March 19, 2016

No Image

Ta-Nehisi Coates On The Fight Over 'Nina Simone's Face'

This still is from the first trailer for Nina, starring Zoe Saldana as singer Nina Simone. This image of Saldana in dark makeup and with a prosthetic nose helped reignite a controversy over skin color and casting.

This still is from the first trailer for Nina, starring Zoe Saldana as singer Nina Simone. This image of Saldana in dark makeup and with a prosthetic nose helped reignite a controversy over skin color and casting. Nina (2016) Trailer, IMDb hide caption

toggle caption Nina (2016) Trailer, IMDb

Lots of people are fuming about Nina, an upcoming biopic about legendary singer Nina Simone. According to its critics, the filmmakers butcher important parts of Simone’s biography (in part, by attributing much of her success to the men in her life), but that their larger sin was casting actress Zoe Saldana, who plays the lead role with the help of skin-darkening makeup and a prosthetic nose.

Many argue that casting the lighter skinned Afro-Latina actress, rather than someone who better resembled Simone, was an attempt to make the film more marketable instead of staying true to the singer and the life that inspired her art. The makeup and prosthetic nose, they also charge, were sloppy and poorly executed. In one of the more gentle critiques, singer India.Arie called the casting move “tone deaf.” Others went with “disrespectful,” “deplorable,” and “embarrassing.”

In this composite image, a comparison has been made between Nina Simone and actress Zoe Saldana.

In this composite image, a comparison has been made between Nina Simone and actress Zoe Saldana. David Redfern/Frazer Harrison/Redferns/Getty Images for Relativity Media hide caption

toggle caption David Redfern/Frazer Harrison/Redferns/Getty Images for Relativity Media

Buzzfeed rounded up some of the Twitter reactions to the film’s trailer. Jezebel highlighted the overwhelmingly white team behind the production. Time magazine talked to Simone’s daughter, Lisa Simone Kelly, about the movie’s narrative flaws, and the Guardian chronicled some of the offensive backlash to people’s complaints about the film. Vox also voxsplained the whole controversy, from pre-production to the release of the first trailer.

But more than any other, Ta-Nehisi Coates’ recently published essay seems to capture the full emotional depth of all this frustration. He suggests this wasn’t just another questionable casting choice involving a person of color in a long line of such casting choices. To explain, Coates gets personal:

“When I was kid, I knew what the worst parts of me were—my hair and my mouth. My hair was nappy. My lips were big. Nearly every kid around me knew something similar of themselves because nearly every one of us had some sort of physical defect—dark skin, nappy hair, broad nose, full lips—that opened us up to ridicule from one another. That each of these “defects” were representative of all the Africa that ran through us was never lost on anyone. “Africa” was an insult—African bush-boogie, African bootie-scratcher etc. Ethiopian famine jokes were all the rage back then…

…[Nina] Simone was in possession of nearly every feature that we denigrated as children. And yet somehow she willed herself into a goddess.”

Coates goes on to explain how Simone’s appearance, as well as her music, helped him view his childhood musings on race in a larger context:

“Simone is something more than a female Bob Marley. It is not simply the voice: It is the world that made that voice, all the hurt and pain of denigration, forged into something otherworldly. That voice, inevitably, calls us to look at Nina Simone’s face, and for a brief moment, understand that the hate we felt, that the mockery we dispensed, was unnatural, was the fruit of conjurations and the shadow of plunder. We look at Nina Simone’s face and the lie is exposed and we are shamed. We look at Nina Simone’s face and a terrible truth comes into view—there was nothing wrong with her. But there is something deeply wrong with us.”

Finally, Coates takes us through what all of this means, both for the potential audience and Nina‘s creators:

“It’s here that the term ‘appropriation’ bears some usage. We’re not talking about someone inspired by the deeper lessons of Simone’s life and her music. We are talking about people who think it’s fine to profit off her music while heedlessly contributing to the kind of pain that brought that music into being. To acknowledge that pain, to consider it in casting, would be inconvenient—as anti-racist action always is. It would mean giving an opportunity to someone who’s actively experienced the kind of pain that plagued Simone. That would doubtlessly mean a diminished chance at garnering funds for such a film. And that, in turn, would court years of delays and the possibility of the film never coming into being. That would be unfortunate—but less so for Nina Simone than for the agents who feel themselves entitled to profit her story.”

