half nelson and dialectics

James Trier 21

Foryears,IhavebeenwritingaboutwhatIcall“schoolfilms,”whichIdefineasfilmsthatareinsomeway,evenincidentally,aboutateacherorastudent.Mostofthefilmsthatcomprisetheschoolfilmgenrearesetinthesuburbs(orsometimesinsmalltowns)andfeaturemiddleanduppermiddleclassWhitestudentsasthemaincharacters.Inthesefilms,teachersaretypicallyveryminorcharacters(usuallycomicalfigures),ifanyteachersappearatall.AsIhaveexplainedelsewhere(Trier,2001),thesesuburbanschoolfilmsareverydiverseintermsofgenre,rangingfromlight-heartedromances(Pretty in Pink),fluffcomedies(Clueless),Pygmalionstories(She’s All That),cultclassics(I Was a Teenage Werewolf),celebratoryyouth-rebellionmovies (Pump Up the Volume, Dazed and Confused),supernaturalthrillers(Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Carrie),sci-fitales (Disturbing Behavior, The Faculty),dark-humorcomedies(Heathers, Pretty Persuasion),spoofs(High School, Not Another Teenage Movie),andafewseriousaccountsofviolencecommittedinschools(Elephant). Theothermainsubgenreofschoolfilms,comprisedoffarfewerfilmsthanthesuburbanschoolfilmsubgenre,featuresaneducatorinthemainrole.Thoughafewfilmshavebeenmadeaboutprincipals—themostpopularofwhichisLean on Me—mostofthesefilmsareaboutteachers.Andamongthesefilms,mostareaboutteacherswhoworkininnercityschools(blockbusterexceptionsareMr. Holland’s Opus and Dead Poets Society,whichtakeplace,respectively,inasuburbanhighschoolandaprivateschoolcateringtoWhitestudentsfromwealthyfamilies).Theclassicsofthissubgenreofinnercityschoolfilmsabout

Half Nelsonand Dialectics

James TrierUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Journal of Thought, Fall-Winter 2010

Half Nelson and Dialectics22

teachers are Blackboard Jungle; To Sir, with Love; and Up the Down Staircase.Blockbustersfromthe1980sand1990sincludeStand and Deliver and Dangerous Minds.Andthemostrecentpopularadditiontothis subgenre is Freedom Writers. Alloftheseinnercityfilmsthatfeatureateacheroraprincipalasthemaincharacterareseriousdramasinwhichtheeducatorsstruggletosavetheirinnercityminoritystudentsfromthedangersanddead-endsoftheirlives(foradeeperanalysisofthiskindofschoolfilm,seeTrier,2005).Andinthesefilms,theeducatorsalwayssucceed,whichhascausedsuchfilmstobereferredtoas“teachersavior”filmsbyaca-demicswhohavewrittenaboutsuchfilms(e.g.,Ayers,1994;Dalton,1999;Edelman,1990;Farber&Holm,1994;andPaul,2001). Inthisarticle,IwilldiscusstheindependentfilmHalf Nelson(2006).Specifically,Iwillanalyzethefilm’srepresentationoftheteacherintermsoftwomainclichésofthe“teachersavior”film.First,Iwillexplorethe way Half Nelsonradicallydepartsfromtheclichéoftheahistorical cinematiceducatorswhoappearintheteachersaviorgenre.Then,Iturnmydiscussiontotheothermainclichéthatthefilmpartiallysubverts,which is that Half Nelsondoesnotofferaone-dimensionalrepresenta-tionofaneducatorwhoisanunquestionablefigureofmoralauthority,whichisthecaseinallsuch“teachersavior”films. ItisessentialtostateattheoutsetthatIhaveconceptualizedthisarticletobeonethatcanbetakenupasanintroductorytextthatmightinitiateapedagogicalprojectdesignedtoengagereaders1 either in devel-opingadeeperanalysisofHalf Nelsonitself,orinanalyzingHalf Nelson inrelationtootherteachersaviorfilms.ThemaineffectofthisdecisionisthatIhavenecessarilyavoidedincluding“spoilers”(i.e.,plotandcharacterelementsthat,ifdivulged,wouldspoiltheviewingpleasureforsomeonewhohasnotseenafilm),whichmeansIhaveleftmuchtobeexploredinthefilm.2However,inmyconclusion,IsuggestsomepotentialdiscussiontopicsthataredesignedtofocusattentiononplotandcharacterelementsthatInecessarilyhavenotexploredinmyanalysis. Itisalsoessentialtoarticulatethetheoryof“reading”(interpreta-tion)thatshapesmydiscussionsofthefilms.IamtakingupStuartHall’s(1980)theoryofpreferred,negotiated,andoppositionalreadings.Hall’stheorypositsthatpopularculturetexts(andmostothertexts)are encoded to bringabout certainmeanings and simultaneously toclose off othermeanings through the text’s presences and absences(orsilences).Anarguablysimpleexplanationofpreferred,negotiated,and oppositional readings goes like this:A preferred reading is onethatsees(interprets,understands)atextasthetextseesitselfandasthetextwantstobeseen.Anegotiatedreadingisonethatrecognizes

