Discuss the range of viewer responses to Julia described by Bodrohkozy's article. Based on your viewing of the pilot and our discussion of television and race in the 1960s, why do you think the show was interpreted so many different ways? Why, for example, would some critics refer to the show or the character Julia as “white?”
In the beginning of his article, Bodrohkozy discusses the criticism that Julia received which claimed that the show was "out of touch with and silent on the realities of African-American life in the 1960s". I think that the show was interpreted in this way by many because it didn't really depict all of the struggles that were present for African-Americans in the 60s. Granted, we only watched one episode, but in the episode, the main character landed a great job, lives in a beautiful apartment (that she must pay for on her own), and speaks as elegantly as someone running for Miss America. Julia seems to fill out the role of what a white woman in the 60s might be dealing with, such as struggling to get a job because of sexism, but her race does not really seem to be a factor in her daily life. While it's nice to show an African-American woman being successful and not facing racial prejudices, that's just not what was happening during this time. We saw during "Crisis" the racism that presented itself in everyday life of African-Americans, and that struggle was not really present on this show.
ReplyDeleteThe article claims that in the original outline for an episode, they were going to feature an African-American family in a slum with many children. After the first draft of the script for this episode, the woman in the slums was transformed into an upper-class African-American with a white maid. The writers of the show wanted to "avoid racist representations". It's frustrating that showing an African-American family in the slums would be seen as a racist representation. Showing a broad spectrum of different family types and the reality of how some African-Americans were living would not have kept up the image that "Julia" was going for, so they were forced to use characters even higher on the economic scale than the main character herself was.
The show could be seen in so many lights, as presented in the article. Some African-Americans saw it as positive that this family was being represented; they wanted a chance to be involved with the show and help it be successful. Some African-Americans thought that the show was unreal and just an all-white program with a woman in black face (not literally, but, you know.). Some white people said the show opened their eyes to a positive representation of African-Americans, something that sheltered white people may have not been used to. Either way, the show had numerous interpretations. Depending on one's social class, race, political views, they would view the show in a different way.
The range of viewer responses to Julia is infinite, and what is more notable, is that it extended beyond the topic of race. Bodroghkozy's article demonstrates that there was a large struggle over how to define white, how to define black, and how these races were defined in relation to each other. While some viewers saw the show as an unrealistic portrayal of a black woman, they also saw it as unrealistic of white people (almost as anti-discrimination), as well as unrealistic in terms of family structure, the treatment of socioeconomic class, feminism, and more.
ReplyDeleteI think the show was so polysemic in nature because of the current political struggles. How could a television show capture what it meant to be black or be white when America could not agree on that either? In addition, did viewers really want to see how blacks really lived? I would argue that this show could be seen as inaccurate, escapist, yet progressive at the same time. The creators of the show were in a conflicted and difficult position, as the article demonstrates, given that no matter how they portrayed race, it was offensive or inaccurate to someone. Would it have been better to show how blacks "really" lived, or would that be offensive? Or could portraying Julia as wealthier and middle-class be seen as really progressive instead, given that it was breaking the stereotypes seen on American news at the time?
While Julia may have been seen as "white" by many viewers given her lack of cultural connection to African-American culture, her wealth and level of education, it is impossible to define her as "white" without defining what is "black." And at the time, I would argue that there was no consensus for what black or white meant in the 1960s.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJulia faced multiple interpretations because of the manner in which the show was presented. Keeping in mind that Julia was one of the first shows to feature an African American leading character, the producers “were uncertain and anxious about their depiction of black Americans” resulting in either “white Negroes” or “ghetto stereotypes” (Bodroghkozy 147). By depicting these simplistic and familiar images of black Americans, the show was more likely to hook white Americas, who may still be wary of consuming the complexities of African American culture, while simultaneously capturing black Americans by featuring a largely African American cast. Due to this racially diverse audience and the subject matter, the show was bound to get a large variety of interpretations from white racists to whites attempting to understand black culture to blacks’ discontent with the inaccurate portrayal, among others.
