Why as an Asian I have no problem with Rooney's character
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Breakfast at Tiffany's
laurence_dang — 16 years ago(February 19, 2010 06:40 PM)
First of all let me state right away that I am in fact Asian. Full-blodded Asian. I have lived in Europe for many years and then in the US. Yes I am completely familiar with stereotypes and distorted visions of Asians. Yes I have been victom of prejudices, mockery and other issues related with being the odd one out.
I have watched countless movies from the classical era of American cinema (of which I am a great fan) and yes I do bemoan the dirth of good complex Asian characters.
However I believe that most who feel offended at Rooney's characterization have little knowledge of the way Asians in general were portrayed in American movies up until the 1960s. Apart from the questionable Charlie Chan movies (which did portray one Asian positively), the field was largely empty.
Rooney's characterization while caricatural and slightly grotesque was not particularly unusual for its time. Perhaps one could argue that by the 1960s we should have "known better", but this was still the EARLY 1960s.
In fact if we compare Mr. Yunioshi to that of countless - no less caricatural - portrayals of Asians done today I would its only fault is to be a little bit exaggerated. Are there many Asian who are actually similar to Jackie Chan or as athletic as Lucy Liu? Have Asians have really gained much in depth of character in the past 45 years apart from a few notable exceptions?
The answer is sadly no. Most Asians in films are still seen as fodder for ridicule and seen as either hopelessly boring nerds, impish clowns or super human martial arts virtuosos.
Thus I believe the entire condemnation and targetting of Rooney's chaerstization as nothing less than hypocritical and holier than thou.
Rather than be shocked at this very minor bleep in an otherwise intersting movie one should instead ponder the many shocking and unusual ideas introduced by this movie. Among these:- The fact that Holly was married at 14 to a man at least 30 years older than she.
- The fact that Holly was ready to marry purely for money in order to support a brother old enough to be in the army (and falls in love with a man who looks like her brother)
- The fact that Paul is essentially a gigolo
- The fact that shoplifting is seen as a source of entertainment
and a few other quite unorthodox and questionable issue which even today challenge our puritanical sense of morality.
This movie is not meant to be easy to watch or to make the viewer feel smug or comfortable. It rips away most of our assumptions about what "good american boys and girls" are supposed to be like.
In this sense Mr. Yunioshi may turn out to be the more understandable traditional character
Food for thought.
-
edess — 16 years ago(February 20, 2010 08:58 AM)
I agree with this. It ruins the movie for me. It doesn't matter that this was the reality in Hollywood back then. It's not the reality now. It was over done to the point of distraction. The buck teeth were particlarly disturbing.
-
laurence_dang — 16 years ago(March 09, 2010 12:03 AM)
While I agree that it might be offensive to anyone today as you mentioned,it was thought of as simply funny (if a bit grotesque and of poor taste) in 1961.
I do not believe it detracts that much from the movie however. One is perfectly able to watch the entire movie and appreciate it while simply ignoring the sequences with Rooney. These sequences after all take no more than a minute or 2 in their totality out of movie which lasts 115 minutes.
Many more movies have been spoiled far more and mor extensively through needless stupidity. -
Big G-2 — 16 years ago(March 09, 2010 01:26 PM)
Well, whether one finds it offensive or not, it still doesn't make it correct, considering it
was
1961 (and not the WWII era) and you had a slew of Asian actors working in Hollywood even if they weren't of Japanese decent. Keye Luke and Philip Ahn come to mind and both had been working in the industry for over 20 years (and later, the two of them would star in KUNG FU). You also had James Hong and Sammee Tong. Of course, there was Sessue Hayakawa, who himself had been nominated for an Oscar in BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI. And of course, Hollywood and elsewhere was now even brining in actors from Japan to star in their pictures. Among them was Kurosawa regular Toshiro Mifune, who in 1961 starred in a Mexican film, (AMINAS TURJANO) which would be his first international movie, among many others. Though Mifune was probably not right for this part, it certainly would have been interesting casting. -
poetcomic1 — 14 years ago(November 21, 2011 05:55 PM)
What a bunch of PC rubbish! In that case Mischa Auer's hilarious 'Russian' caricatures (Destry Rides Again etc.) must offend you too. Then the great screen Irish, Italian and other broad caricatures. While you are at it, why not Marjorie Main's 'insulting' portrayal of poor whites and hillbillies. And these are just off the top of my head.
