More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
GET UPDATES FROM Nathan Gardels and Mike Medavoy
 

Barack and Slumdog

Posted: 02/17/09 12:58 PM ET

When Babel, a tale of far flung fates linked by the threads of globalization, won the Golden Globe for Best Drama in 2007 as well as seven Oscar nominations, its Mexican director, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, voiced the hope that such recognition meant Hollywood was entering a new era. "In the global age," he said, "films must show the point of view of others, with respect and compassion, not as caricature." That is exactly what Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire has done so splendidly, despite the misplaced rumblings of some Indian critics that it is "poverty porn." And, true to Gonzalez Inarritu's hopes, this film about class and social mobility on the dark side of shining India has garnered a stunning ten Oscar nominations, including for Best Picture.

Echoing a similar sentiment, President Barack Obama pledged in his first TV interview -- with the Arab satellite channel Al Arabiya -- that America under his watch would "listen with respect and not dictate" to the world. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has further announced that this country will no longer just throw around its military might, but would pursue a "smart power" approach by tempering the use of hard weaponry with the "soft power" of persuasion and cultural attraction. Or, as Madame Secretary's husband Bill has put it, America would now lead through the power of example instead of the example of power.

Here lies the connection between Hollywood and Washington as America seeks to refurbish its luster so tarnished during the Bush years.

Though the Connecticut Avenue think tanks might like to believe otherwise, the fact is that, for good and for ill, most Americans see the world -- and the world looks at America -- as much through the prism of our mass culture as through the formal institutions of our foreign policy. Through the Internet, we are all exposed to each other.

Unlike most countries, we are seen not only for what we are and what we do, but through the images we project globally through pop music, TV shows and Hollywood films. The warblings of Sinatra, Madonna and Metallica have been the muzak of the globalizing world order. The Bold and the Beautiful still has viewers in 82 countries. Films like Batman Lives and the Simpsons dominate silver screens across the planet.

From the outside looking in, this Hollywood prism is a double-edged sword. Back in 1986, Regis Debray, the old pal of Fidel and Che Guevara, presciently remarked that "there is more power in rock music, videos, blue jeans, fast food, news networks and TV satellites than the entire Red Army" because they carried the vibes of freedom across the Iron Curtain. Thanks to satellite technology, Oprah has become a subversive presence on the TV screens of shuttered Saudi wives. Yet, the spread of "entertainment values" where anything-goes-for-market-share has made many in the Muslim world wary of Hollywood. Her experiences trying to bridge the gap between traditional Islamic societies and the permissive West have led Queen Rania of Jordan to quip that American women are often seen in the Muslim world as "desperate housewives seeking sex in the city."

Looking out from inside is a similar story. Since less than ten percent of the famously insular and post-textual American public travels abroad annually, we get most of our impressions (and misconceptions) about the world beyond our borders from the image media, particularly from Hollywood films like the Mission: Impossible, James Bond or, god forbid, the Rambo series.

If politics in the information age is about whose story wins, then, given this reality, America's storytellers -- Hollywood -- have a starring role in defining America's presence globally. For that reason, they ought to to be recruited for the new "smart power" campaign, which must be two-fold -- projecting America abroad and projecting knowledge of others to ourselves at home.

The most important image to project abroad is that America is a plural, cosmopolitan society that works; a society in which each individual can write their own narrative despite race, creed or gender. Barack Obama, of course, is the poster child for this American idea. A film like Crash shows our pluralism with all the attendant frictions.

We should, however, toot our horn globally with a good dose of humility. After all, Britney Spears, with her celebrity meltdowns, and John Thain, with his scandalous bonuses, are also poster children for our way of life. To avoid hubris, we best remember the famous dictum of Reinhold Niebuhr that, for all our qualities, Americans are not "tutors of mankind in its pilgrimage to perfection."

Perhaps more important, traditional public and cultural diplomacy, which is aimed at persuading foreign publics of America's merits, should be inverted. In the global age, Americans have become inextricably tethered to others of whom we often have little understanding. As we move into the future, Americans not only need to develop a cosmopolitan capacity for empathy and understanding of those with whom we share this shrinking planet; we need to be educated to embrace the rules of engagement for globalization which require forging common and fair rules of the game.

