“Imitation of Life” (1933) is a book written by Fannie Hurst, a once-famous American writer. The book was made into a Hollywood film in 1934 and 1959. It was the only Hollywood film of the 1930s to view race as a serious issue. The film was so famous among blacks that Peola, the name of one of the main characters, was still a byword for self-hating blacks as late as the 1970s.
My understanding of the story before I saw the two films was that it was about a black girl named Peola who looked white and tried to pass for white by disowning her very black-looking mother. In the end she sees the error of her ways and comes home to make up with her mother – only to find that her mother has just died! She cries on her mother’s grave and the story ends, the story of the tragic mulatto.
That would have been a great film, especially if they showed how her heart was torn between the white world and the black world and her fight to become a whole person at peace with herself.
Well, that in fact is pretty much the story of “Passing” (1929) by Nella Larsen, herself a black woman who could pass, not “Imitation of Life” by Fannie Hurst, who was white even if she was part of the Harlem Renaissance scene.
Unlike “Passing”, “Imitation” has white main characters and was made into a Hollywood film. It seems that American film-goers, who are mostly white, do not care enough about a black girl passing to make a whole film about it. So, like in the 1959 poster pictured above, the black characters have the less important part of the story. (On the 1934 poster only the white characters appear!)
Both films are mainly about a white woman who becomes rich and famous and gives her daughter everything – but her love. Peola gets the subplot. She thinks by being white she will have everything – but she will not have her mother’s love.
The 1934 film sticks closer to the book, but it is slower and stiffer, like a stage play. Peola’s mother is pure Mammy, even to the point of wanting to give up millions to remain the servant of a white woman! Peola is not believable either: she wants to be white no matter what, her mother be damned! She is also a stereotype: the tragic mulatto – the idea that mixed-race people can never be happy.
In the 1959 film Peola, named Sarah Jane, gets more of a storyline so we find out more about her, but she and her mother are still the same two stereotypes, although less extreme and more believable. It also has a more powerful ending. Mahalia Jackson sings too!
The 1959 film is worth seeing, but do not get your hopes up. And, as always, the book is probably better than either film, though I do not know that for a fact: F. Scott Fitzgerald did say people would forget the book in ten years.
See also:
i read about Fredi Washington from Imitation of Life (i think it was in the 1930s one). She could have passed for white in Hollywood if she wanted to, but she chose not to.
To me, the problem I find with movies like Imitation of Life, is that, they talk about those that can pass. Most mulattoes, like myself can’t pass.
Movies like this, make it sound like all mixed people are tragic. I understand that these movies existed to discourage interracial relationships or flings but still…
But, I wish, if people did movies on mulattoes, I wish it would be over those who are not trying to “pass” for white.
LikeLike
Why don’t you make your own movie then, instead of asking others to do it for you?
LikeLike
nowhere did i say i wanted someone to make a movie for me. i said that i wished people would be more realistic and accurate…this is america, most people use the tv as their brain…the last thing we need is more false things being put out there.
LikeLike
next time read my comment before you whine to me about it.
LikeLike
also, after you take the time to READ my comment, make sure you process it and comprehend it. the comment was not confusing, nor long, so how you misinterpreted is beyond me.
LikeLike
fredi washington is great
LikeLike
All I was saying that if you wish something was more like you want it to be, the best way to make that happen is to do it yourself.
This is why indi art is so fantastic.
Make what you want to be a reality.
LikeLike
I’ve never seen the movie, but I’m leading a group discussion on stereotypes of Black women (your blog came up quite a bit on Google), and Imitation of Life was mentioned everytime the tragic mulatto stereotype came up. Maybe I should see it…
Nitpick: F. Scott Fitzgerald was male. 😛
LikeLike
a very awesome movie
LikeLike
I totally understand your view point on how not all mulatto’s can pass even if they wanted to. I have plenty in my family and your right to some degree. However, for this particular film/story keep in mind the fact that it was a totally different time period. It wasn’t like today where you have a hand full of different races on either side of the tree. You had one side that was black and one side that was white (or whatever other race they may have been). This basically gave a 50/50 chance on how the offspring came out. Now if the movie was set in 2009 then yeah like I said your point would be more than valid but not for the 1930’s.
LikeLike
Ive seen both versions but the 1959 version got to me the most. Sarah Jane treated her mother awful for no good reason. She should have been happy to have a mother who loved and cared about her. Why wasnt she angry at the white people they were the ones who she had to fake in front of to be accepted. This movie has made me think twice about having a biracial child.
LikeLike
http://www.tcm.com/video/videoPlayer/?cid=135940&titleId=79028
LikeLike
Peanut:
Thanks! Great link! (Donald Bogle comments on “Imitation of Life” for Turner Classic Movies).
LikeLike
I never saw the movie or read the book. I’ll try my best to make a mental note to watch the movie
LikeLike
Not to discount any of the points of view here, but I think time is an important context. I’ve only seen the 1959 version. In 1959, there was a high percentage of white people in the USA who had never even met a black person. While white-centric, the movie injected a dose of reality into the public sphere that white people either were blissfully unaware of, or if they were, most simply wanted to avoid discussing it. We have the luxury of looking at this movie through the lens of today, but for its time it was very in your face.
It also bears noting that to get a point across, you have to speak the other person’s language. There is also the lowest common denominator: money. Audiences can only relate to characters they like. A work of fiction involves some degree of caricature (which differentiates it from non-fiction or documentary). Hence some stereotyping is necessary if you want to both get an audience’s attention and communicate with them…AND…get enough people talking about your movie and get it seen.
LikeLike
@Roland
You make it sound that it is necessary to write a book or make a film so that it can resonate with white audiences. Is that the purpose of writing a book or making a film?
Is it worthwhile to look at a piece of fiction other than through a white lens?
So many Hollywood films about blacks, Native Americans and Asians are written so that they do not offend white sensibilities. That is why the white savior trope is so popular. It resonates with white audiences.
It is a very tired and worn out theme.
LikeLike
Mahalia Jackson sighing “Soon I Will Be Done” that is the piece de resistance.
LikeLike
*singing*
LikeLike
some notes about the 1959 version (per wikipedia): Sirk provided the Annie–Sarah Jane relationship in his version with more screen time and more intensity than the original versions of the story. Critics later commented that Juanita Moore and Susan Kohner stole the film from Turner.[3] Sirk later said that he had deliberately and subversively undercut Turner to draw focus toward the problems of the two black characters.
ALSO
The plot of the 1959 version of Imitation of Life was significantly altered from the original book and the 1934 film version. In the original story, the “Lora” character, Bea Pullman, became successful by commercial production of her maid Delilah’s family waffle recipe (the 1934 film version features a family pancake recipe instead of a waffle recipe). As a result, Bea, the white businesswoman, becomes rich. Delilah is offered 20% of the profits, but declines and chooses to remain Bea’s dutiful assistant.
I think they did what they could, at the time and in that climate, to focus more on the ‘passing’ aspect. But they were not gonna sell a movie with Lana Turner in it by billing it as a story of black struggle. Not in those times. So I understand the poster.
LikeLike