Tag:

Criticism

Roma Didn’t Win Best Picture And That’s Okay

Last night Roma didn’t win for Best Picture (mass eye roll for Green Book’s win) and Yalitza Aparicio didn’t win Best Actress in a leading role, and yes we’re disappointed. But we’re not hopeless.

=

As Latinas, we’re used to not winning awards. I mean let’s face it it’s been 58 years since a Latina has won an acting Oscar (Shout out to reina Rita Moreno). However this year, Latinos proved we will not and cannot be ignored. And I’m not just talking about Jennifer Lopez’s mirror dress, which we’re pretty sure she wore so the max number of Latinas could see themselves on screen. Or the crazy amount of Spanish we heard on the Oscar stage AND during the Oscar ads. I’m talking about how Roma not only won Alfonso Cuarón Oscars for directing, cinematography, and best “foreign” language film, but made a larger statement about the importance of Latino made and driven films.

“I grew up watching foreign language movies and learning so much from them and being inspired like Citizen Kane, Jaws, Rashomon, The Godfather, Breathless… The nominations tonight prove we are part of the same ocean.” – Alfonso Cuarón

Cuarón’s speech tells us everything we need to know. The idea of a “foreign” film makes Spanish and all non-English language films others. It says those stories are different and don’t belong to us. This despite the fact that English is NOT the official language of the US (nor should it be of Hollywood). What stories are “ours” is not based on borders and walls. The talent at the Oscars understood this, even if the categories didn’t reflect it. Even the sponsors got in on the game - shout out to Verizon and Rolex who had non-subtitled Spanish in their ads. It’s like they realized that Latinx people exist and spend money too.
Hopefully, this Oscars acts as the start of greater inclusion for Latinos and all the stories we have to tell. Because I think we can all agree, we definitely don’t need another biopic about Winston Churchill. Or another movie about racism written and directed by white men.

As Javier Bardem said in Spanish no less (but with English subtitles), “There are no borders or walls that can restrain ingenuity and talent. In any region of any country of any continent, there are always great stories that move us and tonight we celebrate the excellence and importance of the cultures and languages of different countries.”

Again and again people of color have proven that our stories are not only worth telling but add a richness and diversity that society cannot ignore. Let’s check the stats: 5 of the last 6 winners of best director have been Mexican. At this year’s Oscars, three of the four acting winners were people of color. Black women won firsts in costume design and set production. And women took home a record breaking 15 Oscars this year, three for directing. Roma was particularly special because it starred an indigenous woman, took place in Mexico with everyone speaking either Spanish or Mixtec, AND won 3 Oscars. A film about Mexicans made by Mexicans that wins all the awards? That’s rare. Roma‘s success has allowed us a glimpse of what we’re capable of if people just give us a seat at the table.

FacebookTwitter
Finding Love and Pandemonium on “The Good Place”

In “Pandemonium,” the season three finale of The Good Place, the show makes explicit its most radical idea yet: love. Specifically, love as what gives life meaning. As Janet, the all-knowing robot says, “If there were an answer I could give you to how the universe works, it wouldn’t be special. It would just be machinery fulfilling its cosmic design. It would just be a big, dumb food processor. But since nothing seems to make sense, when you find something or someone that does, it’s euphoria.” This euphoria, the way the world stops spinning when you’re in love, this is the answer to the “randomness and pandemonium” of the human condition.

It’s a nice idea and backed up by the show’s emphasis on relationships. At one point in the finale, Michael encounters Eleanor, Chidi, Jason, and Tahani together and says “Look at the four of you all together.” And as the camera shows our quartet, the four humans at the center of the show, I was struck. A group of friends, sometimes lovers, on an amazing adventure together. The Good Place succeeds because of the relationships. It is the drama of each character’s interactions that allows the shows to delve into the Big Ideas it’s known for. Without them, it’d be like watching a textbook.

That’s not to say that I don’t find the romance between Chidi and Eleanor a bit overdone. I’m not particularly interested in their will-they or won’t-they plotline but the season three finale got me (spoilers ahead). In it, we see the happily together couple face a new dilemma: Chidi’s ex Simone will be one of the four new humans upon which the group must prove can improve to save all of humanity from ending up in the Bad Place. Convinced he won’t be able to teach her moral philosophy without their past interfering, Chidi volunteers to have his memories washed.