The whole piece is worth reading and thinking about. You can check it out over at The Atlantic.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Sports Chatter: Let The 'Madness' Begin

3:56

Download

It’s time for the NCAA basketball playoffs, and they’ve earned their name, providing some genuine surprises. NPR sports correspondent Tom Goldman stops by to tell us what’s worth our watch.

Transcript

MELISSA BLOCK, HOST:

Let’s go to sports.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

BLOCK: Get your brackets out, for all will be revealed over the next few minutes. That’s right. It’s March Madness. Among today’s games, Yale plays last year’s champion Duke this afternoon. Connecticut takes on Kansas this evening. And here this morning is NPR sports correspondent Tom Goldman to tell us all about it.

Tom, good morning.

TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Hi.

BLOCK: And a great first round for bracket busters.

GOLDMAN: (Laughter) I don’t think all the poor souls who had their office pool brackets obliterated by the craziness would use the word great, Melissa.

BLOCK: Yeah, I know. Well, it’s a figure of speech.

GOLDMAN: But – you know – yeah, glad I don’t know any of those souls personally.

BLOCK: Uh-uh, not at all.

GOLDMAN: OK. So how crazy was it? You had teams seeded 13th, 14th and 15th – three of the lowest seeds in the field – all winning on the same day, never happened before. You had two buzzer-beating shots courtesy of the state of Iowa. A game-winner by the University of Iowa in overtime beat Temple. An amazing half-court heave by Northern Iowa’s Paul Jesperson beat Texas at the buzzer. Of course, the biggest stunner – Middle Tennessee’s 90-81 win over Michigan State, only the eighth time a 15th seed beat a two seed in the first round. The result was shocking, but so was Middle Tennessee’s dominance. I mean, the Blue Raiders jumped out to a 15-2 lead, never trailed in the game – made big play after big play at the end to foil one Michigan State come back after the next.

BLOCK: And explain how that happens. How can so many people be wrong, maybe even you Tom – the selection committee all down to everybody else who bet on Michigan State.

GOLDMAN: This is, of course, the beauty of the tournament on any given day. Certainly, Michigan State earned its No. 2 seed. Many said the Spartans actually deserved a one seed going into the tournament. But they picked a horrible time to play a bad game. And never underestimate the potential of a lower-seeded mid-major school with so much to prove. Michigan State head coach Tom Izzo said afterwards, Middle Tennessee made shots he’d never seen on film. And he acknowledged scouting film doesn’t always capture how these so-called lesser teams crank it up three notches in the tournament.

BLOCK: Well, I love me an underdog, so I have nothing bad to say about that. Are you seeing any trends overall, Tom, in the playoffs this year?

GOLDMAN: We were told going into the tournament that it’s wide open. With all the upsets of the first two days – 13 lower-seeded teams won – that seems to be playing out. We were told the tournament would celebrate upperclassmen who were supposed to play a more mature brand of basketball and not the so-called one-and-done players, guys who make a one-year pit stop in college before going off to the NBA. You look at some of the heroes of the first two days. The Iowa buzzer-beaters, both players who scored those baskets, are seniors. The high-point man for Middle Tennessee, in that school’s monster upset, is a junior Reggie Upshaw. And then senior Thomas Walkup scored a game-high 33 points in Stephen F. Austin’s upset of No. 3 seed West Virginia. So the old guys are doing pretty well.

BLOCK: And you figure the madness will continue – more surprises to come?

GOLDMAN: Predictions are very risky at this point. You could see the madness continuing with lower seeds having success. After all, there’s no one dominant favorite in the field. But important to note – the four No. 1 seeds won their first-round games by an average of 29 points. Seven of the past nine champions have been No. 1-seeded teams.

BLOCK: And very briefly, Tom, want to ask you about the women’s game.

GOLDMAN: You know, this talent pool’s still not deep enough to have a truly mad March Madness. I mean, really, there are good teams like South Carolina and Baylor who both won yesterday. And then there’s the top, top, top, top, top seed UConn. Really, it’s the Huskies versus the world. They came into the tournament 32-0 with an average margin of victory, during the regular season, 39.7 points – hard to beat that.

BLOCK: NPR sports correspondent Tom Goldman. Tom, thanks so much.

GOLDMAN: You’re welcome.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)