School Apologizes for Screening Slavery Satire

[The Straight Story]

The Dalton School, one of New York City’s most prestigious private schools, has apologized after screening a satirical movie about a world in which the South won the Civil War.

The film, titled “C.S.A.: The Confederate States of America,” was shown to sophomores at a presentation of history projects on Monday. Its edgy and comical treatment of slavery quickly led to complaints, and on Wednesday, the school met with students and parents to apologize.

“C.S.A.,” released in 2006 and directed by Kevin Willmott, an associate professor at the University of Kansas, is presented in the style of a documentary, nearly 150 years after Ulysses S. Grant surrenders to Robert E. Lee, following the film’s conceit.

...

Earlier this month the school wrestled with another racially sensitive work, overhauling a production of the musical “Thoroughly Modern Millie” over concerns about the show’s use of Asian stereotypes and references to a slavery ring in China.

Professor Willmott said the school had misinterpreted his film, noting that several of its most controversial ideas are borrowed from history. The movie ends with footnotes.

“This, in essence, is the American problem in race,” he said. “The minute that things become real, the minute that you get close to the edge, everything shuts down.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/31/nyregion/dalton-school-apologizes-for-screening-slavery-satire.html?_r=0

[Igel]

1. The kids who felt it made light of slavery (etc.) should have been given an assignment.

All should have, actually.

"Did this make light of slavery?" = 15 page essay.

No "feeling" in the essay. Feelings aren't arguments, they're not thinking. So in what way did it make light of slavery? Were there any signs of satire that would lead a viewer to conclude that perhaps it wasn't "making light of" but satirizing the topic? What's the definition of satire? How could it have been better satire--what scenes would have been included to more properly satirize the subject?

Draw parallels between the way the film presented the US as the CSA and the way it is today? Are there similarities?

Etc.

Lots of easy, fast feelings are termed "thinking", on both sides of the subject. Now, it's nice to be able to have an emotional evaluation of something, but most people can do that quickly and easily. It's a quick write, it's an easy one paragraph essay. "I didn't like this because I didn't like this." Explaining in what way your feelings relate to the work is usually a big stumbling block. It means putting aside emotions long enough to understand what they're based on.

Getting past emotions to analysis is an even bigger stumbling block.

[Nye Bevan]

2. This is actually a critically praised piece of satire.

Disappointing that so many parents and students did not get this, and disappointing that the school apologized.

[1000words]

3. Ah ... thus the nature of satire.

It is rarely lost on those with an open mind and a modicum of intellectual curiosity.