There's interesting news coming out of the Cannes Film Festival this year. Besides Benicio del Toro winning Best Actor for his portrayal of Che Guevara, Spike Lee took the opportunity to promote his World War II film, Miracle at St. Anna. How? By blasting a hole in good ole Clint Eastwood and his war-time films. Mind you, Eastwood wasn't at Cannes for any type of military project. He was there with Changeling, a 1920s mystery featuring Angelina Jolie. Spike was there to promote his Miracle at St. Anna. His screen adaptation of James McBride's novel that follows the lives of four black soldiers trapped in an Italian village circa World War II.
Now for the meat: During a press conference a reporter asked Spike why Eastwood lacked black in his war films and Spike allegedly answered: "Ask Clint". Oh yeh, he also added that Eastwood deliberately left out the black component to both his Flags of Our Fathers and Iwo Jima even after being told he should include them. Initially, Eastwood refused to comment on the criticism because it had nothing to do with his Changeling, but later Eastwood had a change of heart and claimed Spike didn't know his history and suggested there were no black soldiers in close enough proximity to his particular war stories to garner any screen time AND for Spike to "stop mouthing off!"
A couple of things intrigue me with this. One, so what if Spike Lee is stirring up controversy to promote his film. He's done it before. He's a provocateur and doesn't deny it. Furthermore, he has every reason to challenge Eastwood's lack of black. There were certainly black soldiers who fought in our World Wars and whether they cooked, cleaned, or were fighting battles a few miles away that's not excuse enough to leave them out of the narrative. I mean if we're seriously trying to honor real history then, hell, a brother sneezing from a segregated toilet stall would have been some show of progress. Because face it—you, me and the fly on the wall knows if a black director [or church pastor] leaves out the white component from the black experience he'd be plastered all over the evening news with the world demanding an explanation.
Now for the other intriguing thing: it's always interesting when some whites accuse some blacks of "mouthing off". As if an effort to shine light on a possible historical exclusion that perhaps promotes white privilege can be deemed a nuisance. And more specifically, the absence of blacks being drafted to help fight for democracy can be deemed unworthy of discussion. Naw, I'm not feeling it or Eastwood's dismissal.
Historical accuracy is mandatory in film, art, politics and all other culture-building facets of our nation. Whether it's blacks who fought at Iwo Jima, or blacks who owned slaves, it's necessary. And as long as white filmmakers continue to deliberately recount history only in white then there's something to be said.
Hats off, Spike. You've certainly been tagged as a provocateur of our times. And even if your provoking appears random, calculated, or in the face, it's always relevant. Come on, you can't discuss black without discovering all types of loop holes.
