what the butler didn’t see
by Douglas Messerli
Danny Strong (screenplay, based on Wil Haygood’s A Butler Well Served by This Election),
Lee Daniels (director) The Butler (Lee Daniels’ The Butler) / 2013
First of all, I sensed—and I was correct—that Daniels’ movie was a very
old-fashioned Hollywood epic, taking us by the hand through historical events
of American blacks, from early days of slavery, through the turmoil of racial
protests and riots, major changes in laws and cultural behavior from the
Eisenhower years of the 1950s straight through to Obama’s election in the first
decade of the new millennium. I have never been a fan of what I might describe
as the “Forrest Gump” approach to history, films that take a chronological view
of their heroes’ lives as their move through political and cultural events.
True, Cecil Gaines—a real life White House butler—worked at the epicenter of
these shifts, but clearly, as the film emphasizes, that does not necessarily
mean he was fully or, sometimes, even partially aware of the significance of
the presidential and congressional decisions going on around him.
As the perfect butler, he, like the butler in James Ivory’s The Remains of the Day, is encouraged
and advised, as well as self-determined to ignore any knowledge or even
possibility of hearing what is going on around him. Rather, as a perfect
servant, he was there simply to serve, to exquisitely and elegantly foretell
his master’s needs, bringing a drink at the precisely the right moment, holding
out silver trays of delicacies while impassively standing at attention without
truly attending to anything but the needs of the president, his staff, and
guests. Like the central character of Ivory’s work, the evil goings-on, even
the significant reforms and break-throughs in governmental policy did not
register on Gaines’ face, and, if this movie is to be believed (and at many
moments, it is not to be believed) failed to register in his inner mind.
Fortunately, Daniels’ film, despite its structural spine of all those
years of standing just a few feet from the most influential people in American
history, focuses not on the White House, but on Gaines’ home life, and it is in
that warm and often troubled world, filled with the love of Gaines, his wife,
and their two boys—at least in the early years—which spiritually grounds this
work and brings the black characters some dimension. We can forgive Daniels, I
suppose, after thousands and thousands of Hollywood films who have treated
Blacks as mere figureheads, if Daniels treats nearly all of the white figures
of his film in the same manner. Perhaps in an attempt to seemingly puff-up his
cardboard white creations, the director chose some of the major actors in the
business, including Vanessa Redgrave, Robin Williams (as Eisenhower), James
Mardsen (Kennedy), John Cusak (Nixon), Liev Schreiber (Johnson), Alan Rickman
(Reagan), and Jane Fonda (Mrs. Reagan) to briefly inhabit these noted beings.
Yet all of them are mere cameos compared to the far deeper acting skills
of Cuba Gooding, Lenny Kravitz, and, in particular, Whitaker and Winfrey. Since
Gaines, however, is not allowed political reaction—a role, strangely enough, he
maintains in his home life—the writer and director expanded the real Gaines’
only son, into two, the youngest serving and dying, like millions of other
The more involved Cecil’s son Louis is
in political activities, the more the father isolates himself from his son and
the significance of those events, as if facing them might have made it
impossible to look the figures he daily serves in the eyes. And the rupture
between the two seems to be so palpable (if improbable) that you almost feel
the son is justified in describing his hard-working father as an Uncle Tom.
This butler, like Ivory’s British gentleman, at the close of his life seems to
be left with very little, despite daily rubbing elbows with such powerful men
and women: all he has left is a tie Jackie Kennedy has given him upon John
Kennedy’s death, a tie clip tossed to him by Johnson and a couple of other
trinkets. And in his long absences Gloria has turned to alcohol and even,
momentarily, to a male neighbor.
It is not the American
situation, but the South African apartheid, which Reagan refuses to oppose,
that finally begins to insinuate the issues of race into Gaines thoughts
(predictably, in the constant attempt these days to redeem Reagan’s heritage,
there was a public outcry against this film’s portrayal of him, arguing that he
did oppose apartheid, but was afraid South African might turn to
Communism—although I see it as part and parcel of the same issue in Regan’s
thinking). And it is only when Gaines actually is invited by Nancy Reagan to a
White House dinner, not as a servant, but as a guest with his wife, that he,
for the first time, really perceives his outsider status. Although somewhat
unconvincing, he finally begins to perceive how, for so many years, he has been
blind to the very history he has witnessed and he becomes suddenly desperate to
recover his inner passion. Resigning from his position, Gaines finds his son
speaking to protestors nearby about apartheid, and willingly joins him, being
arrested along with Louis for his activities.
Now that its central character has spiritually “come to life,” the film
quickly fast forwards to the Obama election, spinning into a sentimental
closing, by showing the agèd couple about to attend what appears to be an Obama
gathering. While awaiting their son, now an elected official, to take them to
the event, Gloria dies, and Louis suddenly is truly left with the few “remains
of the day.” Obama’s election, however, signifies that despite all of his
silent suffering, he—at least as a stand-in for all blacks—has now won back his
pride. Putting on the few treasures he has from all those years of quietude, he
visits Obama, who has called him to the great white home, which he knows,
perhaps, better than any of its temporary inhabitants.
In short, although the film often creaks along in its shopping-list-like
recounting of black history through the years of this exceptional butler’s
employment, it also presents a healthy antidote to so much of American
film-making in its dramatic presentation of a real-life black family living out
their lives in the nation’s capital. Washington, D.C., after all, is a city,
one must remember, where the true life-time inhabitants are not the thousands
of whites who temporarily take over its wealthy neighborhoods as politicians
and parties rise to power and fall, but the blacks of several lovely middle
class and south Anacostia poor neighborhoods. It is the men and women in power
who “come and go,” while the administrators, butlers, maids, and others stand
firm in their grounded roles.
Los Angeles, September 15, 2013
Reprinted from Nth Position [England] (October 2013).
No comments:
Post a Comment