Thought-provoking essay in Salon. Does “God” in Bruce Almighty count?
A lot of the parts played by Morgan Freeman count.
That isn’t the first reference I’ve heard to the cliche, but I can’t remember where I first heard it. And the Matrix is the only film I can think of that has two ‘magical negros’ in it.
I’ve heard about this before.
I don’t think Laurence Fishburne in The Matrix counts as one. In the first place, the movie is filled with a.) Black People and b.) Magic People. Morpheus really isn’t that different from everyone else, except that he’s the Leader and expositor. And, as several folks have remarked, he didn’t do the one thing that the “Magic Negro” is supposed to do – he didn’t die tragically, but remained through both sequels.
I haven’t see The Legend of Bagger Vance, but that case arguably doesn’t fitt, either. Jeremy Leven (writer on Creator, one of my favorite odd SF films) was pretty clearly updating the Bhagavad Gita (the title is a dead giveaway), and Will Smith’s character is clearly the same as the disguised Krishna under the name Bhagavan. Bhagavan is a lower-class servant type who occupies the same social standing that blacks did in the time period the film is set in. It’s a perfect translation of types. you could argue that the original Bhagavad Gita was the original “magical negro” story, and that Leven was simply doing too good a job in translating it to modern times, or that maybe this wasn’t a good time to make that film. In any event, i don’t think this was a cheap attempt to use an offensive dramatic cliche, but a clever way to update a classic. YMMV.
I’m annoyed to see this bit of analysis in the essay:
There was (among Democrats, at least) a widespread sense that replacing George W. Bush with the Illinois senator would send a definitive signal that everything was different now, that it was time to rebuild, repair, rejuvenate and move forward, not just toward a post-Bush society, but a post-racial one.
I read enough references to Obama as the Magic Negro from Republicans in 2008, and it’s no better in 2010. The notion that people were voting for Obama because of his race was annoying then and still is. There may have been some feeling overseas that having a minority president in America was significant, but not so much here.
As for the general notion of the Magic Negro, I see it as a variation of the exotic sage character. Forty years ago, the character might have been an oriental, Indian, or native American – but it’s a archetypal literary device.
However, using any ethnic group in that role has problems today, and particularly using American blacks since their history is better known than, say, a Tibetan’s.
I haven’t seen Bagger Vance, but the notion of a black man being more concerned with a white man’s golf game than the racial repression of the early 20th century seems inherently repulsive.
On the other hand, having a mystical black maintenance man in The Hudsucker Proxy seems like no big deal. It could have worked with a Caucasian, altho a bit of physical deformity might have helped 
But not the Shawshank Redemption. There, Freeman is the protagonist, and Tim Robbins is the Magical White Dude.
I still remember reading the comments by Spike Lee that made the term well known. It’s one of those cliches that you kind of see everywhere once it’s pointed out to you.
Regarding Fishburne as Morpheus in The Matrix – there’s no way that the Wachovsky brothers could have avoided being vilified for their use of black people. What are the alternatives?
1.) Use a white guy (or an Asian guy) as Morpheus. You open yourself to the criticism that you have black people in the film, but they’re only there as 'window dressing" You haven’t given them any substantial roles. the important parts all go to white dudes.
2.) Don’t have any black people at all in the film. Now you’ll be criticized for doing what star wars did in 1977 – practically ignoring black people. and even Lucas fixed that by putting in Lando Calrissian in the second film.
The Wachovsky bothers made one of the main characters black, but he’s not the only important black character. He’s magic, but he’s not really more magic than anyone else – everyone has capabilities in the Matrix. He’s more practiced than most, but they all have the potential, and the agents are superior to his ability, and New eventually achieves more.
i recall seeing something o TV or video that showed several people – most of them black – saying that as they watched The Matrix they saw Fishburne’s character as a typical “Magic Negro”, and they were waiting to see him snuffed, since that’s what always happened to the MN. They were sure that he would buy it duering the Rescue Sequence.
Only he didn’t. That surprised all of them.
How much more do you have to do to say that you haven’t got the cliche of the Magic Negro? What could the Wachovsky brothers have done to have avoided either accusations of Magic Negroism or alternative criticisms of Token Negros or Lily White Future? Even if they had made Neo himself black, I’m not convinced that someone wouldn’t find something to complain about.
That’s not what the author says. He says people had unrealistic ideas (“an absurd hope”) about what electing Obama might mean for society.
You’ve got to be kidding.