If there is any singularly poignant lesson from the disastrous course America took after 9/11, it is that any alternative like "smart power" must be sustained by informed public support at home. Every shortcoming, misadventure, misstep or outright catastrophe of American foreign policy can be traced back to the insularity of the democratic public of the world's superpower. The cultural knowledge gap in our time is every bit as much a threat to national security as any military gap during the Cold War.

Imaginative knowledge, whether literature or cinema, is key to closing this gap. "Literature, " Salman Rushdie has said, "can take away that part of fear which is based on not knowing things. " Similarly, Azar Nafisi, author of Reading Lolita in Tehran, says, "The news media is supposed to serve on aspect of our needs -- information. The other aspect must be satisfied elsewhere through imaginative knowledge. Part of the reason people liked my book was because they could experience through reading it what a young girl experienced in a country called and Islamic Republic. And they realized that her desires and aspirations were not very different from their own." Marjane Satrapi's 2007 film Persepolis is a fine example of cinematic insight into others. So, of course, is Slumdog Millionaire.

Clearly, one important component of America's "smart power" strategy must thus involve the storytellers themselves who so influence the world's image of America and America's image of the world -- Hollywood's producers, writers and filmmakers. They themselves must be educated to adopt a globalized mentality, whether through their own efforts or prompting by the State Department.

In this way, Hollywood could become more than the purveyor of amusing distractions in hard times. It could be part of the "deep coalition" to help make the world safe for interdependence, which must be America's global strategy as it moves into an era where it will not always be on top.

In what Fareed Zakaria calls the coming "post-American" era, we will have to compete for hearts and minds just as Chinese epics like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon vie for the silver screen and Mexican, Brazilian and South Korean soaps challenge Days of Our Lives on the global boob tube. The "rise of the rest" wrought by globalization and the spread of technology has changed the equation. The John Wayne-era assumption that America could write the script for the whole world is over, both in Washington and Hollywood.

Nathan Gardels and Mike Medavoy are co-authors of American Idol After Iraq: Competing for Hearts and Minds in the Global Media Age.

 
When Babel, a tale of far flung fates linked by the threads of globalization, won the Golden Globe for Best Drama in 2007 as well as seven Oscar nominations, its Mexican director, Alejandro Gonzalez...
When Babel, a tale of far flung fates linked by the threads of globalization, won the Golden Globe for Best Drama in 2007 as well as seven Oscar nominations, its Mexican director, Alejandro Gonzalez...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 19
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
07:51 PM on 02/18/2009
About "...the misplaced rumblings of some Indian critics that it is "poverty porn." ..."


If we had foreign directors making movies only about 8 Mile in Detroit, then over to an award winning documentry in East Palo Alto and Compton, a comedy set in New Orleans' Ninth ward, followed by a romantic musical based in Flint, Michigan, at some point you'd go WTF...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
11:55 AM on 02/18/2009
Reason many Indian commentators are so ambiguous about it is that the characters are all Muslim, part of the 'invisible' India, and because it shows them as victims of the anti-Muslim riots of the 1990's.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
11:52 AM on 02/18/2009
Slumdog isn't a 'Hollywood' movie, but British, therefore none of the baggage of Bollywood.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rf dude
Just an average Man of Bronze
10:21 AM on 02/18/2009
Hollywood makes scarcely

a whisper in the Bollywood market.

Shah Rukh Khan, Amitabh Bachchan, Hrithik Roshan,

Priyanka Chopra, Rani Mukherjee, Ashwaira Rai,

and almost anybody named Kapoor,

rule the silver screen there.

Nice try with that " relevance " thing, tho'...
--
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rf dude
Just an average Man of Bronze
10:38 AM on 02/18/2009
Sorry, hit the "post" thingie

too hard...
--
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ndem
10:20 AM on 02/18/2009
America has GRAT storytellers and talent...unfortunately you have to deal with agents to work with them! that alone turns off a lo tof talented international people from wanting to work within Hollywood! It is simply unpleasant!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rf dude
Just an average Man of Bronze
10:18 AM on 02/18/2009
Hollywood makes scarcely

a whisper in the Bollywood market.

Shah Rukh Khan, Amitabh Bachchan, Hrithik Roshan,

Priyanka Chopra, Rani Mukherjee, Ashwaira Rai,

and almost anybody named Kapoor,

rule the silver screen there.