After the reset, his memories will stop at the moment he originally died, effectively erasing all his relationships on the show and particularly devastating to the new, happy couple. Unlike the previous resets, the other three humans won’t be losing the memories too. Meaning Eleanor will go on knowing and missing her relationship with Chidi while he’ll have no idea what’s happened. It’s new territory for the show that’s kept its four principles all in the same position over three seasons as they reboot, go to heaven, and discover hell altogether. Now Chidi will be on his own or more precisely part of the new group of people which includes Simone and doesn’t include Eleanor, Tahani, or Jason.

In addition, because of Michael’s fear of failure, Eleanor has stepped into the architect role, acting as the mastermind of the afterlife. Her new role further separates the group, disrupting the original dynamic of four relative equals even more. It’s certainly an interesting visual: to replace Ted Danson’s old, white man, the prototypical face of leadership, with Kristen Bell’s small, casual Eleanor. Let’s just say her T-shirt did not inspire confidence in her first few scenes as the architect. But wardrobe questions aside, Eleanor’s always been the natural leader in the group. Yes, Chidi has been the teacher but Eleanor started the lessons, built the relationships, figured out the rouse first, and got the rest involved. I’m excited to see what her leadership will look like with formal trappings, especially after watching its growth for all these seasons.

So I guess the remaining question is: will love conquer all? Specifically, can it conquer the structural barriers the show has set up for season four? Eleanor and Chidi have found each other through countless do-overs so there’s certainly hope for them. That said, sometimes they end up as friends (my general preference for the two). This time will be particularly difficult because Chidi will meet Simone and Eleanor at approximately the same time, making his chance of falling for either of his two (forgotten) exes pretty even. Plus, as the architect, Eleanor won’t be in the same group or situation as Chidi and the other humans, making it even harder. I adore Simone (played by Kirby Howell-Baptiste of Killing Eve) and thought she was a great match for Chidi when they paired up earlier in the season. I’d still argue that she has more chemistry with Chidi than Eleanor. So who knows what will happen?

The problem with rooting for Simone though is that Eleanor and Chidi’s relationship is what makes them grow. It’s what turns Eleanor from a self-absorbed “Arizona dirtbag” into someone engaged with ideas, concerned about the feelings of others, and interested in doing good. It stops Chidi from being paralyzed by his choices and let’s him finally live. So can this same growth happen if their relationship isn’t romantic? If Eleanor and Chidi are just friends? I hope so. Love comes in so many forms it’d be frustrating for a show as smart as The Good Place fall into the damaging (and often sexist) troupe that only romantic love counts.

So whether they’re coupled or not, I hope Chidi, Eleanor, Tahani, and Jason keep changing because their development is what makes the show so dynamic. If these charmingly insufferable people can evolve, then there’s hope for the rest of us. I guess what I’m saying is, of all the big ideas, famous theories, and lesser known concepts The Good Place has dramatized, its presentation of love may be the riskiest. We’ll have to wait until next season to see if the gamble pays off.

FacebookTwitter
Preparing for the Second Season of “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel”

The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel is coming back to Amazon December 5th. Before the second season premiere, the founders of Mujeres Problemáticas discuss their hopes (but let’s be real mostly their fears) for the upcoming season of last year’s Emmy darling.

CRISTINA: So I’m excited for the second season of The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel. I devoured the first eight episodes after it won all those awards. I went in skeptical because it seemed so WHITE (and because Roxane Gay tweeted this: “So many shows I actively dislike actively winning” during the Emmys, thereby curbing my enthusiasm).

