Fecund Horror Is Coming to Get You

FecundHorror2

 
I’m putting together a collection of my writing on exploitation film and publishing it as an ebook. Vom Marlowe (who used to write here way back when) designed the really pretty darn awesome cover above. The still is from Night of the Living Dead, which is out of copyright because the filmmakers forgot to put the copyright notice on the print, and it mattered back then.

The book will be out July 11, at least if all goes well and I am not devoured by an evil ichor from outer space.

I thought I’d post the table of contents too. Most of the pieces here have appeared on the web already in one form or another—but not all of them.

Introduction:
Looking Wrong at Halloween

Fecund Horror

The Child Is Father of the Child:
On the Friday the 13th Series

American Torture:
On Hostel and Hostel 2

The Top Ten Rape/Revenge Films

I Spit On Your Quietism

Rape the Children Well:
On The Last House on the Left

Suffering With a Purpose:
On The Virgin Spring

Every Thing In Its Place:
On Irreversible

Patriarchy in You:
On The Stendahl Syndrome

Disgusting Women:
On Under the Skin

Bloody Conventions:
On Martyrs

Men in Women-in-Prison:
Masochism, Feminism, Fetish

Waiting for the Revolution:
On Switchblade Sisters

Embrace the Exploitation:
On Calum Waddell’s Jack Hill

And hey, we can do a promotional contest thingee. First person who can correctly identify the new essays (in comments or on social media) will get a free copy of the ebook! Note some titles have been changed, so googling isn’t going to help you necessarily.

Who is the truest Berlatsky superfan? Do Berlatsky superfans in fact exist? This is our chance to find out.

If contests and/or Berlatsky superfandom makes you spew vile ichor in a flylike manor, you can also get an exciting preview copy if you are a blogging/writing type person and swear on the fishy tentacles of Cthulhu to write a review praising my dextrous prose and awesome insights, and/or taking me to task for lack of same.

The Berlatsky superfandom Thunderdome death duel begins..now!

Utilitarian Review 6/18/16

Screen Shot 2016-06-18 at 9.10.50 AM

 
On HU

Philip Smith on Jeeves and social change.

Chris Gavaler on the sci-fi power and sexism of giant women.

on Serpieri’s Druuna and rape in Heavy Metal.
 
Utilitarians Everywhere

At the Establishment I interviewed Jillian Keenan about her book Sex and With Shakespeare, and why spanking can be child sexual abuse.

At Playboy I wrote about

—why the NRA is influential (it’s not the money.

—why there’s nothing wrong with fan entitlement.

At Quartz I wrote about Brock Turner and why we should get rid of sex offender registries.

At Random Nerds I interviewed sci fi author Kameron Hurley about criticism and geek feminist revolution.

At Splice Today I wrote about

Sense and Sensibility and the relief of finding a boring male romantic lead.

Hammer’s The Satanic Rituals of Dracula and how James Bond unfortunately beats the vampires.
 
Other Links

Tonia Thompson on racist double standards in attitudes towards parenting and tragedy.

Robert Greene II argues that the Civil Rights movement started with the New Deal.

Ken White on why celebrating the woes of Gawker isn’t a good idea.

Utilitarian Review 6/11/16

Screen Shot 2016-06-10 at 9.34.18 PM

 
On HU

Featured Archive Post: Consuela Francis and Qiana Whitted on Captain America: Truth.

bit of a short week…though we do have more for next week, I promise.

Chris Gavaler explores the line between abstraction and narrative in comics.

On the tragedy of being named Noah.
 
Utilitarians Everywhere

At the Establishment I wrote about indigent defense, and how it can reduce mass incarceration.

At Quartz I wrote about how even if Mexico is not a race, Trump’s comments about Mexicans are still racist.

At The Week I wrote about Al Giordano, an activist and organizer threatening to run against Sanders for the VT Senate seat in 2018.

At Splice Today I wrote about:

Dracula A.D. 1972 and old vampires same as new vampires.

third parties, which don’t work in the United States.
 
Other Links

Daniel Harper on Death Proof.

Cripin Sartwellon why Stephen Hawking doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

John M. Harris praises the Confederacy.

