Red, White \u0026 Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms by Frank B. Wilderson III


Red, White \u0026 Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms
Title : Red, White \u0026 Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 0822346923
ISBN-10 : 9780822346920
Language : English
Format Type : Hardcover
Number of Pages : 408
Publication : First published January 1, 2009

Red, White & Black is a provocative critique of socially engaged films and related critical discourse. Offering an unflinching account of race and representation, Frank B. Wilderson III asks whether such films accurately represent the structure of U.S. racial antagonisms. That structure, he argues, is based on three essential subject that of the White (the “settler,” “master,” and “human”), the Red (the “savage” and “half-human”), and the Black (the “slave” and “non-human”). Wilderson contends that for Blacks, slavery is ontological, an inseparable element of their being. From the beginning of the European slave trade until now, Blacks have had symbolic value as fungible flesh, as the non-human (or anti-human) against which Whites have defined themselves as human. Just as slavery is the existential basis of the Black subject position, genocide is essential to the ontology of the Indian. Both positions are foundational to the existence of (White) humanity. Wilderson provides detailed readings of two films by Black directors, Antwone Fisher (Denzel Washington) and Bush Mama (Haile Gerima); one by an Indian director, Skins (Chris Eyre); and one by a White director, Monster’s Ball (Marc Foster). These films present Red and Black people beleaguered by problems such as homelessness and the repercussions of incarceration. They portray social turmoil in terms of conflict, as problems that can be solved (at least theoretically, if not in the given narratives). Wilderson maintains that at the narrative level, they fail to recognize that the turmoil is based not in conflict, but in fundamentally irreconcilable racial antagonisms. Yet, as he explains, those antagonisms are unintentionally disclosed in the films’ non-narrative strategies, in decisions regarding matters such as lighting, camera angles, and sound.


Red, White \u0026 Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms Reviews


  • Alexis

    Blew my doors off. Very challenging text, and one I will need to re-visit to fully understand, but well worth the effort. Can't look at film or criticism the same way again.

  • Claire

    Interesting, disturbing, and completely unnecessarily academically worded.

  • David

    I was overwhelmed with his persuasive and devastating account of the Modern world's ontological foundation of anti-blackness only to be surprised by how well he could articulate this through such lucid and insightful film criticism. Amazing and unnerving.

  • caroline

    (If I had any background in film theory and was able to understand some of the references to elements of films, this would have been 5 stars)

  • Ben

    this is a powerful book. afropessimism is an intervention whose conclusions are open ended and whose imagination is unlimited. its power is frightening and what frank achieves in this books seeps past the bounds of cinema to describe how fundamental antiblackness is to what we know as the world. frank is a great writer, powerful thinker and great teacher. glad to have met him and spoken with him while i was uc irvine.

  • Kristine

    ✋🏻✋🏽✋🏿📼📼📼💏⛓👁