Thoughts on Watermelon Man

It occurred to me after a moment’s consideration that some of the same criticisms that we’ve made of Black Like Me can apply to Watermelon Man. The movie’s conclusion implies that Jeff Gerber, a man raised with white privilege and opportunities, has assimilated successfully within a black community. Now, admittedly, Gerber’s making no attempt here to enlighten white people with the black experience, but I still think the movie might be presumptuous to claim that Gerber would make the switch–that is to say, he would “pass”–so easily. The movie presents the greater difficulty in Gerber’s attempts to remain white. Perhaps Van Peebles, the director, is trying to illuminate the exclusivity of white boundaries in relation to the inclusive boundaries of “otherness.” Maybe. I’m struggling, though, with Jeff Gerber’s success… what does it signify, exactly? He’s financially rewarded–bribed–to relinquish his claim to whiteness and leave his white neighborhood, and with that seed money he creates a successful insurance company using the knowledge and skills to which he had access as a white man.
There are too many ways of looking at this situation. On one level, by giving up his house, he’s giving in to literal geographic borders that establish where whites can live versus where blacks can live, which preserves the status quo. On the other hand, he does so largely out of disillusionment with the white community to which he had once belonged. What frustrates me more than anything, though, is the movie’s treatment of the Gerbers’ dissipated marriage: why does Jeff agree to renounce his claim to SEE his children simply because he’s black? Obviously he still wants to support them as a father (sending money, etc.), but does he think it’s better for the children not to be exposed to a black father? (I don’t see Althea’s shuttling the children to a different city as a valid excuse.) I suppose there’s the element of protection–the children will face less adversity if they’re not associated with a black father–but doesn’t that message reinforce the segregation in place already? (A lot of Gerber’s decisions seem to uphold that segregation, so I imagine that’s partly the point.) I find that all a little inconclusive, even unfinished. Althea promises that the children will never forget their father, but that suggests that they’re meant simultaneously to abandon him.

…

Oh, and one other thing: When I Wikipedia-ed Watermelon Man (just because), a couple of disturbing production facts caught my interest. First, the studio intended for the part of Jeff Gerber to be played by a white actor (such as Alan Arkin, my God) in blackface, and Van Peebles refused; second, a rumor holds that an alternate ending was supposed to be filmed, in which Jeff Gerber wakes up as a white man, to discover that it was all a dream. Again, Van Peebles wouldn’t hear of it.
Now I know Wikipedia’s an unreliable source, but even if it’s not true, the “what if” question is valid. I don’t have a coherent thought to offer, though, other than the fact that Van Peebles averted tragedy (or travesty) twice over.

Gerber: black pride or self-indulgence?

I found Watermelon Man somewhat ambivalent on the question of Gerber’s attitude toward his own blackness. On the one hand, there’s reason to think that he genuinely comes to embrace his new race. The film ends with Gerber training in some form of martial arts with a bunch of other blacks (sorry, I don’t know 1970’s history well enough to understand the significance of that training). He also opens up his own insurance firm, leaving behind Townsend’s racist segregationist policies (i.e. sending him specifically to solicit the business of African-Americans). He walks away from Erica after she expresses her ridiculously stereotyped perception of black sexuality — and her willingness to fulfill her promise to constantly have sex with him (surely an enticement?) is made clear by the fact that her breasts are exposed almost the entire time that Gerber is dressing (perhaps it was a 70’s thing; I hardly ever see anything like that anymore). These incidents seem to suggest that Gerber is embracing his new race and developing a certain amount of pride in his identity.