The Tragedy of Noah

Screen Shot 2016-06-07 at 7.42.11 AM

 
This first ran on Splice Today.
__________

When I was about ten or so at summer camp, I was woken up by a counselor looming over me in the dark. He was on some errand — I don’t remember what. But I do remember clearly him saying, as I came out of sleep. “Hey are you Noah?”

I groggily assured him that I was.

“Cool!” he said. “I’m Noah too!”

That probably doesn’t sound like much of a punch-line. But it was impressive enough to stay with me. In my whole life up to that point, I’d never met anyone named Noah. As far as I was concerned, I could have been the only Noah in the world, except for the original guy with the animals marching two by two. And now, here was another, grown-up Noah — a big dream Noah, foreshadowing the Noah I was to become.

It was a pleasant novelty to find another Noah —an entertaining aberration. For the most part, though, I liked being unique. My brother, Eric, often met other Erics, and of course I knew a slew of Michaels and Davids and Johns, to say nothing of Marys and Sues. It always seemed like it would be oppressive to be so common, and have your name on everyone’s lips. When someone said, “Mike,” how could you ever be sure they were talking to you? Better to be the one and only — or, short of that, to be rare enough that meeting your name out there in the world was a notable surprise.

Once I left northeastern Pennsylvania, though, my uniqueness began to fray around the special-snowflake-style edges. Oberlin has a lot of Jewish students, and while I don’t remember any other Noah’s, there was a Noam Birnbaum, whom I never met, but whose name would occasionally pop up uneasily, a not-quite-shadow off to the side of my social circle. I was still me, obviously, but somebody else out there, with my initials, was sort of me as well. Who did he think he was? He had a lot of nerve. Given his presumption, I was glad our paths never crossed.

But while that particular nefarious doppelganger never hunted me down, a slew of others did. The Noahs began to proliferate — especially after my son was born and I started interacting regularly with newly-minted individuals. Children, I discovered, were often named Noah. My son had a number of friends with the name. At school events I’d hear people yell for me, only to discover they were shouting to that friend to pass them the ball, or telling that child not to eat the dog poop. I had imagined that a generic name like “Michael” or “Tom” would be annoying — and so it was. Everyone was talking to me, even the people who weren’t talking to me. I thanked the stars and my Russian ancestors for my last name with its slew of Slavic syllables. Without that, I’d be anybody. I might even have to start using my middle initial or risk vanishing into google.

Things have only gotten worse. It’s now clear that the onslaught of Noahs began earlier than I thought; perhaps thirty years ago, they started to rise up, and now they are legion. This past year, I’ve heard, “Noah” was the single most common baby name in Illinois. I actually have to envy the Davids and Joes, now; they’re more idiosyncratic than I am. It’s true that the ubiquity means that I no longer have to suffer through stupid ark jokes, but it’s a poor trade off. Instead of finding myself as I age, I’m just finding that myself is all these other folks. Who knew that getting older would mean getting more and more bland? Once I was a child among millions, but now somehow, while I wasn’t looking, I’ve grown into everybody else.

Utilitarian Review 6/4/16

Screen Shot 2016-06-03 at 9.21.32 PM

On HU

Featured Archive Post: Erica Friedman on Maurice Sendak.

Chris Gavaler on whether a flag can be a comic.

Ng Suat Tong reviews Blutch’s Peplum.

Me on the Whiteness Project, and the virtues and limits of listening to white people talk about race.

Me on Captain America: Truth and racism in the gas chamber.
 
Utilitarians Everywhere

At Quartz I wrote about

how chronic pain patients are being sacrificed to the drug war.

—the case for a female James Bond.

At Playboy I wrote about how Captain America has always been Hydra.

At the Daily Dot I wrote about how my son is super smart because he watches Crash Course.

At Splice Today I wrote about

identity politics: not a slippery slope to neoliberalism.

Scars of Dracula and defiling the virgin cross.

At Public Books, a little review of Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Justice.
 
Other Links

Waitinggirl13 on the difference between legalization and criminalization of sex work.

Vann R. Newkirk II on Trump and political violence.

Alliterator on the history of dark Captain America.

