Sunday, October 31, 2021

Antiracist Accountability: Two Inspiring Black Psychologists

Hey friends,

Despite being very down to the wire this month, I want to squeeze in an Antiracist Accountability post.  This one will piggyback on last month's post on how psychological research transacts with race.

So here we go!

This month, I want to highlight the trailblazing and revolutionary impact of two Black psychologists: Mamie Phipps Clark and Kenneth Clark.

The Clarks may best be remembered for the pivotal role their research played in the 1954 Brown v Board of Education decision in the Supreme Court, where they demonstrated that, at a very young age, Black children internalized harmful and racist stereotypes under-valuing and demeaning Black people compared to white people.  This was demonstrated in part through their series of studies evaluating Black children's preferences for and attitudes toward white and Black dolls.

Photo credit: Gordon Parks.

While their legal impact was perhaps most felt through that Supreme Court decision, the Clarks were expert witnesses in several earlier trials over school desegregation.

The Drs. Clark earned their bachelor's degrees at Howard University before becoming the first Black people to earn doctorates in psychology from Columbia University.  Kenneth Clark later became the first Black tenured full professor at the City College of New York and the first Black person to be president of the American Psychological Association.

As if all of these contributions and accomplishments weren't enough, almost a decade before their seminal Supreme Court testimony, Mamie Phipps Clark and Kenneth Clark opened the Northside Center for Child Development in Harlem in 1946.  As a sibling institution to the Lafargue Clinic, which primarily served Black adults in Harlem, the Northside Center served the community's children.

Long may they be remembered.

{Heart}

A Halloween Sampler for All Souls: 2021 Edition!

 Halloooo!

Happy Halloween, everyone!

I am very behind in writing this month, so I will get straight to it: It is time for a medley of the scary films I've watched in the last year, in the hopes of offering some great, fun, and spooky options for anyone looking to punctuate the holiday with a creepy movie.

As always, each of the following films will be accompanied by the usual 1 - 5 rating scale for overall quality, as well as a scary/intense rating of 1 - 5 exclamation points, to be interpreted as follows:

! = not at all scary 
!!!!! = so scary!

This year's movies are:

"The Vast of Night" (2019)
Rating: 3.5 Scary Rating: !!!!

This year's scary scifi entry!  With seemingly era-consistent dialogue and slang reminiscent of 2005's "Brick", "The Vast of Night" transports you back to 1950s New Mexico in what is an effectively creepy UFO-chasing film.  While in some ways I found the film as a film a bit disappointing, its increasingly frantic pursuit of the mystery behind bizarre radio and phone line disruptions coupled with some memorably chilling moments make it worth watching.

"His House" (2020)
Rating: 5 Scary Rating: !!!!!

I considered "His House" a close best movie runner up in last year's end-of-year movie round-up, and I stand by that strong endorsement of this riveting, frightening, and ultimately devastating movie.  It is exquisite in its gut-wrenching, multi-tiered horror.  It is simultaneously a righteous examination of the systemic dehumanization of immigrants, a mercilessly unflinching study of the egregious acts people can commit when they have to fight tooth and nail for a chance at survival, and a sincerely terrifying supernatural and haunted house story.  This one is definitely the strongest of this year's Halloween medley offerings!

"Winchester" (2018)
Rating: 4 Scary Rating: !!!

I am so. mad. that this movie has a catastrophically low 13% on Rotten Tomatoes.  I sincerely don't know what the almost universal panning is about.  I'm not going to pretend this is among the greatest scary movies of all time, but it is definitely a competent and solidly entertaining haunted house story.  It includes strong performances, a basis in a real place and real events, and a passable attempt at a deeper psychological discussion of the nature of grief.  Maybe I'm just biased by the inclusion of a psychologist as one of the main characters, but I had a lot of fun watching this movie.  It deserves a second chance.

"Black Narcissus" (1947)
Rating: 3.5 Scary Rating: !!!

This year's throw-backy entry!  I'm not sure how much "Black Narcissus" was originally intended to be a horror movie, but it certainly reads that way today: a small cohort of nuns are sent far into the mountains in a foreign land where they grapple with extreme isolation in an unforgiving terrain, fighting (at times unsuccessfully) the encroaching madness that results.  Intriguingly, this is ultimately a movie about the dangers of colonialism--to the colonizers.  

A note: As you might expect, the portrayal of Indian people in this film is at best dated and at worst super problematic.

"The Nun" (2018)
Rating: 1 Scary Rating: !!

At the recommendation of a dear friend, Husband and I have been working our way through "The Conjuring" series of horror movies in chronological order.  This seems like a worthwhile endeavor, especially because I really liked "The Conjuring" (2013) when I saw it in theaters.  Obediently following directions, we began with "The Nun"... 

...and it was pretty awful.  Perhaps ironically, it seems like it could have been an interesting, more supernatural version of "Black Narcissus", but instead it is too ridiculous to be sincerely scary.  Truly, it makes some utterly bizarre choices.  For example:
  • Why is there a French guy randomly in the middle of 1950s Romania?  
  • Why is some of the signage in English?  
  • Why do the priest and novice nun sent to investigate the suspicious death of a nun at this spooky convent only seem to conduct their investigation at night?
  • Why do the aforementioned priest and novice seem NOT to understand that they do NOT have to follow every spooky apparition they see?
  • Are we seriously meant to believe that bombardment during World War II is enough to unleash basically literally the devil, that the Catholic church knew that World War II bombardment unleashed basically literally the devil, and all they did to contain basically literally the devil was to have a small isolated convent deal with it by praying 24/7??
  • Why is demon hellspawn able to touch someone literally wearing the blood of Christ?  
  • How is the blood of Christ still liquid in the 1950s???  
The questions all but blot out the potential scare factor of this movie.  If you're in the mood for some real camp, this is your movie.

Happy spooky movie watching!  I wish you a wonderful Halloween filled with exactly as much creepiness as your heart desires!
{Heart}