RACE JAM or: How MJ Learned To Stop Worrying and Love The Man
NOTE: This post is an expansion of an argument originally made in episode #87 of MovieChatter, which can be found here. It is not meant to be read as an attack on Space Jam, Michael Jordan, or capitalism, but simply as an exploration of how historical and cultural attitudes can unintentionally affect the production and content of art.
For young boys growing up in the mid-90s, Space Jam was the equivalent of a cinematic wet dream. Whoever decided to take Michael Jordan and Bugs Bunny and put them togetherin the same movie was a genius. I’ve never been much of a sports fan, but even as a child I had seen enough commercials for Nike and underwear to know about Michael Jordan. I knew that he met the American standard of “cool.” And I was already absolutely certain that the Looney Tunes were one of the most brilliant artistic creations of all time. So any film that put them together in the same frame, let alone for 90 minutes, automatically deserved an honorary Academy Award for Best Motion Picture Of All Time.
I recently re-watched this cinematic masterpiece on the big screen. Even as an adult, I still find myself immensely entertained by how the film mixes live-action situations with cartoon antics. Most of the jokes still work, and the ones that don’t never did. I’m also struck by how self-aware the film seems to be, both of its own ludicrous plot and of the corporate factors that influenced its production. It breaks the fourth wall several times, whether it’s through Bugs Bunny addressing the audience or Bill Murray claiming he knows one of the film’s producers – it finds a good balance between low-brow fart jokes and more clever witticisms. All in all, it’s hard for me to think of many better family films.
And yet, something has changed since I first saw it as a 9-year-old. Back then, I couldn’t tell you what a “theme” was, let alone process concepts like “stereotyping” and “audience manipulation.” Now it’s virtually impossible to keep the more analytical side of my brain from churning away when watching a movie - even a movie like Space Jam. While the rest of this essay may imply I have rather negative feelings towards the film, I need to start by stating unequivocally that this is not the case. I grew up with Space Jam. I love Space Jam. Space Jam is manna from heaven for my inner child. The only thing that’s changed is that I now have a new theory regarding the underlying message of the film.
I don’t mean to sound like an Armond White wannabe, but it’s my belief that Space Jam is actually a tragic tale of one man’s imprisonment by institutionalized racism.
INTRODUCTION: AN EXAMINATION OF RACIAL STEREOTYPES
Before I go any further, I need to provide a little background on some of the current sociological theories related to race. “Institutionalized racism” is different from more overt forms of racism (eg. calling someone the “n-word”) in that it is often present in dominant and culturally-accepted institutions, administrations, and attitudes. At an inter-personal level, it often takes the form of assumptions or stereotypes about someone of a different race. For example: the idea that blacks are lazy. Or that they’re criminals. Or even…
…that they’re extremely athletic.
But wait, how is that last one a bad thing? That’s a good stereotype, right?
Not necessarily. Many sociologists would argue that any stereotype by definition is a bad one, because they all have negative connotations, even if they’re more indirect about it.
For example, there’s a stereotype that Asians are smart. While this might seem like a “good” stereotype on the surface, it brings with it other more insidious assumptions: that they’re isolated, anti-social and “not cool.” Or take the idea that blacks are, for lack of a better term, well-hung. That’s another one that seems like a positive stereotype on the surface (“They’re good in the sack!”) but actually just reinforces negative assumptions (“It’s because of their physical and animalistic nature!”).
In fact, that particular stereotype is actually a modern-day evolution of one of the oldest stereotypes in history: the idea that blacks are “sub-human.” Specifically, that they’re more primitive and animalistic than the more “cultured” and “civilized” white man. They were frequently pictured as tribal and aggressive, or with a childlike mentality. See, for example, this article on the subject, or some of the items on this list of racist Disney cartoons.
In general, African-Americans (or “black Americans” if you want to adopt the latest in PC terminology), were portrayed as primarily physical beings, while whites were portrayed as more mental ones. In essence: blacks are big, dumb (and probably dangerous) brutes, while whites are way too smart and cultured to have to engage in strenuous physical activity.