ReplyDeleteThe show referred to Julia and similar characters as white as a means to relieve guilt for harboring racial prejudices. In his article “Is This What You Mean by Color TV”, Bodroghkozy argues “viewers engaged in a denial of the ‘otherness’ of black people in an attempt to reduce white anxiety about racial difference” by “affirming that blacks were ‘just people’,” where people was defined as “white” (Bodroghkozy 149). This argument seems somewhat flawed as it does not capture that viewers viewed some characters as “ghetto stereotypes”, affirming their blackness and separating them from the ‘white’ blacks (Bodroghkozy 147). In my opinion, this notion of black character’s ‘whiteness’ is constructed from historical and psychological reasons. During Julia’s airing, the Civil Rights movement was occurring, planting the wrongness of discrimination based on skin color into Americans’ mind. To overcome this, people began assigning traits to colors. For example, intelligent, well-spoken, and hard-working were assigned to white Americans while unintelligent, poor, and low class were assigned to African Americans. Through this mechanism, racist Americans didn’t hate African Americans because of their black skin but instead because they supposedly fit the undesired traits assigned to the idea of ‘blackness’, relieving racist guilt. Thus, viewers viewed Julia as white because she fit positive traits assigned to white of the time, grouping her based on her traits and not her skin color.
In my opinion, the most intriguing thing about the responses to Julia were how there was no consistency on either side - African American viewers or white viewers - about whether or not the show was appropriate, accurate, and/or good television. On the one hand, you had several white viewers claiming that the show was an abomination, and that they didn't want African-Americans "entering their living rooms." On the other hand, you had groups of white viewers going out their way to express approval, even enjoyment, from seeing a program like Julia on screen. These responses are particularly interesting because they involve white viewers claiming to recognize, understand, and appreciate black culture, despite the fact that they had little to no true understanding or exposure to black culture.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, you had African-American viewers spanning both sides of the spectrum as well. Some were pleased with the introduction of blacks on television, while others were astounded that the depiction of their culture had been blanched of all its color - figuratively and literally. Julia was described as 'white' because everything she had represented middle class white American economic status, from her house to her job to her belongings. The ultimate culmination of these issues is found in the responses of African-American viewers who offered tips and suggestions of how to 'fix' the series and make it more representative of reality. In this instance, the show was so multi-layered and disjointed that it hadn't committed to a true identity on either side of the spectrum, black or white, and those who supported its efforts were trying to nudge it closer towards realism. The heart of the problem is that producers, writers, and actors were trying to gently ease America into the idea of having African-American shows on TV instead of diving headfirst into an accurate portrayal. Perhaps, if they'd taken that route, they would have offended many, but gained the favor of many as well. At the very least, they would have gotten solid opinions from viewers rather than a disjointed array of disconnected thoughts.
While Julia was about a black family, it can be argued that it might as well have been a black one. On one hand, the pilot for this show expressed a lot important race issues that needed to be addressed at the time, but also glossed over others. One of the more obvious is the way racism is treated in the workplace. Julia was shown as having to struggle and appeared to be a strong black woman who was not only a well accomplished nurse, but also a single mother. The show also allowed for the young boys, seen as the future, to bond without caring all that much on the color of their skin. This is where the positive racial messages stop. One of most blatantly racist parts of the episode has to deal with what Bodroghkozy says, ““Family is the primary concern of Americans, therefore black and white mixing is contradictory to this ideal.” While the boys manage to mix and play with each other, when it came to family, mixing was not allowed. Julia wasn’t allowed to be attracted to anyone else on the show, just the black television repair man. While at the time this may have seemed normal, it would be very frowned upon if it were to air today. The reason I say though that this show could’ve had Julia’s family be a white family is in their mannerisms. While Julia and her son were black, they acted “white.” They were portrayed in a way unlike that of which blacks were portayed in Amos n’ Andy. Personally I consider this a good thing, but other might find it as a lack of their representation. As the professor said during the screening, the show mainly only discusses race in the pilot, and the rest of the show doesn’t touch on it too much. Overall the show has contradictory messages on what it is saying about the black working mother at the time. On one hand she is strong and independent, but on the other she can’t properly take care of her son on her own. It is very easy to see why the viewers got so many differing opinions on the show.
ReplyDelete"Julia" was a television show that, at a glance, one would think it was very progressive and forward-thinking given that it was aired in the lat 1960s/early 1970s. However, if one were to dig a little deeper into the social context of the show, they may think of it was more of a distraction from the racial struggles of that time than anything. The true interpretation of "Julia" seems to depend on specific person, as there are well though-out arguments praising and criticizing the show.
ReplyDeleteOn the one hand, this was the first show that placed an independent, African American woman in the spotlight without any blaring racial stereotypes. Not much is described about her life before her husband died, but it is implied that her family has been economically worry-free and living comfortably for some time amongst other white, middle class families. On the other hand, the complete lack of acknowledgement of the hardships that other African American men and women had to endure is probably what upset the public the most. Julia and her son live in an apartment where it seems that no other African Americans live. Julia is shown in the pilot as being highly qualified and wanted for a job, with race not even being a detrimental factor to her getting hired. Many referred to her as a "white Negro", as stated in the Bodroghkozy article, insinuating that people saw her skin color fitting the category of an African American woman, but her seemingly lavish lifestyle was more fitting of the white middle class category.