Right. And I’m not sure about the inclusion of the railroad man in Oh Brother, Where Art Thou? on the Wikipedia list. He’s black and he has some level of mystical insight but the cliche is more involved than that. Besides, the story is a loose update of the Odyssey - of course there’s going to be some prophesying. And another vote that Morpheus doesn’t fit the cliche. This is the downside to what I said about noticing the type everywhere: it really exists, but not every black character with magic powers is a Magic Negro.
Red the narrator but he’s not the protagonist.
I disagree, although the point can be argued.
Look at it this way: the name of the movie is “the Shawshank Redemption”. Who is redeemed at the end?
Not kidding about people “overseas” attaching more significance to Obama’s race than (white) Americans did. No proof, but generally issues seem more black/white the less you know about them.
And as for what the author was “saying,” this was my quote from the essay:
There was (among Democrats, at least) a widespread sense that replacing George W. Bush with the Illinois senator would send a definitive signal that everything was different now, that it was time to rebuild, repair, rejuvenate and move forward, not just toward a post-Bush society, but a post-racial one.
I still call bullshit. The author is implying that Caucasian democrats voted for Obama because of his race. That the Magic Negro would bring wisdom and make everything better.
That was the point of that paragraph in the essay, right?
I’m not buying it. Among the people I know, and the posts I read on the Dope, the feeling that things would be dramatically different came from
- Obama was not GWBush (of the torture and wars of agression.)
- Obama was the best speaker/speech writer to run for president in decades.
- Obama seemed to have a talent for bridge building.
The last item was related to his multi-racial upbringing, but I saw very little hope among (white) democrats for a Magic Negro.
Maybe that’s why there aren’t many (any?) black actors in Harry Potter - they’d all be magical negros.
Both major characters, arguably. imdb puts it this way: “Two imprisoned men bond over a number of years, finding solace and eventual redemption through acts of common decency.” (remember, Andy Dufresne was not a very nice guy at the beginning of the book/movie).
The character of Red in the Stephen King story is obviously white, by the way. Gaining the respect (and even awe) of a Magic Negro Red is part of what gives Andy Dufresne his own magical character in the movie.
A current prominent example of the Magic Negro is the guy who shills for Allstate.
Whenever you get into this you almost have to go back to The Green Pastures (1936). Basically an all-black version of the later “The Bible in the Beginning” it is at once both fantastic art and horribly racist and the African-American influence basically was just on the screen; it was a White interpretation of what a God and Heaven would be like to Blacks. Much of what we see in African-American portrayals of “God” on screen can be traced back to this film IMHO
The trailer of the film is on IMDB at
and much of the film can be found at YouTube
This is just a variation on a very old trope in US literature: the nonwhite friend of the hero. You can see it in Jim in Huckelberry Finn and Chingachgook form Last of the Mohicans. Chingachgook also has some superhuman abilities for things like tracking enemies.
Some of this sounds to be people finding “racism” where it doesn’t exist. Not to derail the thread, but Spike Lee is obviously a race baiter. It’s like CalMeacham said in his post - no matter what you do, some people will call it racist.
It’s like saying there is a conspiracy behind the number 5. 2+3=5, so any combination of 2 and 3 is part of the conspiracy. Thing is, with the proper mathematical finagling, 2 and 3 will give you ANY number you want. Same thing here - if no black people are in the film, it’s racist. If ANY black people are in the film, it’s racist. If ONLY black people are in the film, it’s racist.
I’ve always seen the MN used in modern horror films whenever something supernatural needs exposition. It isn’t always a black person. Depending on the location of the setting or culture of the monster/horror, the appropriate ethnicity is employed. If the protagonists are being stalked by a chupacabra, it will be Jose the Gardener who provides the legendary back story. If it’s a voo-doo threat, it will be the Jamaican maid letting us know that the curse can only be broken by finding the Macguffin. The MN could even be a white guy if he’s the local farmer who warns us to look out for werewolves and what to do about it after the inevitable werewolf encounter. Basically, the MN is used whenever you need to provide the facts to the ignorant protagonists/audience. The ethnicity provides “expertise” on the subject. It’s racist to varying degrees, sure. But it’s born from the laziness of screen writers.
Every time I hear or read the term Magical Negro, I have the urge to slap both Spike Lee and Rush Limbaugh.
The obvious conclusion from this film is that black folk do not make good batteries.
I don’t need any kind of signal to incite that desire…
I have to disagree. The election of a black president was a huge story. I’m not saying it was a big deal to every single white person but it was a big deal. I have no idea how people felt about it overseas. (I do know that some people responded they were surprised Americans elected a black man, but that only proved they weren’t following the polls.)
And I still think that at best, you’re very much oversimplifying what he wrote. He is talking about how people viewed Obama’s candidacy and election, not the reasons they voted for him.