That said, I really liked it. Yes, the costumes and sets are fun but you can catch those on Call the Midwife and other period shows. No, what I really liked was how Maisel shows that gender is a trap for everyone. The main character, the marvelous Mrs. Maisel of the title, Midge thinks she’ll find happiness by following the good woman script (get married, have children, always look beautiful) to the point where she’s waking up before her husband each morning to do her hair and makeup and then pretending to be asleep again so he not only thinks that her appearance is effortless but also never sees her in her actual natural state. Of course, he leaves her anyway, unaware of all that effort. In response, she decides to throw out her old ideas and try on some new ways of being. Meanwhile, her ex-ish husband is on a journey of his own, trying to unlearn all that male learned helplessness – does he need to be “taken care of?” Can he manage his own emotions? We’ll see.

NICOLA: I confess, I am not new to the fast-talking, female-centric television of Amy Sherman-Palladino. Ever since I first saw Gilmore Girls in middle school, I fell in love with her characters and writing style. Every woman in her show was insanely smart, funny, and much more relatable than the dry storylines of Lizzie McGuire. But there was always something missing, most of her central characters were white (except Lane aka Keiko Agena who was amazing!). So when I heard about The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, I was excited and for the most part, it didn’t disappoint. It had everything I loved about Gilmore Girls and more.

CRISTINA: I’ve never watched Gilmore Girls so I didn’t know what to expect. But I do love a quickly spoken monologue, delivered while walking (see half of the script of my favorites, The West Wing and everything Shonda Rhimes does) so it’s no wonder I liked The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel.

NICOLA: Yes! It has a great script filled with witty women with agency plus the stand-up comedy sets bust the myth that women aren’t funny (hopefully hereby retiring it forever). And huge bonus if you love period pieces – it has a 1950’s wardrobe that will make you ask why you don’t have a different coat to match every outfit. The only thing I couldn’t ignore was the blinding whiteness of it all.

CRISTINA: Agreed: the show is terrible on race. Like, ok, you’ve picked a white community as your setting (Upper West Side New York in the 1950’s) BUT you’ve also picked this transgression plot. Midge leaves that world, she defies it in the comedy clubs of New York. Theoretically, her and Susie are an odd couple. They have big class differences with Susie’s tiny apartment contrasting with Midge’s palatial flat to name just one example. Not to mention Susie keeps getting mocked for her “masculine” appearance (although she looks pretty normal by today’s standards) while Midge is an expert at performing heteronormative femininity (we’re talking about a woman who takes her measurements every day). YET, these women could be sisters. Same hair, same skin, similar features. They couldn’t have picked someone more different to play Midge’s foil? Don’t get me wrong, Alex Borstein is fantastic as Susie. I just wished they’d more meaningfully represented New York and its world-famous diversity.

NICOLA: Totally, I’m waiting for Amy-Sherman Palladino to center a character that isn’t her stereotypical quirky brunette. Palladino is great at creating worlds that exist beyond the problems of today, that function as escapes, whether it is mythical Stars Hollow Connecticut or Uptown New York in the 1950’s. Maisel is totally escapist: feel-good nostalgia with a touch of modern feminism dressed as Audrey Hepburn. Because let’s face it, racism existed in the early 2000’s in Connecticut and it definitely existed in New York in the 1950’s. And in 1950’s New York, racism definitely doesn’t look like a rich housewife comparing how many times she went to jail with a couple of Black men from a jazz band while sharing a smoke. That scene in particular seemed horribly out of touch.

 

CRISTINA: It’s true, when people of color finally speak, it’s pretty rough. Whether it’s that Black jazz band or the Black model/make-up girl, or the Black performance artist who’s used as a simple punchline. None of it shows any understanding of what means to actually be a person of color or even where Midge and her band of white friends stand in the world.

So outside of race, the show worked for me because I’m so hungry for “unlikable” women. Male characters get to be good and bad and in-between but women characters usually get stuck on the edges, all good or all bad. Midge is neither of those things and that’s what makes her so compelling. Yes, she’s ruthless to her husband and herself. She’s unaware of the world around her, has never held a job, and only takes middling interest in her kids. For someone so self-absorbed, she’s extremely unselfaware. And yet, she’s hilarious and raw and strong. I enjoyed watching her lay waste to her protected existence, discover the broader world, and hone her newly-found craft. I didn’t find her particularly likable but I did find her interesting – I’m excited to see where she goes in season two. I’m even curious about what Mr. Maisel will do after the season one finale and I’d originally figured he’d be a throwaway character.