Overall, the confusion surrounding the multitude of interpretations of the show could be due to an over-analysis of the show's meaning. It is very possible that the creators of the show simply wanted to portray a positive image of an African American single mother trying to do the best she can to provide for her child in such a judgmental world at that time. Since there is so much evidence supporting the show's bold move to portray a positive image of an African American AND a woman as well as evidence supporting the ignorance toward the true lives of African Americans at that time, it is hard to decide whether the show should receive praise or punishment; it really seems to vary from person to person.
“Julia” was a pioneering show in a time of great tensions so inevitably it would have greatly differing reactions as to its positive contributions towards civil rights. However, the main issue described by Bodroghsky is the difficulty for anyone at the time, not simply producers of “Julia,” to define the roles of Blacks and Whites in society. The purpose of the show was to redefine the image of what it meant to be a Black American, but in doing so it would both reject the cultural differences of black society and also conform a more equal representation towards a “White-defined” norm.
ReplyDeleteMany letters in response to “Julia” reveal the praise of viewers in finally seeing a show that portrayed black life opposite the harsh and aggressive depictions in the news. Yet others critiqued this portrayal as not “showing it as it is,” and ignoring the true issues that lay in real social inequality. These tensions were apparent in the production aspect of the show, seen in drafts and writings that continuously changed the depictions of various Black characters.
Many of the debates about “Julia” seem to be ones that could be applied to any show in this situation. Regardless of the way Julia was actually depicted, there would have inevitably been opposing reactions towards her portrayal. In trying to portray an “ideal future” it would have ignored some of the present, but showing current situations would have refused the idea of a progressive environment.
Although Aniko Bodroghkozy’s article, “Is This What You Mean by Color TV?” focuses heavily on how Julia was received in a somewhat negative light by black communities for not addressing race relation issues at the time, the response to gender and class binaries based on race is what stuck out the most in my opinion. The episode, “Take My Hand, I’m a Stranger in the Third Grade” brings up the idea of self-regulation based on perceived responses by audiences of all ethnicities. The script, which focused heavily on the parenting styles of Julia and Ms. Stanford incorporated this issue of class and gender norms that were based around the “type of black” these two women were. Producers changed Ms. Stanford from a welfare queen who neglected some of her children’s habits into an upper middle class woman who still neglected her children’s habits except for different reasons revolving around money. The idea that creators like Hal Kanter, thought that making this character rise in society would change the way in which blacks may identify with this one episode or the entire series is absurd to me.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the show’s creators attempted to stray as far away from negative representations of blacks as possible, but in the process of doing so discredited the black struggle at the time. I feel as if many of the viewer responses revolve around the authenticity of Julia and Corey’s blackness and how they related to the black experience, for different segments of the population seeing this program juxtaposed to that of the civil rights movement created a great deal of confusion. Although racism did make a brief appearance in the pilot episode, it becomes overshadowed by sexist comments and jokes making Julia’s character transcend color as the show tries to establish it as a non-issue. Unfortunately, the way in which Julia’s producers and creators tried to accomplish was not as well received as programs such as I Spy. The reason why, I am unsure.
The show Julia represents a very narrow aspect of the black experience in American Culture and therefore struggles to address many of the different aspects of life for blacks in the post war era. Julia does attempt to address certain race issues and may even do so by its omission of certain black stereotypes. This was a central objective of the creators, to omit many of the social struggles blacks faced and avoid negative stereotypes, which was evident in the article when Bodrohkozy explained how they chose not to have a large family living in the slums at the center of the show. From the various responses in the article, it seems that certain viewers rejected this omission of certain aspects of black culture (which may have included negative stereotypes) while others appreciated the portrayal of a positive female black lead, even if she was a sort of homogenized character.
ReplyDeleteThe show exists in a difficult relationship to black culture. On one hand it is striving to project a positive image of blacks while being true to many of the race issues taking place in society. Conversely, portraying black characters that were less idealized but maybe more “authentic” would have inevitably included negative stereotypes. This seems to be the reason why certain spectators appreciated her lack of negative racial stereotypes but why others wanted to “fix” the show and create a greater sense of reality.
