How “Get Out” Exposes the Evolution of Oppression

How “Get Out” Exposes the Evolution of Oppression in America

LADY GABRIELLE ASHONG

On February 26th 2012, Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old African American boy, was killed by George Zimmerman. Zimmerman used the defence that “this guy looks like he is up to no good, on drugs or something” (“Trayvon Martin Shooting Fast Facts”). The unarmed teenager was brutally shot and he died because of his appearance. Although not as blatant as strict segregation rules or human zoos, in modern American society, institutionalized ideas of otherness continue to cause epistemic violence and prejudice. Epistemic violence is defined by Kwame Appiah, a British-Ghanaian philosopher, as a violence manifested through knowledge (Appiah 186). Cases such as Trayvon’s display how latent labels of culture are so deeply embedded into the American liberal subconscious that it can conjure prejudicial thinking and feelings of threat. As a result, despite the abolition of slavery in 1865 and the victories of the civil rights movements 100 years later, American liberalism is not post-racial. According to Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries, American liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before law (“Liberalism”). Whilst American liberals believe in a utopic equal American society, the reality is that racism continues to exist in an evolved, more inconspicuous form built on the fear of the “other”, groups of people who do not fit into the white liberal framework. Get Out is an American social thriller directed by Jordan Peele which introduces the complex discussions of race relations in 21st century America. The movie is based on a protagonist Chris Washington (played by Daniel Kaluuya), a black man in an interracial relationship with Rose Armitage (played by Allison Williams). The couple decides to visit the Armitage home for the weekend and though initially, all appears friendly and calm, something sinister lurks behind the façade of the smiles and tea. The first half of the film displays white liberals attempting to understand black culture through a microscopic lens. However, the second half of the movie takes an unexpected turn as we

are led into a trap of control, greed and manipulation. Get Out deconstructs American liberalism, displaying it as part of a history of racism in America which continues to subordinate African Americans. However, Get Out also portrays a more powerful and unconventional story of the “other”, Chris, not being constrained by victimhood. Within this essay, I will decipher how Get Out explores the intricacies of racial discourse, ignorance and victimization which have led to the present social state of liberal America and the fear of otherness.

Images formed by the media and white liberalism cause black Americans to be viewed as “others” in western society. Director Jordan Peele explores this constructed ideology in Get Out by using his protagonist, Chris, as a symbol of physical objectification. For example, forms of appropriation are immediately unveiled during Chris’s encounter with the Armitage family a few minutes into the screening. The father (Dean Armitage) claims, in his first encounter with Chris, that “some people want to be faster, stronger, cooler” and goes on to describe these allegedly black features as “principle advantages you have enjoyed your whole life”. As a result, in this narration Peele highlights the superficial and minutely limited understanding of black people the Armitage family and, by extension, white American liberals have. In particular, the preconceived notion of the black appearance being an “advantage” is astonishing seeing that, particularly in America, black men are more likely to be racially profiled than any other group (Lockhart). Peele demonstrates this in the introductory scene where Chris is stopped by the white police officer because of a minuscule problem with his tailgate. While Chris complies with the officer’s orders, his white girlfriend raises her voice and attempts to argue with the officer. This is the reality of the black experience the Armitage family overlooks. As a result, Peele is attempting to use the Armitage family as a metaphor for how white liberals tend to overlook the black struggle, only wanting the benefits of the black identity without the experience. Furthermore, in the encounter between Chris, the officer and Rose, it is clear that Rose is unaware of her privilege. Her privilege is so blinding that she is unable to sense the danger Chris potentially places himself in if he fails to comply with the law. Obliviously, she states “you don’t have to give him your ID because you haven’t done anything wrong”, completely forgetting the unofficial power dynamics which exist in America — her position as a white

woman addressing the cop, in comparison to Chris, is socially superior. By subconsciously establishing social constructs such as power dynamics and objectification, Peele highlights how the Armitage family are a derivative of unofficial white supremacy as they do not recognize their privilege within their middle-class context.

