All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Saturday, March 06, 2021

Sidney Poitier, enemy of the people



Cable television made Ted Turner rich beyond his wildest dreams. He bought the MGM film library and began buying other old films. He used them to launch Turner Classic Movies to preserve them.

Now under the management of AT&T, his TMC seeks to destroy them.

In September 2019, the network hired film historian Jacqueline Stewart and made a big deal about her being black and female. Her books include Migrating to the Movies: Cinema and Black Urban Modernity and L.A. Rebellion: Creating a New Black Cinema.

TCM is purging its movie library. Breitbart reported that among those on the "troublesome and problematic" list are Hitchcock's Rope (the villains are homosexual) and Psycho (the villain is a man in drag) as well as Breakfast at Tiffany’s, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? and My Fair Lady.

Yes, in Breakfast at Tiffany's, Mickey Rooney's portrayal of an Asian was straight out of a World War II propaganda movie. But the other 4 are good films that withstood the test of time. LGBT villains? Villains are the best roles. Why should straight white males have all the fun?

The problem with Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? is it stars Sidney Poitier.

He's too white.

Via Breitbart, hostess Stewart said, "His career is so important for the ways that white Americans really started to have more sympathy and understanding of black people. But at the same time, there are aspects of his films that are clearly oriented primarily to white audiences. That opens up all kinds of complications for black viewers who felt that he wasn’t a representative of the race as a whole."

In the 1960s, when it came to black actors, he was it. Ivan Dixon did a good job in Nothing But A Man (and of course on Hogan's Heroes). But Poitier was only black star in Hollywood at the time. He did a bang-up job in A Raisin in the Sun, Lilies of the Field, To Sir with Love, In the Heat of the Night, and of course Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? Those 5 films advanced racial equality far more than any of today's virtue signaling.

That he appealed to white people was the whole purpose of Poitier. The New York Times ran a story on September 10, 1967, "Why Does White America Love Poitier So?" He was an excellent actor whose roles advanced society by humanizing black men. Black people knew that and cheered the man.

At the time.

Now comrade, at 87, he is disposable.

Well at least according to the black history crowd, which happens to include Stewart.

The Guardian profiled Poitier on May 23, 2015, under the headline, "How Sidney Poitier paved the way for Barack Obama."

But the undertone of the story was dark: "With his cool, dignified eloquence, Sidney Poitier primed the white U.S. imagination for its first black president. But thanks to his roles in such films as Who is Coming to Dinner, he was also accused of being a white person’s fantasy of blackness." 

The point is not to erase Poitier but to erase the role of white people from emancipation and civil rights. Poitier served his purpose, now he must go. The same happened to Stalin. The same will happen to Obama.

They pose the problem Lincoln does by casting white people in a good light. Their rewrite of emancipation holds that while white people busied themselves with a civil war over states rights, those clever black people liberated themselves from slavery on Juneteenth. Liberals now make the same argument the Ku Klux Klan did in denying the civil war was about slavery.

Demoting Poitier to Stepin Fetchit status should serve as a warning not just to Will Smith and Obama, but to all black people. You may not be next, but you are on the list.

70 comments:

  1. It is surprising, "A Patch Of Blue", is not on the list to be purged.

    An outstanding movie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. That was my thought

      Delete
    2. EVERYONE'S on the list. Everyone. Lincoln was the biggest slave owner in America. True? No. Absolutely, and corruptly FALSE. Nevertheless, you will hear the above being said, sooner or later, probably sooner. EVERYONE'S on the list (verb tense is irrelevant): COMMUNISTS spare no one. In fact, this dummy-stooge (Useful Idiot) at TCM will, someday, be on the list. GOOD.

      Delete
    3. "The Defiant Ones" with Tony Curtis was one of my favorites too.

      Delete
  2. If I'm not mistaken, Poitier is now 94 years old. He is a national treasure, but that's what the woke folk do to national treasures. They disappear them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. he's just like the statues the Left tear down. the problem with feeding that monster is that it will turn and devour you at some point. hopefully conservatives will be able to watch from the sidelines as they tear themselves to shreds.

