Media and "Pleasantville" - A Study by Will Manning

2. ETHNOGRAPHY

Pleasantville provides commentary on a number of social issues, including racism, societal norms, morality, gender roles, and many others.  The main philosophy behind the film is that there is no set way that things “should” or “shouldn’t” be.  The director, Gary Ross, makes this apparent through all of the aforementioned issues.

For example, when George, the father of the family in the sitcom, returns home to find that his wife has not prepared his dinner, he is infuriated.  In a typical 1950s sitcom, the wife would have dinner prepared for her husband upon his return home from work.  Through this scene, the director wishes to establish this sense of disorder.  This collapse of gender roles is one way in which he accomplishes this goal.

Another way in which he portrays this disintegration of natural order is through sexual discovery in the previously ultra-conservative town of Pleasantville.  Before the two teenagers from the 1990s are in the town, there is no sexual activity whatsoever.  Mary Sue introduces the idea through the town when she and a boy go up to “Lover’s Lane.”  “Lover’s Lane” is a scenic, park-like place where lovers would go to hold hands.  However, once Mary Sue introduces the idea of sex, the lovers are no longer simply holding hands.

Once the members of Pleasantville have experienced this movement toward disorder, through sex or any other means, they are able to see in color.  Because the TV show is normally black and white, it is simple to see which characters have made the transformation.  They are the “colored” ones.  This also plays on the idea of racism in the 1950s.  This is especially apparent in a scene that takes place in a courtroom.  The “colored” people must sit in the balcony, while the normal people remain in the main area of the courtroom.  Instead of separation by race, there is a separation by the ability to accept change and movement away from the old societal standards.

In terms of viewers’ reactions to these aspects of the film, there are two main groups.  Some viewers believe that the meaning behind the film is very simple to comprehend, and that there is not much more to glean from it.  However, there is also a group of viewers who believe that the film offers meaningful social commentary on many issues.  This group considers the film to be more complex than the simple, surface story line may suggest.

One online poster, elric, comments:

“I would say it was simple in the sense that the metaphor wasn’t too hard to dig up and the meaning of the film was right there in your face.  It was all right there in black and white.” (http://www.thelostforum.net/viewtopic.php?t=5421)

There are several other online posters who share this similar mindset about the film.  However, there are also many people who defend Pleasantville, stating that there is more to the film than this simple plot.

On the same forum, Rawhide writes:

“Yeah, I didn't think it was simplistic either. I mean, there's the clear parallel to the discrimination of the "people of color" in the movie and the same kind of discrimination that black people in America went through in the 50's and 60's. It really is a metaphor for the way American media in the 50's and 60's portrayed life in America as being pure and wholesome and all good when behind the scenes the truth was darker and more chaotic.” (http://www.thelostforum.net/viewtopic.php?t=5421)

Another poster who belongs to this group is a teacher who keeps a blog about works of art and literature.  His post about Pleasantville mentions the issue of this natural movement towards chaos.

Teacherrefpoet writes:

“The key conflict is between those who want to stay innocent (black-and-white) and those who want to move on to a sadder-but-wiser view (color).” (http://teacherrefpoet.blogspot.com/2006/05/movie-discussion-club-post-1.html)

These are the two most prevalent groups of online posters.  Their opinions differ immensely, and there is often argument about whether the film is worthwhile or not.  Roger Ebert, a famous movie critic has a more positive outlook on the film.  Instead of a movement towards chaos, he believes that the film portrays the movement out of the past and into a new, blissful world.

He describes this view:

"Pleasantville" is the kind of parable that encourages us to re-evaluate the good old days and take a fresh look at the new world we so easily dismiss as decadent. Yes, we have more problems. But also more solutions, more opportunities and more freedom. I grew up in the '50s. It was a lot more like the world of "Pleasantville" than you might imagine. Yes, my house had a picket fence, and dinner was always on the table at a quarter to six, but things were wrong that I didn't even know the words for. There is a scene in this movie where it rains for the first time. Of course it never rained in 1950s sitcoms. Pleasantville's people in color go outside and just stand in it.” (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19981001/REVIEWS/810010301/1023)

His opinion is especially interesting from an anthropological standpoint, because he states that he was a child of the 1950s.  He also notes the similarities between the world that Pleasantville portrays and the typical setting of a 1950s sitcom.  Below is a clip from Leave it to Beaver, a typical 1950s sitcom.  It is very similar to the world that Gary Ross portrays in Pleasantville.

