By Independent Lens Staff
The sixth episode of the short docuseries History of White People in America is in the format of a catchy musical, but for a purpose: to tell the story of the arbitrary system of race in the United States—a system that has kept people who were not white in an ongoing battle of identity. You might find yourself humming along to the ear-wormy tune “Race Roulette,” before even realizing it’s about a biased court system spawned by the 18th-century Naturalization Act. This legislation set the standard for citizenship in America and remained law until the 20th century.
Filmmakers Ed Bell, Clementine Briand, Pierce Freelon, Jonathan Halperin, Aaron Keane, and Drew Takahashi talked to us about why they chose to tell this story in a musical, animated style, why it necessitated using startling, racially stereotypical imagery, and what every American can learn from watching this short documentary.
Why tell the complicated history of American citizenship in a four-minute animated musical?
It isn’t easy to distill complex ideas that took place over long periods into short films, but extreme distillation can be a powerful form of storytelling. We began by examining today’s civic conversations to identify which aspects of history [would work] in short form that could add context and help advance those discussions. As America enters a new era of populism and nativism, we sought to address these issues by uncovering their historical roots.
Our goal was to illuminate those origins and the many individuals and movements responsible for shaping the ideas, messages, and images that underpin what we see today. By holding up a historical mirror, we show these strategies have been tried before—and if we are willing to learn from them it can inform our actions in the present.
We aim not to tell The Story of American Citizenship, but A Story. A haiku can reveal truths in just a few words. We hope our short film can do something similar.
How did you select archival material?
The racist and stereotypical depictions shown in this film, sadly, are neither rare nor difficult to uncover. These images were pervasive, appearing in newspapers, magazines, posters, and commercial art. Even a basic internet search of 19th- and early 20th-century archives reveals an overwhelming catalog of such material.
This ubiquity is a critical point we wanted viewers to grasp. A significant portion of these materials came from institutions like the Library of Congress and the British Library, with additional images sourced from organizations such as [Germany’s] Bibliographisches Institut and various state historical societies and museums.
Much of this material is in the public domain, raising a troubling possibility. As creators of modern image-generation technologies draw from these public sources, they risk perpetuating harmful stereotypes in ways we might not fully understand.
Without providing context for these images, we risk embedding them even deeper into the public consciousness for generations to come.
How did you navigate depicting racist imagery?
These films are a unique experiment in filmmaking—a collaboration between animators, producers, musicians, poets, historians, and legal scholars. Every decision is shared and made collectively. Difficult decisions, like including racist and stereotypical images, were carefully discussed and only included once we weighed the decision carefully.
Ultimately, we decided if we omitted these images, we would not be telling a truthful story. They were a common part of the civic conversation during key moments of America’s immigration and citizenship history.
Did you consult with scholars and experts?
When distilling such complex history down to a few minutes, scholars Gabriel “Jack” Chin, William A. Darity, Aaron Tang, and Dorian T. Warren, Ph.D., were invaluable. Each word in such a short film carries much weight. The experts guided us in making critical distinctions, as clarity remained a priority. They contributed to our artistic interpretation, helping us avoid visual misrepresentations.
Most importantly, their expertise enriched the collaboration by revealing blind spots and challenging our biases, enabling us to present the most accurate version of history possible. The scholars kept us honest—and the history authentic.
What do you want audiences to take away from watching this?
We hope viewers learn that the current civic conversation about immigration and naturalization does not come out of nowhere. The recent false claims of Haitian immigrants eating pets, for example, is not a new phenomenon but has a historical context. We want the audience to learn America is continuously in tension between inclusion and exclusion. That tension is, in part, what makes America.
Related Films