NICOLA: I agree, what’s great about the show is how much of it centers around a woman (a mother no less!) that makes mistakes and still hasn’t found herself. And it’s totally okay. I think as women, and especially as feminists, society often tells us we should know exactly who we are and have all our goals mapped out on some sort of Pinterest-sanctioned vision board. However here’s a woman that actually did everything society told her to do (marry, have children, look that certain way) and she realizes she’s not sure it was what she wanted. We need more female characters that aren’t perfect, ones who don’t find their passion till later in life, ones who maybe don’t need their husbands anymore. I just hope that maybe the next season includes a little more acknowledgment of the diversity of New York City. Who knows maybe next season will acknowledge that there’s a Puerto Rican community in Brooklyn? Or maybe Midge will make a (real) Black friend?

CRISTINA: Preach! I hope so. The (lack of) portrayal of race could hardly be worse than season one, so I’m figuring season two will be better. It can only go up from here!

FacebookTwitter
18 Críticas to Follow

SOOOOOO it turns out that media criticism is just as f’ed up as Hollywood itself. You see, most film critics are male and pale and this has major effects on which films get to market. But, as you know, white dudes aren’t the only media nerds these days and they certainly don’t speak for all of us. To help you find people’s opinions you might actually relate to, we found 18 amazing mujeres writing on media that you should follow. Like literally, we made a twitter list for you. FOLLOW THEM.

Natasha S. Alford

Natasha S. Alford is an award-winning journalist, taking home trophies from the likes of Harvard, CBS, and GirlBoss. As Deputy Editor of The Grio, she unflinchingly investigates what’s going on in our culture from gun violence to Queen Sugar to electoral politics.

Vanessa Erazo

Vanessa Erazo is KILLING IT at our very own Remezcla, as the “head Cinenerd aka Film Editor.” She does cool shit like getting paid to go to the Tribeca Film Festival, fangirl over Oscar Isaac, and uplift Latino films. Basically, we want to be her when we grow up.

Julianne Escobedo Shepard

The biggest badies in media are called “Editor in Chief” and that’s exactly what Julianne Escobedo Shepard is. Of Jezebel. It’s a little blog. You may have heard of it. Over there, she gets to write and ASSIGN stories on everything from the movies to politics to fashion. Be swoon our beating hearts!

Maria Elena Fernandez

Maria Elena Fernandez is the type of Cubana who always gets a “senior” added after her name. These days, she writes for New York Magazine and Vulture and has contributed to the LA Times, Daily Beast, NBC News, etc. Follow her for the Latina perspective on everything from natural disasters to the Oscars.

Sabina Graves

Writer/director for Grinning Graves studio, Sabina Graves also reps for Latina nerds everywhere at Super Hero News. She hosts a podcast over there covering all thing men-in-tights. She’s not limited to comic books though, she’s also got a taste for the dark side, dabbling in horror.

Teresa Jusino

You may know Boricua Teresa Jusino from when she was Assistant Editor at The Mary Sue or as That Girl Who Did the Doctor Who Reviews on Tor.com. Now, she’s creating her own stories with the Pomonok Entertainment. Their motto? “Where nuanced female characters come standard.”

Zahira Kelly-Cabrera

Zahira Kelly-Cabrera describes herself as an “AfroDominicana mami, writer, artist (some may say ‘social media personality’), mujerista, award-winning sociocultural critic, and international speaker.” Consider us in love!

Lissete Lanuza Saenz

We’ll admit it. We’re fangirls. And that’s why we’re so into Lissete Lanuza Saenz, Co-Executive Editor at Fangirlish.com. There, she keeps us up to date on TV and movies as varied as Sunday night football, the Good Place, and Outlander. Tune in with us.

Latinx Geeks

We’re pretty into Alexis Sanchez and Reign at Latinx Geeks. Follow these mujeres on Twitter to stay up to date on all things sci-fi, comic book, and fantasy. They’re making waves hosting panels at Comic Con NY, standing up for survivors of abuse, and generally showing that Latinas belong everywhere.

