Critical Studies in Media Communication Vol. 18, No. 4, December 2001, pp. 452–465 Challenges & Compromises in Spike Lee’s Malcolm X J. Emmett Winn ᮀ—This study looks at Spike Lee’s Malcolm X as an important text in understanding Afrocentric perspectives that challenge the ideological stereotypes of mainstream Hollywood film. Malcolm X intervenes between Lee, the filmmaker, and the powerful media industry and is emblematic of the larger discussion of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic views in media culture. This film is not only an interesting case study but a significant part of an ongoing cultural discourse that is as relevant now as when Malcolm X lived. The relevance of this essay lies in its contribution to the discussion of media perspectives with a focus on furthering media literacy. It aids the viewer in understanding the social discourse surrounding a mediated racist ideology and the ongoing cultural work of social equality in the United States. This research finds that in the continuing struggle over media representation, Lee’s film is an instrument of media politics, controversy, and commercial- ization. INCE the media are sites of struggle ing director Spike Lee’s Malcolm X Sover power and meaning in our (1992), a text that has been both hailed culture, media communication research as offering a black perspective counter is often concerned with racial represen- to the racist portrayals of African tations in film and television (Hall, Americans in film and criticized for 1980). Gray (1989) argues that the “con- being too conventional and commer- stant quest for legitimacy and the need cial (Bogle, 1996; Boyd, 1994; Dyson, to quell and displace fears at the same 1995; Ebert, 1992; hooks, 1996). Mal- time as it calls them forth are part of colm X presents a view of African the complex ideological work that takes Americans that diverges from and chal- place in [media] representations of lenges the racist views that have been a race” (p. 378). This essay elucidates foundation of cinema from the earliest issues and conflicts involved with strug- days of filmmaking (Bogle, 1996; Di- gling media perspectives by examin- awara, 1988; Hall, 1981; Rhodes, 1993). “This struggle,” states Rhodes (1993), “between the transmission of J. Emmett Winn is an Associate Professor in racist ideology and dogma, and the the Department of Communication, Auburn efforts of oppressed groups to claim University, University, AL 36849-5211. An earlier version was presented at the National control over their own image, is part of Communication Association convention, Novem- the legacy of the American mass me- ber 1998. The author acknowledges the insight- dia” (p. 185). The relevance of this ful criticism of Navita James, Gil Rodman, research lies in its contribution to the Susan Brinson, and M. H. Brown in writing discussion of media perspectives with this essay. a focus on furthering media literacy. It Copyright 2001, National Communication Association 453 CSMC WINN aids the viewer in understanding the trayals. Finally, Lee’s film was ulti- social discourse surrounding a medi- mately released within the mainstream ated racist ideology and the ongoing Hollywood establishment and was not cultural work of social equality in the as radical, controversial, or challeng- United States. In the battle over media ing to that system as some critics would portrayals, Malcolm X is an instrument have preferred (Bogle, 1996; Dyson, of media politics, controversy and com- 1995; hooks, 1996). This essay does mercialization. not judge whether Malcolm X is contro- Furthermore, Condit and Lucaites versial enough but, instead, shows how (1993) point out that in the 1980s the Malcolm X is an exemplary cultural arti- leadership of the struggle to define “the fact that illuminates the struggle over American dream of equality” was representation in the media. joined by “public intellectuals, includ- Hall (1981) explains that “the media ing scholars and filmmakers” (p. 180). are not only a powerful source of ideas Lee’s Malcolm X, although not appear- about race. They are also one place ing until 1992, is an interesting part of where these ideas are articulated, this struggle. Lee presents a cinematic worked on, transformed and elabo- version of The Autobiography of Malcolm rated” (p. 35). Lee’s Malcolm X commu- X, framing it between a prologue and nicates his perspective, one that he epilogue that situates the life story considers strongly informed by black within the current struggle for equality cultural politics. The questions of eth- in the United States and the broader nic/racial, gendered and class based international struggle. views of the world are significant inquir- In discussing media representations, ies, and there are, at any one time, the polysemic nature of texts allows for many views struggling for attention. However, looking at the media and wide ranging readings (Hall, 1980), and critically arguing that specific views this essay does not suggest that its views are both presented and challenged si- are the only interpretations of the film. multaneously is possible. Malcolm X is However, Kellner (1995) argues, “there one such site of struggle. are limits to the openness...ofany text...andtextual analysis can expli- cate the parameters of possible read- ings” (p. 11). Therefore, there are pre- Lee and Warner Bros. ferred readings that are useful in Kellner (1995) suggests the views pre- discussing Malcolm X in terms of the sented in entertainment programs are struggle over media representations. often the result of the organizational Specifically, Malcolm X can demon- structure of the media. Hollywood film- strate three aspects of the struggle over making, as popular culture, can be the representations in the media. First, it site of struggle between the views of characterizes how Lee struggled with the filmmakers and the demands of the his distributor, Warner Bros., to make film industry. The plight of the film- Malcolm X and was forced to borrow maker’s fight against a system that cares money from prominent African Ameri- little for an auteurist vision and too cans in order to finish the film. Sec- much for the profitability of a product ondly, Lee’s presentation of African is the stuff of countless Hollywood leg- American characters is, in general, di- ends and is an issue with which artistic vergent from traditionally racist por- creators struggle in nearly every form 454 CHALLENGES & COMPROMISES DECEMBER 2001 of popular art. However, the film- when the film is perceived as a black maker is only one part of the film film, the unease can become gut- industry organization. This system con- wrenching angst” (p. 25) as race and trols the production, distribution, and ethnicity make the relationship even exhibition of a film; many people and more problematic. interests must be brought together to From this vantage point, the relation- make a Hollywood film. In short, the ship between Lee and his distributor, creative conflict inherent to filmmak- Warner Bros., part of Time-Warner ing should not be simplified to a lone Inc., bears investigation. Lee struggled visionary versus a profit-driven con- with Warner Bros. for the necessary glomerate. The system needs the film- budget to make the film as he envi- maker’s creative product in order to sioned. However, Warner Bros. was exist, and the filmmaker, in most cases, never receptive to Lee’s vision. Lee, needs the system for financing and dis- quoted in Wiley (1992), explains: tribution. Warner Bros. and I never saw eye to eye Filmmaking as a collaborative effort on the scope of this film. They don’t know requires the combined talents and re- who Malcolm X is. The film ends with sources of producers, writers, direc- Nelson Mandela in Soweto, and they’re tors, talent, a host of technical crew like, “What does Nelson Mandela have to members, and other personnel. This do with Malcolm X?” (p. 96) creative side of cinema is itself only one part of the organization. Other Warner Bros. disagreed with Lee con- industry representatives are needed for cerning the content and length of the film. Lee wanted additional funds to a film to receive the funding, advertis- finish the film as he had planned. As ing, and distribution that it requires to Lee fought with executives at Warner be completed and exhibited. Bros. the Los Angeles riots broke out, Movies are distributed by major dis- an event that seemed to highlight the tribution companies. Many of these importance of Lee’s vision for his film organizations are the remnants of the as part of a public discourse on equal- major studios of Hollywood’s Golden ity. Wiley (1992) explains: Age of filmmaking (e.g., MGM, Para- mount, and Warner Bros.). However, On Thursday, April 30, [1992] as sections with changes in corporate ownership, of [Los Angeles] burned across national it makes more sense to refer to these television, Spike Lee screened Malcolm X distributors as parts of large conglomer- again at the Warner’s lot, telling those ates. Understandably, the distribution assembled in the screening room, “this company is crucial to the overall finan- movie is needed now more than ever.” (p. 128) cial success of the film and, therefore, has substantial influence on the mak- Lee believed that his film would make ing and release of the film. Thus, the an important contribution to the ongo- filmmaker is often financially depen- ing discourse concerning equality for dent on the distributor. Sharkey (1989) African Americans. sees this creator/organizational rela- Yet, Lee was unable to convince tionship as precarious, “the alliance Warner Bros. to supply the additional between filmmaker and film-marketer funding. Lee believed he needed the is uneasy and often a source of conflict money to make his film a testament to under the best of circumstances.