      Delete
  3. They are presuming a lot in the villains in 'Rope' being homosexual. They are two men, living together, but their less than macho demeanor is a signal of their "intellectual" status not sexuality. Perhaps it is the murderous "elite" that is objected to.

    Or it is what so many professors have become today, Jimmy Stewart's character, Rupert Cadell. Rupert is an arrogant teacher who delights in pontificating on the superiority of some and their right to eliminate the inferiors. His students take this to heart and try killing for the experience. The film is more about his intellectual toying being taken into reality by students denied Rupert's moral upbringing by the like the Rupert so they don't have the boundaries.

    The professors love to pontificate on the wonderfulness of socialism, but only because they've never considered socialism unbounded, even though the 20th century was rife with examples. They cannot arrive at what Thomas Sowell did with the following:

    "Socialism is a great idea. That does not mean it’s a great reality"
    —Thomas Sowell

    It's fun to imagine there is no heaven, it's easy if you try. But horrifying if you stop and really think.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yeah, it's gonna be a drag when I go off to meet my Maker and find out it was just a lightning bolt in a bowl of primordial soup, sigh

      Delete
    2. No, Jeffery, you'll be there just long enough for St Peter to say, "Cancel:.

      Delete
    3. I have read that the characters in "Rope" were based on Leopold and Loeb, the killers of a young boy who wanted to know what it felt like to kill someone.

      Delete
    4. Hey, Edwina, do us all a favor and STFU. Idiot.

      Delete
  4. Sidney Poitier is White Black is White ...War Is Peace, Freedom Is Slavery, and Ignorance Is Strength in Orwell's "1984"/// There are those uncritical thinkers who think that character is what counts and not skin color. But such people are not "woke", are they?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Soon they will cancel MLK...

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. EschetParfaitMarch 9, 2021 at 3:40 AM
      If the Left holds people of the past responsible for not adhering to present day values and mores this anecdote may just give the puritanical zealots enough "ammunition " to actually cancel MLK:

      "In 1958, while writing an advice column for Ebony Magazine,Dr. King responded to
      a young “gay” man looking for guidance.

      Question: My problem is different from the ones most people have. I am a boy,but I
      Feel about boys the way I ought to feel about girls. I don’t want my parents to know
      about me. What can I do? Is there any place where I can go for help?
      Answer: Your problem is not at all an uncommon one. However, it does require
      careful attention. The type of feeling that you have toward boys is probably not an
      innate tendency, but something that has been culturally acquired. Your reasons for
      Adopting this habit have now been consciously suppressed or unconsciously
      repressed. Therefore, it is necessary to deal with this problem by getting back to
      some of the experiences and circumstances that led to the habit. In order to do this I would suggest that you see a good psychiatrist who can assist you in bringing to the forefront of conscience all of those experiences and circumstances that led to the habit. You are already on the right road toward a solution, since you honestly recognize the problem and have a desire to solve it." Martin Luther King

      Delete
  5. Wonder if they feel the same way about the Mocha Messiah who was "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and without a trace of negro dialect"?

    PS TCM dropped black & white movies, then old movies, then movies altogether years ago.

    All they do now is zombies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shut up, Jeffrey. Nobody gives a flying f what you think.

      Delete
    2. Projecting again?

      Obviously you do.

      Delete
    3. You're thinking about AMC for the zombie show and the ditching of the B&W movies. TMC shows some delightfully awkward pre-modern un-woke stuff!

      Delete
  6. I would argue Sammy Davis Jr was a major black movie star in the 60's. He may not have headlined as many films as Poitier, and certainly not as many major films, but his presence was proof that Poitier wasn't the sole black film star of the 60's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He wasn't on Poitier's level, but he was up there with Frank and Dino.

      Poitier was Gregory Peck-Cary Grant caliber.

      Delete
    2. "Here come da judge, here come da judge..."

