Salad bowl versus the melting pot…Who benefits from the concept of the melting pot… the ideal by the dominant culture that everyone melts into a common cultural identity of Americanness. However, what is the ethos of this Americanness. Whose culture is dominant? What are we melting into and becoming? In the Caribbean, there is a unique cultural identity that has been created over the centuries however there is a dominant African presence as felt in the music, dance, food and the people.
The salad bowl theory assumes that everyone can live alongside each other in the same society while maintaining their unique cultural identity. This theory is much more possible in the context of Immigrants who migrated to the United States and whose fore parents did not experience slavery and racial marginalization as that of African Americans. The salad bowl theory is the ideal of recognizing each group for their uniqueness and what positive impact and influence they bring to their adopted home. However, for African Americans, who have been stripped of much of their ancestral cultural identity, whether they fit into the salad bowl concept, should be questioned
History of African Americans
Despite their history and continued struggles living in a Eurocentric oppressive society African Americans have so far been able to defy the odds as a collective. They have been able to continuously rise above their conditions to make positive impact culturally, politically and economically within the United States and Globally.
One act of slavery was the stripping away of a cultural identity that separated African Americans from their Ancestral ties to the continent. This separation was achieved through forced abandonment of their mother language, indoctrination of enslavers history and culture and consistent reminder of the supposed inferiority of the African ethos and worldview.
The system of oppression has not been successful in its endeavors to cause complete disruption, as the goal is sustained disconnect to ensure complete control over the psyche of our people. As Maulana Karenga once said “a people without a culture is lost”, and I believe the Black response to the Barbie movie, is an example of a culturally lost people being enamored by content that is not in their best interest. I would dare to say, that this movie is a perfect example of content created by the dominant society that negatively effects the Black Community.
Creation of Barbie and Barbieland
My analysis of the new Barbie movie is void of knowledge of prior Barbie movies but is based on the understanding of what the Barbie Doll is intended to represent. Barbie was first introduced in 1959 by Mattel toy company and marketed to young girls as a way for them to experience the Barbie life through their dolls. Girls were able to play house and explore fashionable styles for all the fun occasions Barbie was attending with her friends, including her boyfriend, Ken. She was an escape for little girls who enjoyed envisioning a lifestyle different from their own, particularly during a time when women (mostly white) felt restricted from participating fully in society
The initial criticism of the toy was the overly curvy features and the abundance of materialism that was portrayed in her lifestyle.. Then there was the issue of representation. Mattel did not become inclusive of other cultures and ethnicities until 1980 when they introduced both the African American and Latin American Barbie dolls. While the change allowed for representation of different ethnicities, they perpetuated the same mainly unrealistic images of perfection and materialism. Some may argue it serves to evoke an image of girly femininity, of which many little Black girls were robbed during the time of slavery.
Critique of the Movie
In understanding this history and context, I frame my critique of the movie, specifically around the message that is being relayed as well as the issue of the intended audience. The movie stayed true to Barbieland’s original concept of idealism that may not be realistic for most of its buyers with the exception of Middle-Class white girls. The idea of living in a perfect world, controlled by women where everything is perfect, and everyone loves everyone, while living a life of fun and frolic with no worries, is really helpful to no-one. While I understand the need to escape from reality, even for little girls, my concern is the chosen conflicts within the story. There are two parallel storylines, first there is discovery of the real world for Barbie through her search for and attempt to establish a relationship with her human handler.
Second, the conflict between men and women, where there is a vocal outcry against patriarchy as exists in the real world and a desire to reclaim an ideal feminist world for Barbieland, one that is fully controlled by women. The Kens of Barbieland are forced to play non-descript subservient roles within the society where they are only granted any positions of power after pleading with Issa Rae (Barbie President). This clear message of marginalization is reinforced by Barbie’s rejection of Ken as her boyfriend, stating clearly that she has no need for him, and he must instead “find himself…” without her.
My concern with the movie is its obvious anti-men rhetoric as a response to a better society as opposed to finding a way for the men and women to work together. Coming from an Africentric framework where there are several examples of matriarchal societies that demonstrates a clear understanding of the role and importance of men within the society. In Kemetic (Old Egypt) there is an understanding of the masculine and feminine energy working alongside each other to provide balance. Balance ensures success in family, community and the wider universe.
Young boys
What is doubly concerning is the message being sent to young boys and men. As I sat looking at the movie there was an undeniable feeling of the Kens in the movie being emasculated to the point where Ken felt a sense of relief when he arrived in the real world and realized that men actually had power. The denial of position or status for Ken in Barbieland may have been an intentional exaggeration to emphasize the point that the real world is Patriarchal and dominated by men. However, while this point is being highlighted, what is noteworthy is the proposed solution… that closes out the movie. The message sent to young girls and boys is that women have grown tired of the patriarchal society we live in and if given the opportunity, they will overthrow the men and replace them with female power. The feminist message is then cemented with the point that Barbie (a woman) does not need Ken (a man) and that she is happy with living her best life discovering who she is.
Conclusion
I find the resolution within the movie to be particularly dangerous for non-white communities, particularly the Black/African community as it is the antithesis of how we see our roles within our communities and larger society. The feminist movement was never meant to solve the problems faced by Black Women as we did not and to a degree still do not face the same problems as white women, due to the overshadowing factor of race. Also, Black/African women come from a culture where historically the relationship between the two genders is symbiotic with each gender understanding his or her role and position within their society.
While the intended target audience of the movie remains unclear, it is obvious that it does not serve to engender positive relations between the genders and certainly cannot be considered a movie that reinforces messaging conducive to the Africentric framework. This brings me back to my initial point, that with full knowledge of self and a connection to culture, it is easy for African Americans to recognize entertainment and “culture” that goes against the virtues, principles and norms of their people and their inherent culture.