Nice try with that " relevance " thing, tho'...
--
09:09 AM on 02/18/2009
I've become hooked on Bollywood films in recent months. They're pure entertainment and escapism, and they rock. You'll often find that there are political, social, religious or caste-related messages woven throughout, but they don't become oppressive. Hollywood could learn a lot from Bollywood. Or rather, Hollywood could see what it's lost in the mirror of Bollywood. Hollywood used to deliver us from drudgery. When was the last time you saw a larger-than-life hero/heroine on the screen?

I appreciated Slumdog but also classify it as "poverty porn." We know poverty exists. Some readers might be experiencing it. If you have the means, feed someone today.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rf dude
Just an average Man of Bronze
10:09 AM on 02/18/2009
Shabaash, sophie-ji!

Raj Kapoor did not feel it necessary

to use British actors and British directors

in HIS Hindi-movies!
--
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gunga-Din
08:56 PM on 02/17/2009
SlumDog is a bluff. A poor copy of the great brazilian movie City of God. Slumdog is only a marketing of poverty for Hollywood liberals
07:58 PM on 02/17/2009
How about if Mike, Nathan and HuffPo blogger Dan Glickman talk about having more foreign films shown in the U.S. Too many Americans are ignorant of other cultures. Imposing Hollywood movies to the detriment of other nation's cinemas is not doing anyone favors other than the major studios. Instead of Hollywood remakes of Asian horror films for example, have the originals screened in U.S. theaters. Maybe having more films from Iran booked in multiplexes might make a dent in humanizing people from the Middle East. Or having more than one or two Bollywood films that might show up in more than the largest cities, if they show up at all. You want globalization? You want people to have a better understanding of each other? Fine. Start by requiring that more movie theaters book other films besides the crap they think audiences want.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mlpo
07:48 PM on 02/17/2009
Actually, a lot of Chinese people I have dealt with told me that in China "Crash" was very popular and it was taken as "evidence" that America was on the verge of a race war. Many members of the Chinese leadership viewed it that way. That is one reason why so many of them considered it impossible that Obama would get elected. They'd seen "Crash" after all.
06:37 PM on 02/17/2009
Sounds like a recipe for stalinising Hollywood, turning it even more consciously into an instrument of propaganda. Of course this would also desiccate it of its creative juices and mean that no one wanted to watch its products any more.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
wayoutleft
my nano-bio coded in a period: .
11:01 AM on 02/18/2009
exactly freaking correct torchlight! hollywood has been trying to propagandize the iraq war for years. this is why it makes flop after flop about iraq. this new self-conscious, in-your-face industry role as government propagandist probably signals major military activity terrorizing mideast civilians is at hand.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gunga-Din
05:24 PM on 02/17/2009
The Maxwell Smart Power Strategy
03:53 PM on 02/17/2009
I'd like to nominate the word "slumdog" for banishment because it is retarded.
03:29 PM on 02/17/2009
If we had only spent all the money we spent on invading Iraq instead on shipping them billions of dollars worth of Levis and Fords and Direct TV and National Enquirer and flat screen TVs and XBOX360 and hair salons and nail salons and McDonalds and Burger King and Starbucks and Skateboards and Netflix and Capital One Credit Cards and Bud Light and the NFL etc etc etc they'd be much better off and so would we.
03:11 PM on 02/17/2009
Well meaning, is part of the main problem. It continues down the line of opining on what is morally correct and who is exactly the moral superior to make that call?

Pressure from the State Department is scary; having them decide who is naughty or nice has gotten us into this mess, the "Quiet American"?. Any defining of what is to be presented is censorship and makes boring programming. Fine if you want to appeal to a bunch of Prius driving psueds but accomplishes very little. Did Roger & Me, really revolutionize the labor relations in the auto industry?

Hollywood is not the evangelical pulpit of the whole food shopping elite. They make films that sell en mass, for every Slum dog millioniare, there are 100's of DIe Hards and Legally Blonds. People want to go to the movies to be entertained. Life is tough and paying to see a film that tells you this is just plain masochistic, i'd stay at home, look at my 401K, listening to Leonard Cohen if I wanted a downer. You are worried that foreigners will think we are cheez wiz gulping morons, so we should project a more cultured approach? they wont buy em.

You cannot change perceptions of America by making a film featuring Mel Gibson as a Rabbi working for Free Palestine. The "we can win, my god's bigger than yours!" is part of our dna. You don't need a State Department Epic, you need constant open reporting, education and time.