      :-)

      Delete
  7. This isn't 1984, but Farenheit 451. Wonder how long that will be around.?

    ReplyDelete
  8. This isn't 1984, but Farenheit 451. Wonder how long that will be around.?

    ReplyDelete
  9. his TMC seeks to destroy them.

    So? Its their property. So what. Its all so boring. These idiots are simply into Nihilism. They will consume themselves in due season its what they do.

    Filled with hate they are compelled to spread hatred and they will never stop.

    Nothing pleases them nor can it. They can never be placated or satisfied. They are already dead so let the dead bury the dead.

    And they enjoy the attention you all give to them. Don't you get it yet?????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And the day is fast approaching that when someone is called a racist, the public will yawn and do an eyeroll. Or say STFU!

      Everyone will ignore them. The sooner the better! Once they begin to destroy female sports the die is cast.

      Do I hear the fat lady singing?

      Delete
    2. It's here.

      The fat lady has hit E above high C, warbled her finale aria as she dies on the couch, taken a dozen curtain calls, hit the shower, been picked up by the producer's chauffeur, let him soak her in lavender-scented oils, and ridden him like Catherine The Great rode General Orlov.

      Delete
    3. They are dead. They hate everything and are jealous and envious of people who are are worth millions or even billions less than them. It's like the Grinch not understanding how the Whos can be happy after he stole everything. Except the elite's heart never grows.

      Delete
    4. I get it. One of the reasons why I haven't watched TV, other than sports with the sound off, since about 2000. When they turned the Simpsons into the Manson family, that was it.

      Delete
  10. Leftists, Democrats, and the Ku Klux Klan are all cut from the same cloth. I thought everyone knew that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know but for some strange reason people won't stop talking about them and telling the same story a zillion times over.

      Delete
  11. "Demoting Poitier to Stepin Fetchit status should serve as a warning not just to Will Smith and Obama, but to all black people. You may not be next, but you are on the list." Remember, folks! The Democrats were the party of slavery, which fought for slavery, until defeated, and has since recuperated, and is bad as it ever was.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Does anyone else think Obama's sneer has frozen on his face? And that Michelle's look is that of permanent anger? I guess these are the looks of permanent grievance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think we all have. Trump wasn't destroyed.

      Delete
  13. Does anyone else think Obama's sneer has frozen on his face? And that Michelle's look is that of permanent anger? I guess these are the looks of permanent grievance.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Gee, it's been over four hours and no "Anonymous" has shown up to whine that Don is wrong, that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery, and it was just Lincoln's war of conquest against the poor, innocent southerners.

    :-)

    (N.b. - Wilbur Fisk begs to differ.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, if you want to discuss it, I can give you chapter and verse on how Lincoln started the war when it could have been avoided.

      And it had nothing to do with slavery. Money, definitely, but not slavery.

      And, as everybody here knows, I am anything but anonymous.

      Delete
  15. I recently read that Arizona State University renamed its film school to the Sidney Poitier School of Film.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ah yes, it was about slavery, but not solely, and while slavery was involved in the arguments over expansion, the die was cast by Sen Douglass a few years earlier, as part of his Senate campaign, to facilitate his expected presidential run. He eliminated the 1820 compromise, and in so doing cast the die that as soon as the democrats lost the WH after 1860 there would be a war. Those silly tolerant left wingers getting crazy again.

    The south could have delayed it, and even prevented it by not firing on Fort Sumter and forcing Lincoln's hand. But Douglass gave them a dream, and they were bound to follow it through as ambitious people do.

    Yes there was money involved - the north and south had been arguing tariffs for years. And it played its part.

    The was was about conquest. Not State's rights, nor slavery, nor even money. Political power. That's it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, it wasn't, Jeffery. Like everything else in life, it was about money, the protective tariff, to be exact.

      And Lincoln could have evacuated Sumter, rather than turn it into a soggy Alamo.

      And only one ess in Stephen Douglas.