This dichotomy between the physical and mental is also tied in with class, particularly in regards to sports. Just think about the number of black athletes in more “physical” and “public” sports, like football and basketball. Compare that to the number of blacks - particularly well-known blacks - in more “high-class” or “exclusive” sports like golf (Tiger Woods doesn’t count for the time being) in which players aren’t required to be very physically active. Like it or not, there is an unwritten assumption by the mass media and our culture as a whole that to be black is to be defined by physicality.
Now, I don’t want to imply that black athletes do not deserve their success, or that they only become famous as a result of cultural racism which wants to treat them as mere entertainment. Far from it. In fact, there is some legitimate scientific evidence to back up the idea that blacks take up certain sports more naturally than whites (though again, some argue this may be related to racism, specifically slave breeding practices and class differences). My point is simply that when old racist ideas are combined with bureaucratic institutions that originated in an era of overt racism, you wind up with the current NFL and NBA. By which, I mean you wind up with a system in which athletes are economically liberated (by being paid millions of dollars by wealthier white executives) in exchange for being commodified. They become icons. Symbols. Products. And, statistically speaking, most of them are black.
Here’s some food for thought: the number of black athletes in sports like basketball and football is far greater than that of white athletes. Yet at the same time, there are very few black coaches. Institutionalized racism through systems such as hiring practices has made blacks do the physical labor (and be the “mules,” so to speak) while, essentially, whites get to order them around.
Combine that with the fact that sports are popular, and you get a dangerous mixture. More than 98 million viewers in the United States tuned in to watch the Super Bowl in 2009. That’s nearly a third of the entire population. A population which is approximately 65% white, for that matter. So you get a whole lot of people gathered around the television to watch black men perform. Play. Slam into each other. Be physically daunting. Is it any wonder these myths about black brutality still exist today?
Which brings me, at long last, to Space Jam.
As much as Space Jam might try to focus on themes of competition, individualism and sportsmanship instead of something controversial like race, it can’t be denied that institutionalized racism played a key role in both the production and the content of the film. This is no more evident than in the presentation of both the film’s villains, The Monstars, and of its hero, Michael Jordan. Let’s take a scene-by-scene look at the ideas coursing through this film, shall we?
THE VILLAINS: BLACKS AS EVIL
The villains of the film are the Monstars, little aliens who in order to beat the Looney Tunes at basketball decide to “steal the talent” of NBA players. It is only by capitalizing off the talent of professional athletes, the majority of whom are black, that they can succeed. They literally feed off the stereotypical physical attributes of black men in order to become tall and imposing beings (read: not “normal”) themselves. There is a sequence in which five NBA stars have their abilities stolen from them, leaving them so physically devastated that they can barely walk, let alone make a basket.
The first part of this sequence is the “ability-stealing” scene…
…and its full effects become clear starting at 3:24 in this sequence. Note the “performance” stereotype still intact, and that the white guy is apparently the only one with other skills.
While this scene contains some hilarious physical comedy, it exaggerates the importance of “talent” so much that viewers are led to believe that it is the sole foundation of these players’ success. After being “infected,” Charles Barkley can do little more than wave his arms in futility. Patrick Ewing can’t even catch a ball. In a later scene, as they walk through a hospital doorway three of them hit their heads on the frame due to their total lack of coordination. Is it funny? Yes. But let’s think about the underlying messages here.
The Overt Message: The athletes have had their talent stolen and are now bad at playing basketball.
The Implication: Talent is the source of every physical ability, ever. Without it they aren’t just bad at basketball, they are physically disabled. Years of training and practice don’t matter – in the end, talent is what enables you to do simple tasks like catch a ball. Athletes (read: in basketball this usually means people of color) can only be fully-functional human beings, let alone successful ones, if they are physically gifted.
Once the evil aliens have stolen talent, they become huge and intimidating creatures. As one exchange of dialogue puts it: "These little pipsqueaks just turned into superstars!" "They're monsters!" "Sufferin' succotash! They're Mon-Stars!"
The Overt Message: Villains win by cheating and relying on the abilities of others.
The Implication: If you’re a talented black athlete (the source of these abilities), you’re a monster.