Melissa Leon

Melissa Leon is the Entertainment Editor for The Daily Beast, meaning she gets to do cool stuff like interview Oscar Isaac. Also, influence a million readers a day with her reviews, reporting, and intersectional hot takes.

Kristen Lopez

Women of color are only 4.1% film critics and you KNOW only a tiny percent of that number is la raza. That’s why it’s so important that Kristen Lopez is writing for Rotten Tomatoes (not to mention The Hollywood Reporter, The Daily Beast, Remezcla). Movie buffs take note.

Yolanda Machado

The founder of Sassy Mama in LA, Yolanda Machado has been keeping it real since way back in 2010. Her media presence now also includes being one of the FEW women of color critics on Rotten Tomatoes, bylines at Harper’s Bazaar, Marie Claire, and Remezcla.

Janel Martinez

Janel Martinez founded Ain’t I Latina?, an online destination by Afro-Latina for Afro-Latinas that’s part activism, part cultural criticism, and all hella interesting. It’s exactly the type of thing that inspired us!

Tara Martinez

Currently at Elite Daily, Tara Martinez is one of those Latinas who’s made a career out of watching TV, writing down her thoughts, and making us all listen. She’s a journalist and a critic, helping us parse the latest celebrity gossip in addition to walking us through Black Mirror.

Claudia Puig

Claudia Puig is the OG of Latina film critics. She’s the PRESIDENT of the LA Film Critics’ Association, was lead film critic at USA Today for 15 years, and has been dishing up expert analysis for NPR since 2005.

Desiree Rodriguez

A creative, critic, and organizer, Desiree Rodriguez works in the comic book industry, created #BeingLatinxInComics, and publishes regularly on the intersection of gender and race in the DC and Marvel universes. Basically, if you’re into comics, you should know her.

Alejandra Salazar

Proud Tejana Alejandra Salazar is living your best life. She went to Stanford. She’s currently in NYC, working for WNYC’s Morning Edition. She writes about our Latinx community, politics, gender, and culture for folks like Refinery29 and NPR. Work it lady!

Miranda Sanchez

Miranda Sanchez is in front of the camera and behind the console, reviewing video games for IGN. We see her week in, week out as the only woman and person of color up there and she more than holds her own.

FacebookTwitter
On Teenage Witch Reboots: “Sabrina” vs “Charmed”

Witches are having a moment. And not just because it’s Halloween. The witch trope is everywhere as female power is being reimagined, reclaimed, and re-vilified in the media, religion, and of course politics. We have a  President who has reporters running around investigating which is really the “greatest witch hunt in history.” Then, there was the mass hexing of Brett Kavanaugh, which is hopefully taking further effect on Tuesday. Brujas even appear in our very own tagline here at Mujeres Problemáticas.

So it’s no wonder the media has delivered us not one, but two teenage witch reboots this October. Netflix’s Chilling Adventures of Sabrina premiered on October 26 and follows Kiernan Shipka of Mad Men fame as Sabrina, the new and improved teenage witch. You remember the original with Melissa Joan Hart, Caroline Rhea, and Beth Broderick as three blonde witches living with their black, talking cat. Meanwhile, the CW premiered their Charmed reboot on October 14 writing all three of the witch sisters as Latinx (although not managing to cast three, actual Latinas). The original brunette trio was Shannen Doherty, Alyssa Milano, and Holly Marie Combs in what they argue was a feminist show in its day.

Today, the The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina and the Charmed reboot position themselves as feminist TV, centering women, our power, and its consequences – aka they both have things to say. Yet, strangely, one of these shows is getting a lot more attention than the other. Any guesses as to which? Yes, you are correct, the blonds are getting 725 TIMES MORE ARTICLES. I did the math. Try it yourself. Do a Google News search for both shows and get some variation on what I got: a staggering 10.8 million pieces written about Sabrina and a much smaller 14,900 on Charmed. What gives?