Racism in the Gas Chamber

I published a piece at Playboy yesterday about the new revelation that Captain America is part of Hydra. I mostly talked about Truth: Red, White, and Black, the miniseries by Robert Morales and Kyle Baker, which imagines the supersoldier serum tested on a group of black soldiers in a Tuskegee-like experiment.

Anyway; one thing I wanted to get into the piece but couldn’t quite fit was a discussion of this sequence.
 

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 4.27.18 PM
 

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 4.27.32 PM

 
Isaiah Bradley, the one survivor of the supersoldier experiment, has been sent on a suicide mission in Germany. In the course of his effort to destroy the Nazi supersoldier project, he attempts to rescue Jews from a gas chamber. They don’t realize he’s trying to rescue them, though. In fact, they think the Nazis have sent him to rape them. Their confusion, it is implied, is caused by the fact that he is black. In short, the comic presents Holocaust victims, at the moment of their death, as racists.

This is probably the single most shocking moment in a comic that is full, front to back, with shocking moments. The scene is obviously played for gothic horror; the naked, emaciated women swarming over Bradley, a zombie tide of death. But the gothic is here, specifically, a white gothic. The Jewish women, moments away from becoming victims of racist murder, find a final, horrible solidarity in anti-black racism. They can’t see Bradley as a savior because of their racial preconceptions, and so he can’t save them from their racist murderers.

This scene obviously isn’t true; nothing even remotely like this ever happened. Black people were depicted as rapists by German propaganda though—and in Maus, Art Spiegleman shows his father, a concentration camp survivor, as harboring racist animosity towards black people. It certainly seems possible, and in fact likely, that some of those who died in the concentration camps believed that black people were inferior and subhuman—just as the Germans believed Jews were inferior and subhuman.

You could see Truth as a vision of reconciliation, or solidarity, between black people and white Jewish people. Captain America was created by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby, both Jews, and he here becomes a symbol of black pride, and of American blackness. “Isaiah” could for that matter be a Jewish name; Bradley is, in effect, both Jewish and black, deliberately connecting the persecution, and the heroism, of both identities.

The scene in the gas chamber points to a less cheerful reading, though. The experience of oppression doesn’t have to unite the oppressed. In some cases, instead, the fear of oppression, or the brutal, intimate, immediate, reality of oppression, can lead to more racism, more hatred, and more violence. Morales and Baker depict Jews, at the moment of their genocide, choosing, in fear and horror, to be white. That doesn’t have to be the Truth. But still, it’s a choice that is a bit too familiar for comfort.

What White People Say

Screen Shot 2016-06-01 at 11.10.09 PM

 
“I don’t think I’ve ever come across anything that’s made me aware of my race,” says Kathie, a middle-aged woman from Buffalo, NY. She was interviewed in 2014 as part of the Whiteness Project, an interactive investigation of what white or partially white people think about their own race, conducted by Whitney Dow.

Kathie’s insistence that she doesn’t, and shouldn’t think about her race neatly underlines why the Whiteness Project is necessary and useful. For the most part, white people don’t have to confront, or address race; whiteness is unmarked and unremarked. For most purposes in popular culture Spike Lee is a black director; James Cameron is just a director. Barack Obama is a black president; George Washington, Bill Clinton, and Ronald Reagan were just presidents. Part of the magic of being white is that you’re the default, rather than the exception.

In defining white people by their whiteness, the Whiteness Project insists that whiteness isn’t normal or natural. Instead, whiteness is a specific, constructed, created identity, which white people acquiesce to, or embrace, or fidget inside of, with varying degrees of grace and insight. “So does the Whiteness Project re-center white people?” Steven W. Thrasher asked at the Guardian when the first round of interviews came out in 2014. “Yes,” he concludes, “but that’s part of the point: Dow wants his subjects to be the center of attention, and the reason for their viewers’ discomfort about white people’s views on race.”