I emphasize the “black” attribute because, let’s be honest. Shawn Bradley doesn’t count. As a kid, I had heard of every single one of the players in Space Jam except for Shawn Bradley. And the alien who takes his talent doesn’t become all that horrifying. Let’s break it down:
Charles Barkley becomes Pound, the “leader” of the group. Mean. Intimidating. The perfect example of the black “brute” stereotype.
Patrick Ewing becomes Bang, the big green one. Also mean and brutal.
Larry Johnson is Bumpkis. A purple people-eater.
Mugsy Bogues becomes Nawt, the wily, Gremlin-esque one. Also pretty scary-looking.
Shawn Bradley becomes… this guy.
Leave it to Hollywood to make the one white dude the most kid-friendly. Just look at him! He’s tall. Lanky. Buck-toothed. Goofy-looking. He’s the dumb one of the group. The comic relief. The one we like the most. Whereas the others, even at their most air-headed, are somewhat intimidating, this guy never does a single thing that could induce fear in younger viewers. Near the beginning of the match, he drops a basketball on a little mouse, whom it was already implied was being quite irritating.
Starting at 1:45 – The "white" one does what any sane person would do.
Near the end of the game, the Monstars find their lead over the TuneSquad narrowing. So they decide to play rough. Really rough. They start smashing Looney Tunes left and right, inflicting all sorts of terrible pain on their opponents. Here’s the scene:
Black brutes in action.
Notice anything weird about that sequence? How about the fact that the blue one isn’t in it? It’s like he decided to take a water break in the middle of the game. The orange, green, purple and red Monstars – the ones who stole their talent from black athletes – are all extremely violent. They are threatening. They are villains. But ol’ blue Blanko – the one who stole his talent from the white guy – is nowhere near the rampage. Were it not for the mouse-smashing instance earlier, we might even conclude that he’s a pacifist.
Let me be clear: I don’t want to imply that everyone over at Warner Bros. are outright racist bigots. But when white men are in charge of most film productions, certain cultural attitudes will seep in. Space Jam has a bunch of cartoon space monsters as villains. It’s unfortunate that the “black brute” stereotype snuck in during their creation, but it did.
Which leads me to…
THE HERO: BLACKS AS ADMIRABLE (AS LONG AS THEY ARE CONTROLLED BY WHITES)
If the Monstars utilize negative black stereotypes to appear more villainous, Michael Jordan is presented with the same stereotypes but in a positive way. His physicality is not feared, but celebrated. This is evident from the very beginning of the film. The opening sequence presents Michael as a child, shooting baskets with his father and describing his dreams of NBA greatness. After each statement he makes the basket with a perfect swish, foreshadowing how he will achieve all of his goals. This leads into an opening credit montage of nothing but His Airness dunking and jamming with more force than Yoda on speedballs.
Just believe you can fly, and it’ll pan out.
The Overt Message: Michael Jordan is a sports god.
The Implication: His success is due primarily to innate, physical talent. Forget hard work beyond practice. Let’s make no mention of his superb academic performance. He is who he is because it was his destiny.
From the very beginning, Michael Jordan as a black athlete is still defined in physical terms, but unlike the Monstars he is the opposite of the “brute” black stereotype. He’s somebody that everybody loves. He’s a fantastic athlete. He wasn’t involved in any major scandals. People like Michael Jordan. And the people behind Space Jam knew this, and took full advantage of it.