Perhaps it’s that Netflix is a much more prestigious channel than CW. Netflix has won two Oscars, ten Emmys and five Golden Globes for shows such as House of Cards, Orange is the New Black, Master of None, and The Crown. Meanwhile, CW gets passed over so much, it’s become a running joke with critical darlings like Jane the Virgin and Crazy Ex-Girlfriend continuing to get snubbed by most awards shows. But why? Maybe it’s not the quality of the shows but rather the gatekeepers who dole out awards don’t take seriously programming who’s intended audiences are young people, young women, and the oh-so-misunderstood young women of color? As mainstream an outlet as TV Guide said that if Jane the Virgin “aired on ABC, maybe it would’ve already gotten an Emmy nod.”

So if the Television Academy doesn’t take young women seriously, who does? Normally, I’d say feminists. Feminists are always arguing that society needs to pay more attention to what young women are saying, doing, and thinking. Yet, I’m pretty disappointed here too. Jezebel ran a thoughtful critique of The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina. Bitch dived into the show’s feminist arguments. Neither publication managed a thousand words on the feminist ideas in Charmed, despite both publications being aware of the show (Jezebel covered the build up the CW premiere and Bitch listed the show as one of 14 to watch this fall). I imagine they had to pick. They couldn’t write TWO stories on teenage witch reboots and they picked one.

They picked Sabrina. And so did everyone else. Maybe it’s because of Kiernan Shipka’s larger presence, compared to the three relatively unknowns in Charmed. Looking at the numbers, Kiernan has 838K followers on Instagram and 67.2K on Twitter. The Charmed stars have about 650K on Instagram and 82.7 on Twitter COMBINED, making their social media presence less than Kiernan’s. On the qualitative side, Mad Men was a groundbreaking and critical darling while the Charmed stars are coming from shows you’re less likely to have heard of or in parts you’re less likely to remembers. Of course, parts for women of color are much harder to come by – overall, women get just 40% of the speaking roles on television and only 33% were women of color or just 13% overall. None of the Charmed stars would have been even considered to play John Hamm’s daughter.

Sabrina vs Charmed

But I don’t think so. I don’t think it’s that Netflix’s PR machine is 725-time better than the team at the CW. I don’t think it’s that Sabrina came out all at once, allowing TV writers to binge watch the whole thing, while those wanting to write on Charmed have to wait for weekly installments. Those things may play a role. But the underlying reason can be found at the intersection of racism and sexism, clearly the extra penalty women of color pay for existing in this society.

Rarely do you get such a clear example. Here we have two eerily similar shows. They’re released weeks apart. They’re both reboots of early 00’s hits. They’re both about TEENAGE WITCHES. It’s pretty darn specific. Yet one show centers a white girl and her experiences while the other features Latinas. And that show gets taken more seriously. It takes up more space. It is deemed more “feminist.” There’s no getting around it. Race is the key difference. And that’s fucked up. As we say at Mujeres Problemáticas, it’s hard out here for a bruja.

FacebookTwitter
Founding Manifesto

It’s tough out here for a bruja. Everyday, we see amazing Latinas who are killing it at work, at home, at school, and in our communities, but that’s where it stops. We KNOW them, but we don’t SEE them. In politics, in the news, in films, and in books, our stories rarely get told and when they do, they often rely on played out stereotypes. It’s time we see ourselves as we want and deserve to be seen. (Where’s the summer blockbuster featuring la raza? Where are our new anchors? Can we get some more TV shows? What about some Grammy nods? They have like 100 categories!)

Before you disagree, let’s just say the facts are on our side:

Other communities of color had amazing, breakthrough moments of progress this last year from Black Panther to Crazy Rich Asians. Yet, we are still waiting to see even a glimmer of ourselves reflected in the mainstream. You know we love us some Oprah. We went and saw Crazy Rich Asians opening weekend. We recognize Beyonce as queen. This isn’t about begrudging another group its success. It’s not about some sort of oppression olympics. This is about rewriting the game.

And we do mean, literally, re-writing it. We want to READ OUR VOICES. As Latinas, we don’t see our voices, our experiences, our ideas reflected back to us. That just isn’t right, especially when you consider our market force. See above if you want to do some math about it.

The thing is, we Latinas have plenty to contribute. We’re not going to make a case for our exceptionalism or even our humanity here. If you don’t believe we’re fully human, interesting people, we aren’t going to try to convince you. But we are going to push back against the ways we’re being systematically erased, passed over, and ignored.