As Bodrohkozy's article and our lectures have pointed out, there was a lot of attention on African Americans in the media in the 1960s. Countless organizations were fighting for civil rights, in both violent and non-violent ways. It was a sensitive time in racial relations and Julia was the first show in years with an African-American lead, so directors of Julia were conflicted in how they should depict African Americans. As the reading explains, they “wanted to avoid racist representations” of the black race, but were unsure of how to do so. This, I think, is what got the show in trouble with some viewers. Many claimed the show did not “tell it like it is.” That is, Julia did not realistically represent the hardships faced by African-Americans in the real world. Some criticized that it did not show black lifestyle in ghettos. This, however, suggests that every black experience is a “ghetto experience,” which we understand to be untrue.
ReplyDeleteAs one student noted, responses from both White and African-American viewers were inconsistent in their opinions on Julia. Some whites feared the effects that the show might have on society, while others praised it. Some African-Americans thanked the producers for depicting the race in a good light, while others deemed it unrealistic. A common critique was that Julia may as well have been white. In the 1960s, White was considered “the norm from which ‘Other’ deviates.” Racism was essentially overlooked in Julia, and focus was placed on the character’s beauty instead (as was typical for white women). In this way, Julia was just a “normal” person on television, and therefore a White woman in the real world.
Never before “Julia” had African Americans portrayed in such a positive light. The show was an extreme deviation from the mammies, minstrels, vaudeville, Amos ‘n’ Andy, Beulah portrayals that were all too popular in the country in past decades. Suddenly being confronted with an attractive, hardworking, kind, professional African American character such as Julia I would argue created such a stir of different responses because such a character had not been seen before. The letters that the producer of the show received were largely from housewives that voiced a variety of opinions that reveal how conflicted the country was about whites and blacks sharing a tv show. Some women were thought the writers were unfair to the white housewife Mrs. Waggadorn, often showing her disheveled and disorganized compared to the prim Julia. Others thought it was about time someone portray “good” African Americans instead of just the “bad” ones protesting on the news. Critics have refer to Julia as white because the creators stripped any and all African American culture from the show. Julia speaks like a white woman, her home is generic and white, and any discussion of race itself is glossed over in the show. The show was problematic, but like Amos ‘n’ Andy was arguably a necessary stepping stone in the development of how African Americans are portrayed in tv and film.
ReplyDeleteViewers had tons of varying opinions about Julia and the way that it handled race in America in the 1960s, mainly because it didn't really address race beyond one-liners. Some viewers saw this approach as good, since it didn't make a big deal out of race. As Bodroghkozy mentions, many viewers wrote in to the show to praise it for the way that it portrays African Americans as regular people, and for not making a huge deal about their skin color. However, many of the viewers that appreciated this approach identified as Caucasian- Bodroghkozy quotes a letter from a fan that states, "I am white, but I enjoy watching Julia." From what I read in this essay, it seems like white viewers felt like they were being very socially conscious for watching a show with African American characters but that did not discuss race in depth. The show was criticized by some for being a "sell-out", trying to soothe whites and portray to black audiences that there was a "good life to be achieved by those blacks who did not riot, who acted properly, and worked within the system."
ReplyDeleteBecause Julia showed an African American woman facing more middle class struggles, it was also criticized. Some viewers thought that it should have focused more on her struggles with race that she may have encountered during the 1960s Civil Rights movement. Others, as I mentioned above, thought it was progressive to show her in a normal, everyday role- implying that skin color doesn't separate us as much as people may have believed back then. Again, some praised that approach, but others saw it as whitewashing a woman. Julia, for some, was a show that could easily be the same with a white lead actress instead of a black actress, which is why Julia was referred to as "white".
According to Bodrohkozy's article, Julia was a polarizing show because it portrayed the lives of a single African-American mother and her child during an era of discord and dissent in the civil rights movement. Julia avoided mentioning all of the protests and violence shown on news broadcasts at the time, and thus, critics claim that the show trivializes it, showing viewers that there's “nothing wrong going on” in regards to the civil rights movement. In fact, some implied that the lifestyle portrayed by Julia and her son Corey (life in a luxury apartment that would be impossible to sustain on a nurse's salary) on the show would come for the African-Americans “who did not riot, who acted properly, and worked within the system.” Also, critics noted that the writers of Julia struggled with their depictions of African-American characters: during the drafting process, they were either “demeaning ghetto stereotypes or upper class 'white Negroes,'” with the writers ultimately choosing the latter for most African-American characters on the show, as seen with Mrs. Sanford. Because it minimized the political and racial unrest at the time and could not create less binary African-American characters, the show and its eponymous character was called “white,” as the show could go on, even if they substituted a white woman for Julia's character.
ReplyDelete