As I’ve shown in my examination of the film’s villains, this is a film that has no problem delving out stereotypes left and right. However, it saved all the “nice” ones for Michael. He comes home to a loving family… the kind of fantasy family that doesn’t exist in what the rest of us like to call Real Life. His kids are cute and obedient. His wife adores him. His dog is loyal. There’s a home-cooked meal (of chicken and collard greens, no less) waiting for him. There seems to be no conflict at all. Everyone is happy and satisfied. There is nothing upsetting about him at all. In that way, he’s almost like Sidney Poitier, crossing racial barriers by being completely sterile and non-threatening, and being associated with “pro-America” attributes like family values, hard work and individualism. David Andrews and Steven Jackson argue in their book Sports Stars that through this kind of public image Jordan was able to counteract the underlying racist attitudes that sprang forth from Reaganism in the 1980s:
“By nationalizing bodies, that is equating particular bodies with desirable characteristics and other bodies with deviance and decay, Reaganism helped to helped to define signifiers of national import and mobilize racist sentiments. Deviant bodies were inevitably of color and/or female. Yet as a highly talented, visible male athlete with an affable persona, Jordan quickly countered this trend and was signified as one of the desirable hard bodies – strong, assertive and successful. These hard bodies were affectively and effectively held out by the New Right as exemplary in contrast to the soft bodies allegedly linked to welfare dependency, crime and drug abuse. In this racist characterization, Jordan was portrayed as the moral obverse of the masses of African Americans vilified by the New Right for allegedly lacking the (new) right stuff.”
In other words, Jordan isn’t your “typical” black man, according to this cultural worldview. He’s, you know, a good guy.
As a good guy who happens to be black, he’s also the perfect tool to be utilized by the corporate elite to subliminally (if unintentionally) reinforce racial attitudes while making a huge profit. Not to mention it wouldn’t look good if your starblack athlete was portrayed publically as anything less than perfect - people might get scared and not like him (and the products he endorses) anymore! In the film, he is perfectly content. Passive. One might even say subservient.
Subservient to whom? White corporate America.
If black athletes are primarily physical beings meant to be consumed by mainstream America, Michael Jordan is the ultimate commodity. Not only do people love him, corporations love him too. Think about how many times you’ve seen Michael Jordan in an ad or commercial. Nike. Hanes. Coke. Gatorade. Chevrolet. Wheaties. McDonalds. He’s one of the most marketed figures in the history of sports – in 1998, he made reportedly $45 million in endorsement deals, which is greater than the $34 million salary he earned for playing basketball that year. That’s right. He made more money selling his image than he did doing his actual job.
Michael Jordan is one of the most profitable pieces of merchandise out there. And corporations know it. After all, let’s not forget: Space Jam is based on a commercial. That’s right, a commercial! Michael Jordan and Bugs Bunny first appeared together in a Nike Super Bowl ad in 1993:
The original Space Jam.
Before long, Jordan and the Looney Tunes were being seen together on t-shirts, shoes and other products. These ads were so popular that it wasn’t long before someone thought it would be a good idea to make a 90-minute commercial. And let’s be honest: Space Jam fits the bill! Yes, it’s a funny movie. Yes, kids love it. But at the end of the day, it sold a lot of toys, and the amount of product placement is insane. At one point, Jordan’s assistant Stan (played by Wayne Knight) even says, “Get your Hanes on, lace up your Nikes, grab your Wheaties and your Gatorade and we’ll pick up a Big Mac on the way to the game!” If there’s anything we can learn from Space Jam, it’s that if you want to sell stuff, you can start by selling Michael Jordan. When Warner Bros. was able to combine their property with the persona of Michael Jordan, they probably wet themselves with glee. Space Jam is one giant commercial, the cinematic equivalent of corporate masturbation.
Starting at 0:46, Warner Brothers literally kisses its own ass.
Indeed, that seems to be a key theme of the film. It opens with Jordan retiring from basketball to follow in his father’s footsteps – just like he said he would in the opening scene – by playing baseball. The only problem is, he’s not as good of a baseball player as he is a basketball player. And as previously discussed, according to the philosophy of Space Jam, if you’re black and have no physical talent, you’re pretty much a waste of a human being. You’re pointless. People don’t want to watch (read: consume) you, and sponsors don’t want to endorse you. This is the modern-day form of slavery – whereas capitalism used to revolve around the physical buying and selling of human beings as laborers, it now revolves around the buying and selling of them as entertainment.
And for most of the film, Michael actually seems to realize this. He doesn’t want to be in the limelight anymore. He’s kind of annoyed by people like Stan always trying to wait on him hand and foot. He’s tired of simply being a product. The decision to turn to baseball was one motivated by his personal relationship with his father, not by a sponsor fee or the promise of more money. Does he seem happy playing baseball? No, but he doesn’t seem unhappy either. He seems, at the very least, satisfied with the situation, even though he’s frustrated that he isn’t a better player. But he doesn’t seem to seriously mind the decline in sponsorships or public appeal – he’s fully aware of the power politics that are at play.