      Delete
    2. Nope - you can believe that as southern revisionist history if you like. But that is not why it started. You need to go back to a history class not taught at the Citadel and try again. The tariff argument had been going on for decades. It was old hat. The tinder was lit by Douglas for his political ambition. I don't think that was his intent. He wanted to be president. But the reaction to his action was the South was not going to abide any president who would try to resurrect the 1820 compromise parameters- which Lincoln was surely going to try and do. But the South never even tried to compromise at that point. Had they just gone for a pure political separation it would have been an interesting scenario. And I have sympathy for the argument they could break their allegiance to the Union. But once they fired on the Fort, Lincoln (who clearly cared about preserving the whole union above all else) was pretty much locked in.

      And I apologize for my double S. At least I didn't make a mistake with the main point.

      Delete
  17. "Poitier was only black star in Hollywood at the time"

    Um, just off hand, Bill Cosby was a big star in the 60s. Remember I, Spy?

    ReplyDelete

  18. The cancel culture can have a field day with old movies. Peter Lorre played Mr. Moto. Boris Karloff played Mr. Wong. Edward G. Robinson played Wong Low Get on Hatchet Man, multiple non-Chinese actors played Charlie Chan, etc. etc.

    Enough said about the cancelled Bill Cosby on I Spy on the 60s, but at the same time, Greg Morris was fantastic as Barney Collier on Mission: Impossible. He was an electronics expert and performed the most scientific and technical tasks on the show. A great character, he will be chopped soon by the tyrants.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will films with opium dens be canceled? I loved "Thoroughly Modern Millie" when I saw it at age 9.

      Delete
    2. The great movies of Poitier had nothing to do with his being black or any kind of stereotype. He played a warm, decent, intelligent man, period. The roles in To Sir With Love, Lilies of the Field and A Patch of Blue could be played by anyone. It was the acting. I guess you had to be there. No one talked about his skin colour...except for Guess Who's Coming To Dinner which was a tongue in cheek, sarcastic exploitation film of its time.

      Delete
  19. cross posted at https://freedomaustralia.freeforums.net/thread/963/sidney-poitier-enemy-people

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don,

      Poitier is one of the finest actors I have had the privilege to watch in action.

      I would suggest he is now 'verboten' as he is British Bahamian descent even though born in USA.

      Delete
    2. Sure looks like the luxury of sitting on our hands & doing nothing but talking about it is quickly going away, in light of all this censorship.

      Delete
  20. The nature of authoritarian regimes is to destroy, kill & steal from everyone in order to empower themselves - it is the classic pattern of UEMF Parasites!
    #legendOfROBBINGhood #DUPEprocess

    ReplyDelete
  21. What are they going to do with Don Cheadle in Hotel Rwanda?

    ReplyDelete
  22. '..a white persons fantasy of blackness...' Good grief who are these race obsessed bigot dopes who write that crap? White folks have a fantasy of blackness? That writer needs mental therapy and medication

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Note that most of the people spewing that bilge are actually... white. It's either "elite" whites (most of whom got what they have by either ancestry or trickery, know that they don't deserve it - and have found this nonsense to be a convenient excuse to exclude competition from more-talented but non-elite whites) or a few non-elite-but-wannabe non-elite whites.

      (The latter are cannon fodder for the elite whites, but are too dense to have figured it out yet. Back in the day, the inner cadres of communist parties in eastern Europe made good use of the wannabes as low-level enforcers - the wannabes figured that if they abused normal people hard enough, the cadres would recognize their greatness and welcome them into the cadre circle; when they figured out this was never going to happen, they took out their sense of being deprived of their entitled status by abusing the normal folks even harder... seriously, in many places you had a party enforcer (i.e., a total a**h*le) supervising people on every floor of every apartment building. That's where you'll meet the old "occupy" types if the left ever manages to go full Hoxha/Ceausescu...)

      Delete
  23. I'm waiting for "The Birdcage" to be canceled because Robin Williams wasn't gay.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Never seen Rope. Never even heard of it until now. Guess I better hop to it before it's memoryholed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's an experimental film shot in one continuous take with one break to change the film roll. It's worth watching for that alone.