That’s why we founded Mujeres Problemáticas. We’re not the “good” women who do a bunch of work in the background and don’t get credit for it. We’re not super sexy ladies with accents a la Sofia Vergara in Modern Family (FYI we love Sofia. We just want Modern Family to get that there’s more to being Latina than being “spicy.” Also, accents aren’t funny, sorry, not sorry). And we’re not the “bad” women who care only about ourselves even if it means walking over our hermanas. We’re complicated. Our feelings are complicated. Our hot takes are complicated. Our very existence is complicated.

So expect to see some complicated, problematic, nuanced shit on these pages. We’re tackling media and culture, demanding better representation even as we fan-girl out over our favorites. It’s time we have a place to lift up the amazing Latinas who are doing the same work, doing it differently, and doing it better. We’re speaking out in all of our bruja glory and using all the power we have to rewrite the game so Latinas everywhere get our fair share. Come hang with us.

FacebookTwitter
When I First Saw Myself on TV She Was White

I was in high school, a self-described book nerd, when I first saw a character on TV that I believed was me reincarnated, her name was Rory Gilmore. Rory loved books, drank obscene amounts of coffee, loved the Shins and Belle and Sebastian, and dreamed of being the next Christiane Amanpour – we were perfect for each other.

She was my fictional hero, a young woman who was valued more for her intellect and quick wit than her beauty. A healthy change from our culture’s overindulgence in the beautiful white blonde protagonists of the early 2000s like The O.C or Gossip Girl. But there was one thing that Rory and I didn’t have in common: she was white, I’m Latinx. Growing up in fictional Stars Hollow in Connecticut, Rory and her world looked similar yet different from mine.

Even then, I knew light skin was an unspoken requirement for TV, excluding the role of the ethnically ambiguous friend (shout out to Miranda from Lizzie McGuire). On Gilmore Girls, Rory’s numerous love interests reinforced the idea that light skinned women were most likely to get the guy, specifically white men.

Nothing I am saying here is shocking – Gilmore Girls had and continues to have a notorious reputation for how it treated people of color. From Miss Kim, Rory’s best friend Lane’s mother, who they paint as a stereotypical “Tiger mom” with a heavy accent, to Michel, Lorelai’s co-worker who they limit to the harmful gay tropes without a meaningful storyline or character development. And let’s not forget the worst and most cliche stereotype: the treatment of the maids. The countless women who work for Emily Gilmore are mostly portrayed as women of color with heavy accents and are so interchangeable that their names are optional.

Gilmore Girls: Yeah, it's sad.

However, the saddest aspect of this show for me lies with its central character Rory. I was a senior in high school when I finally found out the truth. That the actress Alexis Bledel who played Rory over the show’s 8 years was in fact half Mexican. Just like me.  She even grew up in a Spanish-speaking household, not learning English until she began school. I trusted that Bledel wasn’t hiding her ethnicity on purpose, but the network and the creators of the show certainly were.

Looking back, I think about what Gilmore Girls would have meant to me if Rory wasn’t the unattainable white heroine I grew to love. What would it mean for millions of young Latinx women to watch a show with a Latina character who was known first for her intellect and not for her sexuality? What would it have meant for white girls to be asked to empathize with someone just a bit different from them? To see a character that wasn’t a criminal, nor constantly worried about her immigration status, nor just a sex object? To follow a girl who spoke Spanglish and had witty references to the genius of Allende, Cisneros, or Selena.

Last year, Amy Sherman Palladino, the creator of Gilmore Girls, created her second TV show The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel to wide acclaim. The show is set in the New York Comedy Clubs of the 50’s, conveniently a place that historically wouldn’t have allowed people of color. I don’t believe this is merely a coincidence. I am sad that Palladino continues to rely on the witty white woman narrative, instead of creating space for a character that isn’t from the white communities of Connecticut or uptown New York City. Representation matters whether you’re 17 or 27 and I’d so appreciate Palladino expanding from her whitewashed world. Sadly, I can only dream that one-day young Latinx women will have characters in movies and on TV that are as complex as we deserve.

FacebookTwitter