This is why, in my opinion, when he first arrives in Looney Tune land he doesn’t seem all that surprised. In fact, he seems to take it all in good-natured fashion. He makes a single objection – “You’re a cartoon. You’re not real.” A few seconds later, everything’s a-okay! Oh, sure, you can say it’s just the screenwriters attempting to make the film more accessible to children by ignoring potential sources of conflict (after all, to a child, why couldn’t you be transporter to Looney Tune land?), but it actually makes perfect sense. He is immediately comfortable with the Looney Tunes because, like himself, they are cultural icons known for their physical achievements. Michael Jordan is famous because he knows how to seemingly manipulate the laws of physics – he’s even nicknamed “His Airness” due to his gravity-defying leaps – when playing basketball. The Looney Tunes are famous because they also defy the supposedly “normal” laws of physics, whether it be by surviving explosions or falling off a cliff unharmed. They are both known primarily for their physicality, and as such serve merely as “entertainment” for the masses. They are both victims of a culture that delights in the humiliation and sideshow-attraction-status of the Other.
When Michael agrees to help the Looney Tunes, he isn’t simply doing it to be a nice guy. He’s doing it because he can relate to their oppression as a black man, particularly as a black athlete. I mean, just think about the main plot of the film. An alien race has come to kidnap them and take them home to make them slaves. Hm… why does that sound so familiar?
The original Monstars.
At one point in the film, Jordan even volunteers to be a slave himself if they lose. Why? Because as a member of an oppressed race, he feels compelled to unite with other oppressed people in their fight against The Man. If they fail, he fails too.
Black man and cartoon rabbit as equals. Note who gets first billing.
Of course, in the end, the Looney Tunes win and defeat their oppressors. The perpetrators of overtly racist actions (slavery) and stereotypes (black brutes) are gone. However, the institutionalized attitudes and stereotypes (blacks as physical and consumer products) still exist. And according to Space Jam, these things are okay! Michael Jordan embraces them. He returns to basketball, and a life of being cheered at by millions of fans who wish to bathe in his celebrity. The sponsorships will undoubtedly return. And films like Space Jam will ultimately be made – films by white executives which capitalize on his status of Best Black Athlete Ever and will result in enormous profits for other white executives. The status quo is maintained.
The Overt Message: Michael Jordan found his true calling was basketball and was happier and more successful as a result!
The Implication: If you’re a black athlete, you’re only as good as your talent and your sponsorships. The best thing to do is whatever will land you endorsements and enable you to star in a movie like Space Jam, thereby guaranteeing your executive team even more profits. Dance, monkey, dance!
Space Jam tries to present itself as a racially progressive film. After all, in the end, the oppressors are defeated! Unfortunately, since huge corporations have such a huge stake in the film, they’re not going to dare to show Jordan not ultimately serving as a different kind of slave – a corporate pawn. Of course, they won't explicitly make this form of slavery obvious to the audience, either (eg. by including a scene in which he’s handed a big, fat check, which is closer to real life). According to them: he’s a product (and sells more products) because he wants to be. It’s simply due to his talent. It’s what he’s meant to be. Michael Jordan may beat The Man at basketball, but at the end of the day he’s still a sell out. Sure, he defeated the Monstars, but he’s still a prisoner of other institutionalized racist forces. And according to the philosophy of Space Jam, and its $335 million worldwide gross, that’s something to be admired and celebrated.
See Also: This article by Naomi Klein on Space Jam and corporate synergy.
Things To Consider: What points in this post are valid, and which might go too far? Can films unintentionally carry negative messages about race? To what extent are athletes (or celebrities in general) and our perceptions of athletes molded by larger cultural and economic forces? Why was Michael Jordan chosen to star in Space Jam? Nowadays, would someone like Tiger Woods be considered an appropriate casting choice for a feature film? How do race, economics and values work together to produce celebrities and stars?