Scenes that are not historically correct in Django Unchained

DJANGO UNCHAINED (2012)

Name of Student

Subject Name Here

Date Here

DJANGO UNCHAINED (2012)

Introduction

The antebellum period (1820-1860) is a period in which slavery dominated the American life. This form of life depicted a broad aspect of the American society ranging from political to economic vitality, from cultural activities to business, from religious activities to individual experience. As much as, currently, the American life gives little room for the discussions concerning the slavery issues during the antebellum period, movies have been used to depict the undertakings of that era. Django Unchained (2012) is one of those movies that exhibits the slavery as a reality of what transpired. Tarantino uses the movie to present physical violence, loss, sexual violence, personal and group evil and retribution ¹ . The film, however, has sparked a lot of criticism as people term it as a controversy and linking it with racist claims. The question that concerns this movie is: Is Django Unchained historically accurate in what it portrays? Generally, as much as there is some truth about slavery in the American society at that time, Django Unchained does not depict realistic and true actions that link to the enslavement of men and women at the antebellum era.

Scenes that are not historically correct in Django Unchained (2012)

Entirely some scenes focus on storytelling and the instance in which the film shows the villainous plantation owner, Calvin Candie. He is shown as having the best of his time and entertaining himself through watching a Mandigo fight, that is, a fight between a slave and another slave with the aim of one killing the other in a bloody battle. It is one of the top controversies where Tarantino brings out a plantation owner, Leonardo DiCaprio as a trainer and a lover of slave fights, gladiator-like battles ² . It is a powerful moment that brings out the awkwardness of the antebellum South, however, from history, there were no moments of the slave against slave fight because slaves were a costly “commodity.” Thus, they could not waste them on game fights; In other words, plantation owners were strong businessmen who were not focused on entertained but rather utilizing slaves to better their businesses and in the acquisition of harms. Slaves could only be called upon probably to take part in some entertainment which includes singing and taking part in dances but not a cockfight. Bloodsport was not something that the plantation owner liked and did not have time for that, instead, all the focus on getting the best and maximum out of their cotton fields. It brings out the question of one utilizing their investment on productivity or entertainment ³ . So, the Tarantino’s concept of Mandigo fights is a twisted one which does not portray the slavery era ⁴ . In this case, he should have replaced these fight scenes with slave entertainments and singing which could focus on depicting the injustices and the problems they were going through including being beaten by their masters, overworking and hate which would have been in line with what was transpiring then.

Another issue is the historical inconsistency where the film exhibits the Ku Klux Klan scene. This hilarious clan in Django Unchained is incorrect in the period that is shown to appear because the group did not exist in 1858 since it came to its existence after the civil war, that is, a formation of Confederate veterans ⁵ . The bag head sequence exhibits them as fools, and they are reduced through bullets and explosives. In a real sense, the Ku Klux Klan came into existence in 1865. Furthermore, Tarantino uses the movie to develop a revenge thrill and serves to ridicule the Ku Klux Klan. Tarantino, in this case, should not have brought up the concept of the Klan and instead replace it with the fights and struggles of the slaves in trying to free themselves.

The three-hour movie, also, depicts enslaved women who are just sexual partners and appear as cowards who are just waiting for rescue. In a real sense, during the period of slavery, women were not only sexual partners but beings who took part in the struggle for freedom and their defense as well as defining themselves in situations that seemed to take away their humanity. They were not as helpless as shown in the movie but rather powerful beings. Historically, they had a style in which they aimed at ensuring their families are intact and hoping that the future could be different with them which Tarantino should have shown. Instead, he portrays women as weak and vulnerable to anything that could come their way without any of them trying to help themselves out, for instance, Harriet describes a situation where she was forced into a sexual relationship, but she took a step and ran away ⁶ . This effort should have been evident in Tarantino's work rather than weak women. In other words, according to Tarantino, women were always reliant on men, and the white population could use them in whichever manner they felt like which is untrue as women, during slavery, put on struggles ⁷ . Instead, the film should have brought out the characteristic of those women working on plantations within their actual context and behavior that is, working with their families was something that they did, and all of them were unified because of the violence and the conditions they were going through at that time. These inhuman challenges that they had to go through include the separation of mother and baby after childbirth ⁸ .

Conclusion

Tarantino brings about aspects of violence making it a daily point of slave life terming it as a way of protecting the slave society. For instance, Broomhilda receives a severe whipping, and in another scene, Django takes off his shirt to show out the scars he had sustained. Women, in this case, are shown as lacking control and being sexually abused, which is evidence that the antebellum period was a violent period and difficult one for women and men. It exhibits the realities of sex across the skin color and superiority. As much as the film is a slavery oriented film where the African Americans had to go through hard life, the historical setting is incorrect.

Bibliography

Douglass, Fre derick. The Narrative of the Life of Fredrick Douglass, an American Slave: Written by Himself. The anti-slavery office, Boston, 1845

Douglass, Frederick. When The Lion Wrote History . Video, 1994.

Dunham, Jarrod. "The Subject Effaced." Journal of Black Studies 47, no. 5 (2016): 402-422. doi: 10.1177/0021934716633606.

Hughey, Matthew W. "Film Review: Slavery, Emancipation, and the Great White Benefactor: A Review of Lincoln and Django Unchained slavery, Emancipation, And the Great White Benefactor: A Review of Lincoln and Django Unchained Lincoln (2012, Directed by Steven Spielberg) Django Unchained (2012, Directed By Quinton Tarantino)". Humanity & Society 37, no. 4 (2013): 351-353. Doi: 10.1177/0160597613505960.

Jacobs, Harriet. Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl . Reprint, Stilwell: Neeland Media LLC, 2017.

Pargas, Damian Alan. Slavery and Forced Migration in the Antebellum South . Reprint, New York, NY: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2015.

Stewart, Bruce E. "Ku-Klux: The Birth of the Klan during Reconstruction." Journal of American History 104, no. 1 (2017): 196-197. doi:10.1093/jahist/jax051.

Watson, David. "Django Unchained: Directed By Quentin Tarantino." British Journal of General Practice 63, no. 608 (2013): 153-153. Doi: 10.3399/bjgp13x664379.