Often, the very thing that seems to define whiteness, in fact, is the resistance to defining or seeing whiteness. In a new series of discussions with millenials in Dallas, TX, released in April 2016, the Whiteness Project interviewees repeatedly think about whiteness in terms of refusing to think about whiteness. Ari, 17, talks about how he’s stigmatized for being Jewish, and points out, perceptively, that while he doesn’t consider Judaism to be a race, other people do, which affects him. But when he talks about whiteness he insists that “the color of my skin has nothing to do with my everyday experiences”—as if his experience and those of black Jewish people would be interchangeable, or, perhaps, as if he hasn’t considered that black Jewish people exist. Sarah, 18, similarly insists, “I never think about my race…my age and my gender has a bigger influence on what I think of as my identity.” More aggressively, Leilani, 17—who is part Asian— insists, “If we want to get rid of racism, stop talking about racism.” For her, talk about whiteness is no talk; when she thinks about her white identity, she thinks about not thinking.

Other interviewees are more willing to try to see past whiteness’ invisibility. Lena, 21, whose father is Arab-American, talks about how she didn’t want him to come to school events because she would be teased or insulted when people realized she wasn’t white (enough.) “Being realistic, I think it’s good that I don’t look too much of anything, because just getting jobs…it’s much better for you if you look white.” Carson, 18, says, “it’s hard to know that I’ll be given more. And it makes me call into question my merit.” Connor, 24, talks about dealing drugs and notes that “there’s been plenty of times where I’ve consciously taken advantage of the fact that I was white.” He adds, ” I would be in jail if I was not white.”

Lena, Carson, and Connor are all talking about privilege, and about the fact that whiteness is not just invisibility, but power. Invisibility and power, are in fact intertwined. You stay out of jail because you’re white, but then the whiteness becomes invisible, so suddenly you have no jail record because of personal merit, rather than because of the color of your skin. Or, as Lena says, you can get a job because your white, and then having the job on your resume is attributed to merit, rather than individual whiteness, when you go on your next job interview. In that sense, the Whiteness Project, by making whiteness more recognizable, undermines the notion that white people come by their success through personal awesomeness alone. As such, it works to confront, or destabilize, racism.

Or that would be the optimistic take. When the first batch of videos in the Whiteness Project was released, there was a certain amount of skepticism on social media from black viewers, many of whom wondered why white people needed to be given more space to talk. And some of those criticisms resonate with this second round of interviews as well. What good does it do, really, for Connor to explain that his whiteness is a get out of jail free card? To what degree is any particular anti-racist agenda advanced by listening to Chaney, 18, explain that she isn’t responsible for the history of racism and doesn’t want to pay reparations. “You can’t get things for people who are dead,” she says intensely. “It’s all in the past.” There is no more racism; there is only white people talking about their innocence, forever.

After each interview, there is a little statistic. In Chaney’s case, that statistic is that 51% of Americans think slavery is not responsible for black people having lower incomes today. The framing is particularly unhelpful; slavery happened a really long time ago, but as Ta-Nehisi Coates documents in “The Case for Reparations,” racism, and using racist laws to expropriate the wealth of black people, didn’t stop in 1865, or 1975, or with the racist subprime mortgage crisis of 2008. Reparations isn’t just about slavery; it’s about what happened in the 150 odd years since slavery, all the way up to yesterday.

“Whiteness Project aims to inspire reflection and foster discussions that ultimately lead to improved communication around issues of race and identity,” the statement of purpose on the website says. That’s a laudable goal. But framing reparations solely as an issue of slavery doesn’t improve communication around race. Instead, it makes communication around race worse. Asking white people to talk about race is useful in highlighting the importance of and power of whiteness—but it also spreads a lot of disinformation. White people, it turns out, are not all that great at talking about race, both because they lack practice, and because part of white identity is ignorance. As a result, the Whiteness Project includes a lot of white people spouting nonsense. Correcting that, or pushing the conversation to a productive place, requires more than a few statistics, especially when, on occasion, the statistics themselves are misleading.

It’s important to highlight whiteness, and to force white people to realize that white identity exists, even when (or especially when) they don’t want to think about it. As Lily Workneh says at Huffington Post, the insights here
included both unsettling and enlightening reflections” But white people becoming more self-conscious about whiteness isn’t, in itself, an assurance of progress: white supremacists and Neo-Nazis are very self-conscious about whiteness. If there’s not an explicit, and forceful, anti-racist agenda, a discussion about race can just end up rehashing prejudices. The Whiteness Project raises important issues. But ultimately, without greater critical context and engagement, racism is unlikely to be defeated, or even meaningfully addressed, by a bunch of white people talking,