      Delete
  25. OK,

    I've read this story four or five times now, here and elsewhere, and I still don't get it.

    What are they objecting to, re: Poitier?

    I mean, we have this quote: "...there are aspects of his films that are clearly oriented primarily to white audiences."

    Like what? What aspect is "oriented" (one presumes this means "entertaining" or "endearing" to People of Pallor that isn't just as entertaining/endearing to People of Color? Any examples?

    It continues: "That opens up all kinds of complications for black viewers who felt that he wasn’t a representative of the race as a whole."

    Well who the hell ever IS representative of any sufficiently-larger group of people? Does every Swede think himself perfectly represented by Al Pacino? Every Londoner, by Steve Martin? Every Kansan, by Danny DeVito?

    Why, then, should every Nigerian or Kenyan think himself adequately-represented by a guy from the Bahamas?

    For that matter, why should every Bahamian think himself well-represented by one particular actor from the Bahamas? Did every American think themselves well-represented by Donald Trump?

    In fact, what's the underlying premise of expecting one man to represent a whole group of people? Are we now supposed to think that all persons born in a particular zip code are carbon copies of one another? If some Asian-American were to say, "Oh, you African-Americans all look and think alike," would all the woke people smile and nod approvingly?

    ...

    Here, at root, is the problem: I'm trying to parse some sense out of a wokester. But woke opinions never make sense; they're not meant to make sense. They're not assertions of truth-propositions (let alone arguments).

    All they really are is a mix of verbalized instinctual urges and desperate tribalist shibboleths emitted by persons who've sacrificed intellect to ideology. Wokesters don't say woke things because they think them. They say woke things for the same reason ducks go quack and cows go moo.

    So I should give up on frustratedly parsing the un-parse-able. It's a category error to expect antireason to be reasonable. When a dog urinates on a fire hydrant, he's not committing an act of vandalism, he's just being a dog.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Kind of ironic. Both Sidney Poitier and Harry Belafonte were essentially communists. The left has created so many societal divisions that it has begun to consume itself. From a distance it is now becoming either ironic or funny. I'd vote for both.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Without question, the greatest Black actor in history.
    This is an absolute insult to his legacy.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "The point is not to erase Poitier but to erase the role of white people from emancipation and civil rights."

    I agree. Thematically, good-hearted, liberal-minded, white parents overcoming widespread racial prejudice during the Jim Crow era in which they came up, and welcoming Sidney's character and his family into theirs does not comport with the Left's divisive propaganda that "white supremacy" and "systemic racism" are burning rampant in America in 2021.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "The point is not to erase Poitier but to erase the role of white people from emancipation and civil rights."

    I agree. Thematically, good-hearted, liberal-minded, white parents overcoming widespread racial prejudice during the Jim Crow era in which they came up, and welcoming Sidney's character and his family into theirs does not comport with the Left's divisive propaganda that "white supremacy" and "systemic racism" are burning rampant in America in 2021.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Every black actor/actress on today's tv commercials need to be canceled too. They are way too white and way too rich. They have black driving luxury cars, riding peletons and talking like white people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I noticed all the new ads with black families in huge houses...yet in one of them, the dad takes their orders and picks up the food at McDonalds to eat at home. In their mansion.

      Delete
  31. The insanity that people think they can decide for others what they are supposed to see.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Lilies of the Field...on my list for this Easter season, :)

    ReplyDelete
  33. No one of any race can be "representative of the race as a whole," least of all someone that has made a career of being of his or her race -- as has done Professionally Black, Jacqueline Stewart. And we know that's what she is from the titles of books she has authored.

    In my opinion, this is a lot of racial and racist insanity -- denouncing normalcy.

    ReplyDelete
  34. We watch Amos and Andy along with Sanford and Son every night. Lefties would have a nervous breakdown watching these urban people actually working for a living. They were very talented people.

    ReplyDelete