-
gribfritz2 — 9 years ago(April 15, 2016 07:42 PM)
ROFLMAOyou don't seem to understand the PC movementeverything is a stereotype or in poor taste UNLESS it mocks someone of European descent. Here's a little rhyme to remember: if you're white, they can make fun of you all night.
-
jamesc-helgrim — 11 years ago(November 24, 2014 10:39 PM)
"Very offensive to just about anyone today"? Really? As hard as I try, I can't bring myself to be offended by it, and I think as a young white person I'm pretty typical in this regard. I understand, of course, that it could be very offensive for people of Asian decent, but I don't understand why it should offend anyone else. Maybe I'm stupid. Maybe not.
-
sd619rules — 11 years ago(November 24, 2014 10:45 PM)
"Very offensive to just about anyone today"? Really? As hard as I try, I can't bring myself to be offended by it, and I think as a young white person I'm pretty typical in this regard.
You may
think
that, but you really are not typical if you think it is not offensive, you would be what
most
people- not everyone- today consider an outlier. -
jamesc-helgrim — 11 years ago(February 10, 2015 11:51 PM)
I think you misunderstood me. If something's offensive toward a group I'm not part of then I'm not offended by it. I think that's normal. What I'm not saying is that it's not an offensive character, because it pretty clearly is. What I am saying is that there's a huge difference between "very offensive to just about anyone" and "very offensive".
-
sd619rules — 11 years ago(February 11, 2015 12:04 AM)
Maybe I did misunderstand your position.
But for me, if someone were to use racial or ethnic slurs, stereotypes or epithets for any group, not just my race, gender or ethnicity, I find it offensive.
Like King said, an injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywherepeople should stand up and say that certain behavior will not be accepted n a civilized society, no matter who the offensive conduct is aimed at. -
ExaltedOne — 10 years ago(October 31, 2015 10:27 PM)
That might be the problem right here: the fact you've been conditioned to consider the act of
making fun of someone
an "injustice".
People have been ridiculed for stuff, both individuals and groups, ever since the mankind began. Making fun of the Japanese is likely no worse and no less common than making fun of gingers, or people who talk funny, or people with weird names, or homosexuals, or pretty much anybody else. It's been perfectly normal when I was growing up, and I'm definitely quite a bit younger than Breakfast at Tiffany's. Maybe, recent generations are simply more touchy than we used to be (softies!
). But honestly, I think it is silly. If we spend our life constantly being afraid of insulting somebody, we end up doing nothing at all.
The worst thing about today: When reprimanded by some self-appointed morality protector over some perceived "transgression", people these days actually apologize, even though the only proper response would be "Mind your own business, beep you very much!"
Case in point: Matt Taylor and his shirt. To this very day, I just don't understand why he didn't simply tell the worthless b*** to shut up and beep off. -
sd619rules — 10 years ago(November 01, 2015 06:42 AM)
Offensive speech is offensive, and it is not
making fun of someone
, it is judging them on race, ethnicity, gender or some other non-material factor and shows the sign of a weak person and shallow mind.
Thanks for playing Champ. -
morganseer — 9 years ago(December 30, 2016 01:44 PM)
people should stand up and say that certain behavior will not be accepted n a civilized society, no matter who the offensive conduct is aimed at.
Really? You're gonna get riled up that a movie made in 1961 isn't politically correct? Who're you going to stand up to? They're all dead.
While you're out there bravely battling (and defending) the dead, I'll be over here giving a hand to the living.
BBL -
sd619rules — 9 years ago(December 30, 2016 02:04 PM)
The Rooney character is extremely racist and offensive, it would never be tolerated today but in 1961 it was a different time and era; and we learn from our past mistakes (or the smart ones among us do). It is best to note the issue, validate the offensivenss of it, and make sure it does not happen again. Anything else is just a person today being a Social Justice Warrior/Drama Queen. The use of racial slurs just in this thread proves how sensative an issue this is, and how some people never learn and are not above the Rooney character from 196155 years ago.