepiatone

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know which is worse, political correctness gone wrong, as happens, such as in this case, or the right wing bigots leaping with indignant glee upon the "political correctness gone wrong" bandwagon to justify their own viewpoints.

And why vote to remove Dorothy Gish's name? She didn't appear in The Birth of a Nation.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, VivLeighFan said:

The reason is because Lillian starred in The Birth of a Nation, the most racist film ever made 

Oh, come on, MORE racist than Not Without My Daughter (1991)??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TomJH said:

I don't know which is worse, political correctness gone wrong, as happens, such as in this case, or the right wing bigots leaping with indignant glee upon the "political correctness gone wrong" bandwagon to justify their own viewpoints.

I'd say the second ones you mentioned here are worse, Tom.

(...but ONLY by a hair)

;)

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the most racist film ever made was "The Good the Bad and the Ugly".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

Not too many "lead" roles for Lillian up to that point, so she probably looked at the role( and movie) as more "career move" than a personal social commentary.  As then(and more so) acting, and the still fledgling movie industry and film acting had one of the largest unemployment numbers of all professions, that ANY role in ANY movie was work,  and with bills to pay and eating to survive was certainly MORE important than how society MIGHT react to a movie and it's subject matter some 60+ years later. 

To condemn the Gishes for their incidental connection to something that at the time wasn't considered controversial is like also condemning the CAMERA MAN who shot the movie for earning a living.  Or like me condemning my good friend JOE, who's of German ancestry, because of what the Nazis did to the Poles in WWII. 

Sepiatone

While I share your general sentiments here Sepia, your thought that when this film premiered "it wasn't considered controversial" is a little off-the-mark.

In some quarters during that time this film was considered very controversial, especially by the NAACP, which had been established in 1909 and six years prior to this film's first public screenings in 1915.

(...it's just that the NAACP had little to none public influence upon the American general public at the time) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TomJH said:

I don't know which is worse, political correctness gone wrong, as happens, such as in this case, or the right wing bigots leaping with indignant glee upon the "political correctness gone wrong" bandwagon to justify their own viewpoints.

And why vote to remove Dorothy Gish's name? She didn't appear in The Birth of a Nation.

LOL. She's related to her. This is ridiculous. There seems to be more going on here than removing the name. Displays? And how do you move a theater into a Union bldg.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dargo said:

While I share your general sentiments here Sepia, your thought that when this film premiered "it wasn't considered controversial" is a little off-the-mark.

In some quarters during that time this film was considered very controversial, especially by the NAACP, which had been established in 1909 and six years prior to this film's first public screenings in 1915.

(...it's just that the NAACP had little to none public influence upon the American general public at the time) 

And it's your parenthetical statement that enforces my "...wasn't considered controversial." comment.  It's true that at the time, general American sentiment was that the NAACP wasn't being taken seriously.  "Controversy" when limited to only one segment of the overall population doesn't(to me at least) make anything all that "controversial".  For example.....  

THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST was considered controversial among those of the Christian faith that took the movie as too serious a representation of The Gospel, while many others, realizing it was a farcical and fictional supposition didn't make too big a stink about it.  One local clergy, in commenting about it correctly surmised, "The more we of the clergy condemn it,  the more attractive it will become to those of weaker or absent faith."  He seemed to recall that back in the earlier '70's, the novice Oakland county, MI commissioner L. BROOKS PATTERSON's attempt to ban a nudity rife "soft porn" flick called NAKED CAME THE STRANGER, which, until HE made a big stink about it, wasn't generating much revenue for the theater that was showing it.  But,  AFTER he went on TV to raise his complaint, people started lining up around the block to see it!  AND mostly to see what all the fuss was about.  ;)

Sepiatone

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw...

Does anyone know if these reports I've heard about Griffith's film being recently screened for our current POTUS at the White House are true or not?

AND, that afterward in his usual extremely articulate manner he supposedly posted on Twitter: "It's like history written with lightining [sic] but without sound and in Black & White."?

(...just wonderin') ;)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Btw...

Does anyone know if these reports I've heard about Griffith's film being recently screened for our current POTUS at the White House are true or not?

AND, that afterward in his usual extremely articulate manner he supposedly posted on Twitter: "It's like history written with lightining [sic] but without sound and in Black & White."?

(...just wonderin') ;)

My understanding is that the film is a favorite of Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders.    We all know all old-white-men love that film!!!

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jamesjazzguitar said:

My understanding is that the film is a favorite of Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders.    We all know all old-white-men love that film!!!

Hmmm...now why on earth am I now reminded of what Bing says to Frank during their duet in High Society here, James?

(...YOU know..."You must be one of the newer fellas!")

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us