But at the same time I wonder whether this change is to be taken seriously. Around 56 minutes in, there is a scene where Gerber tries to enter a club but is denied entry because of race. Soon after, a mob surrounds the entrance and demands that Gerber be granted equal access to the club, and the rather grandiose chant “is this America?” is repeated several times. Surely the chant suggests that this scene is not to be taken seriously: rather, it seems nothing but a chance for Gerber to indulge his own self-importance. Similarly, the scene starting from 1:19:00, where the neighbors negotiate with the Gerbers to get them to move out, could on the one hand be construed as an expression of black power, and on the other hand as greedy manipulations. I favor the latter interpretation: there is nothing racial about Gerber’s language. His language is mocking and sarcastic, not supported by morality or racial equality. He simply says, “Now try 90. Unless you don’t mind the smell of…” to get more money of the neighbors. He is enjoying himself far too much for his action to be anything but self-indulgence — similar is his final encounter with Townsend, where he says “screw you” and “about your breath…” which, really, have no purpose but to insult. And I’m not sure what to make of the penultimate scene in the black club. How is the image of a black stripper submitting to black men anything other than another form of oppression (though I might be saying that from the perspective of 2007)?

Thus, I conclude that, to me at least, Watermelon Man’s ending is ambivalent in that it’s never really clear whether Gerber is using the “race card” to assist in his personal revenge, or whether he honestly embraces his race. Comments?

My initial reaction to Watermelon Man

So, when I started the movie, I was ready to jot down a few observational notes…but to be honest, I didn’t take down many notes (okay, none) in the beginning because I was just stupefied and my thought was, “This movie is ‘wrong’ on so many levels!”   Since I was watching this movie for academic purposes, I (eventually) found myself trying to analyze each scene?  Does the opening sequence–Jeff exercising and racing the bus–serve to establish that he’s a little different than others? 

It is interesting to note that Jeff doesn’t mind tanning…until he thinks that his tanning bed has malfunctioned and made him “too” dark; when he complains about his newly acquired dark complexion, it made me think of the phrase “everything but the burden”–it’s okay to sport a nice healthy tan as long as the end results aren’t that one could actually be mistaken for black and consequently, treated poorly (or worse than the other/Other).  It is clear that Jeff wants to distance himself from having a black identity (think of his phone call with the tanning bed manager and he never uses the adjective “black” to describe himself; instead, he chooses “tan” and “dark”).  Later in the film, he does say that he’s black (in the white doctor’s office), but he still doesn’t want to accept this identity completely. 

We also see that other characters begin to attach larger meanings to the biological, which blurs into the natural.  In other words, other characters begin to note “clues” that could have/should have notified them earlier of the possibility of Jeff’s “true” identity as a black person.  For example, his white doctor notes that his (Jeff’s) lips were always on the fuller side and after Jeff makes one of his endless sarcastic remarks, Althea states that she never did understand Negro humor (which refers to an opening scene at the breakfast table in which Althea isn’t amused by Jeff’s comments and he doesn’t seem to be on her wavelength, either).

Quite a number of other scenes stuck out to me, but I’d be writing all afternoon if I were to begin, but I can list a few of them:

• The way Jeff turns animal-like and attacks the delivery man when he shows up to drop off the new tanning apparatus; Althea picks up a chair and further treats him like an animal (commanding, “Down!” or something like that as if he were a dog/beast)
• Before turning black, Jeff treats his wife with little regard (I wouldn’t say he treats her as his equal) and after the previously described scene with the delivery man, the roles reverse, at least temporarily, because she chastises Jeff as though he’s a child… 
• Jeff accepted their neighbors’ offer of $100,000 to move out of the neighborhood for fear that the values of their homes would plummet.  What I found most interesting in this scene is that Althea is present, yet says nothing…it’s her home, too, but she remains silent and the men–4 white ones and 1 black one–participate in the negotiating… 
• There are others, but lastly, how/why did Jeff turn black overnight?  Isn’t this a bit odd?

I don’t want to suggest that the film did not portray some verisimilitude, (like Althea’s claim that she’s liberal and sympathetic to black plight, yet, when it came down to having a black man as her husband, she couldn’t handle it) but I found myself shaking my head a lot, especially after it was all over.  Perhaps in a way the film could serve as some form of social commentary as it shows a few aspects of racism, but what is the real message it sends to the audience(s)?