Edward Said’s analysis of ‘Otherness’ in Orientalism is also helpful to understand the magnitude and complexity of racism in modern American society. As displayed by the character of Chris, ideas of the ‘other’ are so deeply institutionalized and systematic that fascination instead of understanding engulfs members of the American liberal society. To understand this intricate relationship between othering and epistemic violence, Said tackles the idea of latent and manifest Orientalism to determine the root of the discourse of Orientals. For Said, latent orientalism is an unconscious thinking of the Orient whilst manifest orientalism is the stated views of the Orient. Colonial supremacy historically defined cultural differences unbeknownst to their own as “degenerate, uncivilized and retarded” (Said 206). Therefore, this patronizing western perspective of the ‘other’ is argued by Said to have always existed in a “framework constructed out of biological determinism and moralpolitical admonishment” (Said 208). Said’s description of ‘framework’ captures how restricted Western understanding of the Eastern world can be. Like Chris, Western perceptions of the Eastern world have become so polarized by art, media and discourse that people become objectified by their culture instead of being understood as individuals. As Said highlights, the Western world “rarely” saw or “looked at” the Orientals, instead “they were seen through, analysed not as citizens, or even people but as problems to be solved or confined...and taken over” (Said 208). The description of a framework consequently displays the struggle white liberals have in understanding the “other” past a specific image. In Get Out, Peele displays how this framework is so strong that even well-meaning individuals have trouble escaping it. This mental framework of othering, as displayed by white liberals in Get Out, can further be understood as a manifestation of essentialism. Kwame Appiah’s The Lies that Bind highlights essentialism as the belief of people having a set of characteristics which makes them what they are. Appiah’s argument of essentialism is that humans are not only set in their ways of thinking but that these thoughts can become concrete

and accepted as a universal truth, especially if it is a negative claim about a group (119). Therefore, does essentialism mean that preventing prejudice in white American liberal society is impossible because subconscious thoughts are innate? Furthermore, does essentialism justify the ignorance of the Armitage family? This is a point of ambiguity in Said’s book.

Moreover, Said’s exploration of Western prejudice of the East is similar to the prejudicial framework the Armitages’ use to analyse Chris. In Orientalism, Said strengthens his arguments about the western prejudicial thinking of the Eastern world by highlighting social and psychological influences as the causes of epistemic violence. Due to essentialism, it is possible that many members of the Westernized world did not choose to view the Eastern world as others but were conditioned to do so. Said highlights that latent and manifest orientalism created the understanding of Orientals as being “backwards, isolated, stagnant and mysterious people” (Said 206). Said defines latent Orientalism as an unconscious perception of the orient and manifest Orientalism as the more visible displays. Examples of these forms of manifest Orientalism include paintings and writings by novelists which display recurring images of sensual women, bearded men and sparse deserts. Therefore, if members of the Western world have only been educated by this discourse of the East, their ignorance seems inevitable. Peele displays this idea of essentialism in Get Out by showing that the Armitage family are already hard-wired with a particular image of Chris. Therefore, though Chris is being praised for his physical “advantages”, these perspectives, whether positive or negative, stem from the discourse created by the latent and manifesting portrayal of African Americans . By highlighting the stereotypes that the Armitage family make in their speech and behaviour with Chris, Peele displays how generalizations of one individual are used by white liberals to singularly categorize African Americans. As a result, instead of learning about the individual, American liberals are blinded by a preconceived ignorant understanding of the individual’s group. The ignorance of American Liberals to the black identity is the exact flaw Peele captures in Get Out.

Peele also conveys the various forms of appropriation in America, which alienates marginalized groups, to deconstruct racism for liberal white

America. For this essay, I will define appropriation as the misunderstanding and misrepresentation of culture. Appropriation is explored in Get Out as stemming from morbid fascination and ignorance of American liberalism; it is displayed in lingo and actions used between encounters with Chris and the Armitage family. This idea of fascination also complicates Said’s analysis as it depicts otherness as not only being a symbol of fear, as suggested in Orientalism, but one of intrigue. Although the Armitage family believes using racially stereotypical phrases allows inclusivity, it causes further isolation for Chris. By using these racial interactions, Peele intrinsically explores racism by boldly highlighting examples of manifest appropriation. One form of this manifestation is the dining room scene half way through the film which captures the Armitage family enjoying their dinner. Chris sits next to Rose whilst the rest of the Armitage family sit on the opposite side of the table. The brother, Jeremy, says “if you pushed your body, you would be a fucking beast”. Other examples of appropriation include Chris’s interactions with Rose’s father, Dean. Dean uses phrases such as “thang”, “I would have voted for Obama for the third time” and “my man”. These forms of vocal appropriation display how American liberal society continues to use ignorant and artificial interactions to incorrectly understand and accept black Americans. As a result, Peele is suggesting that there is rarely a genuine understanding between liberal America and African Americans.