The overall experience of Pleasantville relays a specific philosophy to viewers.  It focuses on the idea that society naturally changes.  There is no set order or way that everything must be.  The references to the typical 1950s sitcom may also seem exaggerated.  However, as Roger Ebert says, they are not too far from reality.  Pleasantville is also successful in demonstrating how this change is not necessarily positive or negative.  The film begins and ends with the 1990s as the setting.  Therefore, viewers are able to see the positive and negative aspects of both modern society and the society of the 1950s.  The film does not argue that one is inherently “better” than the other.  It simply highlights the differences and shows that there is no way to stop this natural movement towards chaos and change.

Forums and blogs consulted:

http://www.thelostforum.net/viewtopic.php?t=5421

http://www.theabeforum.com/view_topic.php?id=369&forum_id=2&jump_to=6197

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/362059-what-did-you-think-pleasantville.html

http://teacherrefpoet.blogspot.com/2006/05/movie-discussion-club-post-1.html

3. ANALYSIS

As the ethnographic research showed, Pleasantville is a film that addresses many social issues through several different mediums.  The film explores gender roles, racism, sexual promiscuity, political conservatism and liberalism, and many other aspects of a society.  It is interesting to observe different viewers’ reactions to the film.  For example, Roger Ebert’s reaction to the film is much different than the forum posters’ reactions.  He has a much more positive take on the philosophy behind the film.  Although the exact age of the forum posters is unknown, it is not likely that they all grew up in the 1950s.  The majority of Internet users do not fall in this age range.  Therefore, it is interesting to contrast the younger generations’ reactions to the film with those of the older generation.  The teacher, who made the blog post about Pleasantville, had reactions similar to Roger Ebert’s, but vastly different from those of the forum posters.  It is also important to take into account that the forum posters are summarizing their opinion into a quick sentence or two, whereas Roger Ebert and the teacher are writing in-depth reviews.

Gary Ross shapes the philosophy seamlessly into his film.  He incorporates so many societal issues into this one piece.  One of the most powerful scenes is when Mary Sue tells her mother about sex and masturbation.  Although the audience does not hear the description, the scene is especially effective in advancing the philosophy behind the film.  The notion that a daughter would explain these things to a mother is so radically different than anything that would happen in our reality.

There are numerous minor examples and details that supplement the philosophy, as well.  For example, the town is fascinated when the mattress store begins to sell a mattress that is big enough for two people.  When the basketball team loses its first game, the people are in shock.  At the end of the film, the first color television sets begin to appear in stores.  This event is also crucial, because it marks the transition.  At first, when changes started occurring, the people of the town did not want to acknowledge what was happening.  Betty, Bud’s mother, even attempted to wear black and white make-up to hide the fact that she was “colored” from her husband.  The point when color television sets appear in the stores illustrates the fact that the people have finally accepted this change.

Bill Johnson, played by Jeff Daniels, also has a very interesting role in advancing this philosophy of change.  He owns a soda shop in the town, and Bud works there.  One day, Bud is late for work, and Bill is confused about what to do.  When Bud arrives, Bill tells him that he didn’t know what to do, because things weren’t going the way they “normally” would.  Through the course of the film, Bill Johnson’s character develops.  Although at first he is one of the most steadfast opponents of change, he grows to accept and love this change.

Director Gary Ross stated in an interview:

“This movie is about the fact that personal repression gives rise to larger political oppression.  That when we're afraid of certain things in ourselves or we're afraid of change, we project those fears on to other things, and a lot of very ugly social situations can develop.”
(http://www.imdb.com/reviews/149/14904.html)

Ross’s idea of “repression” is apparent through several characters in the film.  The most obvious example is the aforementioned Bill Johnson.  Bill owns the soda shop, but this is not the thing he most enjoys.  Because he represses his own desires to conform to society, he abandons the thing that he really loves, painting.  As the film progresses, Bill Johnson becomes conscious of the fact that he can paint whenever he so chooses.  He begins painting more and more, and he experiments with color.  His character represents an eradication of repression.  Similarly, when Mary Sue tells Betty about sex and masturbation, Betty is curious.  She is also open to these ideas of change.  Normally in Pleasantville, it would be unacceptable for a woman to take this kind of action or think so liberally.  However, Betty is one of the first characters to realize the harmful nature of this repression of one’s feelings.  The mayor of Pleasantville is the most unreceptive to the change.  In the courtroom scene, he is outraged when people admit that the change could be for the better.  Eventually, Bud changes him against his will, and he is able to see in color.  This scene represents the notion that a person can fight against change, but change remains inevitable.

Through character and plot development, Ross demonstrates how a society reacts to change.  There are those who are reluctant at first, those who enjoy the excitement, and those who are strongly opposed to any form of change.  All of these reactions to societal change are interesting from an anthropological standpoint, because one can study what motivates a person to react in a certain way.  Ross develops all three types of these characters, and viewers are able to see how they interact with one another.  Pleasantville successfully shows how people react to change, how they interact with one another during the change, and that change is inevitable.