Skip to main content

Those Civil Rights Glasses

Around 20 years ago - when I was a young man in my early 20s, and an avid film-goer - a curious cultural event happened - Sixties horn-rimmed glasses became cool.  A mini-genre emerged, roughly between 1988 and 1992, which, in this five year period, created some of the best American films - The Civil Rights movie.  Perhaps it starts with classic redneck vs. G-man Mississippi Burning, which features a startlingly young Willem Defoe as a buttoned-up Kennedy-boy FBI man and a brilliantly simmering Gene Hackman, in perhaps his finest role other than the French Connection films.

Defoe wears the specs here.  Then came 1991's masterwork, JFK, Oliver Stone's own conspiracy-theory Citizen Kane/Rashomon, which retells the Kennedy assassination and general 60s paranoia, from the perspective of Kevin Costner (never better), as Jim Garrison.
 
Finally, Malcolm X, with Denzel Washington, appeared in 1992, and here, Spike Lee's great biopic does not spare us the eyewear, either - those same glasses appear.  Indeed, in some circles, these are known as Malcolm X glasses.  Indeed, so cool were those glasses, that in 1993, Michael Douglas appeared with them on in Falling Down - as if to signify his bottled-up killer's debt to both the lost dignity of Kennedy-era America, and his revolutionary focus.  Again, 1992's Thunderheart borrowed the earnest FBI man motif, but set it in the 1970s, as another civil rights issue developed on the reservations; this time, great playwright Sam Shepard played the older man, and both wear sunglasses, but with a notably funky look.

Notably, characters wearing Malcolm X glasses are, to misquote Yeats, filled with passionate intensity, but don't lack conviction - they marry the action man with the man of thought - as the man under the floorboards thought was impossible.  Watching Hackman take on Brad Dourif in the cornpone barber's chair, the other night, I recalled how thrilling such films are, where a clear moral evil (Southern bigotry) collides with a clear moral good (government-protected civil rights) - a Democrat's version of the roughneck 80s actioners that were more Reagan-era in their lone wolf brutality.  Now, when the Tea Party again questions the role of "big government" we need to be reminded of the value of men in glasses.

Comments

Kiss My Art said…
Dear Todd

Although my glasses are nothing like those you've depicted, I quite enjoy being short-sighted. If I'm feeling unsociable and don't want to recognise anybody, I simply leave them off. I also think that certain women (Sarah Palin springs to mind for some reason) can look pretty sexy in spectacles!

Best wishes from Simon
Yeah, I even like having one eye much more short-sighted than the other. I think of my right eye as my Philip Larkin eye, through which I can enjoy a melancholic view of the world. I don't know whether the glasses make me look cool, though!
I like to wear different fashionable glasses. I don't think glasses depict something like being social or something. Its just a way you want to look or to see.
Julie Woodrow said…
My glasses are my safety net. Like Simon, when I am somewhere where I feel uncomfortable and self- conscious, I simply take them off and go back to my natural state, where everything is soft and fuzzy. I have always been the girl with glasses, I happen to like being that girl. While maybe not as sexy as those without specs on their face, I feel like they give me an air of intelligence that is very lacking in today's society.

Popular posts from this blog

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".

THE SWIFT REPORT 2023

I am writing this post without much enthusiasm, but with a sense of duty. This blog will be 20 years old soon, and though I rarely post here anymore, I owe it some attention. Of course in 2023, "Swift" now means one thing only, Taylor Swift, the billionaire musician. Gone are the days when I was asked if I was related to Jonathan Swift. The pre-eminent cultural Swift is now alive and TIME PERSON OF THE YEAR. There is no point in belabouring the obvious with delay: 2023 was a low-point in the low annals of human history - war, invasion, murder, in too many nations. Hate, division, the collapse of what truth is, exacerbated by advances in AI that may or may not prove apocalyptic, while global warming still seems to threaten the near-future safety of humanity. It's been deeply depressing. The world lost some wonderful poets, actors, musicians, and writers this year, as it often does. Two people I knew and admired greatly, Ian Ferrier and Kevin Higgins, poets and organise