Furthermore, appropriation is seen in Get Out as casting out black Americans from the American Nation. Liberal Americans most likely do not understand their privilege or racial inequalities because their perceptions are both biased by a superficial understanding of the other and their patriotic nationalism. Steven Elliott Grosby, a professor at Clemson University, presents the causes and issues of patriarchy in Nationalism by highlighting how a nation can be a “collective consciousness” but differ on an individual basis (Grosby 119). A nation is not a “colony of ants” but “social relation of several individuals as a consequence of those individuals participating in the same evolving tradition” (Grosby 119). Like Peele, Grosby explores the idea that nationality does not automatically grant one all of the benefits of their nation. American nationalism is built on the foundations of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. However, this is a myth which applies to only a small group of predominantly

white, middle-class men and women. The treatment of othering of Chris in Get Out highlights how alienated he is in his nation. The values of what America believes of its nation is a paradox to how the citizens of the nation are treated. Grosby’s analysis of the patriotic bias highlights why liberal America believes in a fabricated form of equality. As suggested by Grosby, the principles of a nation are actually “the conception that one has of oneself” (132). Liberal Americans have a romanticized relationship with their nation which critically hinders their ability to escape their conditions and see from the perspective of subordinate groups who are excluded from their nation’s benefits. Although Nationalism and Orientalism both provide key evidence for the subordination of the “Other” in the Western world, they fail to depict the other as existing beyond a state of victimhood. Said depicts the Orientals, from the perspective of the Western world, as an “outsider and weak partner of the west” (Said 209) whilst Grosby states that “The layer that represents recognition...may or may not coincide with the recognition that one is a citizen of the political and legal relation of the state” (Grosby 221). Said’s claims of a static American liberal society suggest that the others are also constrained in an unchanging position of victimization. In comparison, Grosby displays how the other can remain subordinate in a nation despite being a citizen. However, Peele complicates their analysis of the subordinate other’s social position by highlighting how Chris evolves from victimization to social triumph. To emancipate himself from his enslavement, Chris uses the tools which were initially used by the white elites to enslave him. For example, he kills Jeremy with a bocce ball, an object associated with white middle-class privilege. Chris also saves himself by picking cotton, a powerful depiction of how African Americans can assert their own identity with elements which were historically used to oppress their ancestors. Peele demonstrates that for African Americans to avoid social enslavement and most importantly, to save themselves from victimization in a static liberal society, they must fight the countless barriers of American liberalism. As a result, whilst Said suggests that social change is impossible because of the “mental framework” of liberal America (207), Peele shows that it is possible for African Americans to overcome oppression. Peele displays that the African American position in liberal America should not be portrayed as a cyclical system of oppression and victimhood. As a result, Peele

challenges the conventional helpless image of the “Other” by making Chris a survivor and a symbol of resilience.

In conclusion, Get Out asserts that racism continues to thrive under the veneer of white American liberalism. Ultimately, the ending scenes of “Get Out” are the most important part of Peele’s aim of punching the message of American liberal racism to the audience. In the last act, Chris (a black man) lies on top of Rose’s bloody body as a police car approaches in the distance. This is perhaps the highest point of tension in the thriller because the audience knows how this set up looks in the eyes of white America. For a moment, we are heartbroken as we know that Chris would be unquestionably imprisoned if a white cop steps out of the car. Although this was Peele’s original idea, he chose to have an alternate happy ending and rightly so. Peele uses this ending to empower his African American audience members by pausing their feelings of hardship and subordination in American liberal society. This pause is Peele’s attempt to encourage African Americans to use resilience to escape victimhood in liberal white America. In all, the true thriller of “Get Out” is not the attempted forceful enslavement, but the American system. The irony of Get Out is that by highlighting the stagnancy, ignorance and weaknesses of white liberals, Peele makes American society become the Other.

WORKS CITED

Appiah, Kwame Anthony. “Chapter 6.” The Lies That Bind: Rethinking Identity.

New York, Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018, pp. 119–186.

Get Out. Directed by Jordan Peele, performances by Daniel Kaluuya, Allison

Williams and Bradley Whitford, Universal Pictures, 2017.

Grosby, Steven Elliot. Nationalism: a very short introduction. Oxford, New York,

Oxford University Press, 2005.

Lockhart, P.R. “Living While Black and the criminalization of blackness.” Vox, 1

Aug. 2018, www.vox.com/explainers/2018/8/1/17616528/racial-profilingpolice-911-living-while-black.

“Liberalism.” Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries, Oxford University Press, 2021, https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/liberalism. Accessed 25 May 2021.

Said, Edward W. Orientalism. London, Penguin Books, 2019.

“Trayvon Martin Shooting Fast Facts: CNN Editorial Research.” CNN, 11 June 2012, edition.cnn.com/2013/06/05/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-fastfacts/index.html.