James Trier 23

contradictoryelementsinatext,thatdoesnotacceptalltheelementsthatfitapreferredreading,thatmightreadsomeelementsinanop-positionalway,butthatdoesnotreadinatotallyoppositionalway.Anoppositionalreadingisonethatrejectsmostorallofwhatapreferredreadingaccepts,resultinginareadingthatcanindeed“readthesigns”but refuses to follow their direction. Aswillbeseen,whereasIenactanoppositionalreadingofanim-portantscenefromthefilmLean on Me,IengageinpreferredreadingsofselectedscenesfromHalf Nelsoninordertodevelopmyargumentthat Half Nelsonsubvertstwomainclichésoftheteacherheroschoolfilm.However, I recognizehow those elements that Inecessarilydonotexplorehavethepotentialtogeneratenegotiatedandoppositionalreadingsaboutcertainimportantaspectsofthefilm.Myrecognitionofthisisembeddedinthediscussionquestionsandtopicsthatappearintheconclusion,whicharelikelytoengagereadersinactivatinganarrayofpreferred,negotiated,andoppositionalreadingsofvariousscenes,orofthetotalityofthefilmitself.

The Song Remains the Same (Or Does It?) Half Nelson(2006)isafilmaboutapopular,young,WhiteteachernamedDanDunne,whohasbeenteachingeighth-gradehistoryforatleastsixyearsatajuniorhighinBrooklyn,NewYork.Danisalsothecoachofthegirl’sbasketballteam.Danhasapassionforteachingandhecaresdeeplyabouthisstudents(mostofwhomareAfricanAmeri-cans),andheformsaspecialrelationshipwithoneofhisstudents,athirteen-year-oldgirlnamedDrey(shortforAudrey).Dreyliveswithhermother,anoverworkedparamedicwhoisoftenassigneddouble-shiftsthatforcehertoworkevenlongerhoursthanherusuallylongshifts,soDreyisessentiallyalatch-keykidwhoheatsupherdinnerinthemicrowaveandwatchesTValoneuntilhermothercomeshome(sometimesverylate,withDreyasleeponthecouch,theTVstillon).Drey’sfatherlivessomewhereinthecitybuthenevercomesaround.Hedoesn’tappearinthefilm,thoughDrey’smotherchastiseshimoverthephone(asDreyoverhears)forneverpickingDreyupfromschoolorbeingapartofherlife.Drey’sbrother,Mike,isinjailforsellingdrugsforaneighborhooddrugdealernamedFrank.BecauseMikedidnotgiveupFranktothepolice,Frank(young,handsome,andcharismatic)providesDreyandMike’smotherwithmoneynowandthentohelpoutthefamilyeconomically(themoneyalwayspassesfromFranktoDreywhentheycrosspathsintheneighborhood).Frank,though,alsohasdesignsonDrey,hopingtolureherintobecomingadrugdelivererand


eventuallyadealer, likeherbrother.ThoughDreycancertainlyseesomeofthedangersandconsequencesinherentingoingdownsuchapath,sheisstilljustthirteen,sosheneedssomeonewhocanlookoutforher.Unfortunately,Drey’smother isn’t fully aware ofhowoftenFrankandDreyseeoneanother,norissheawareofFrank’sgrowinginfluenceoverDrey.Drey’steacher,DanDunne,however,eventuallydoesbecomeawareofthedangerthatFrankposesforDrey,andonemainstorylineofHalf NelsonisDan’sstruggletopreventDreyfromcomingfullyunderFranks’seductiveinfluence. If this summaryencapsulatedall thatHalf Nelson is, then the filmwouldseemlikeyetanother“savior”filmaboutaneducatorwhoentersaninnercityschoolwiththeintentofsavingminoritystudentsfromlivesendangeredbythepovertythatstructurestheireverydayexperiences,theviolencethatsurroundsthemwheretheylive,andfewpossibilitiesofescapingfromtheirdead-endfutures.Half Nelson, however,radicallydepartsfromthebasicclichésofthe“savior”schoolfilmintwoimportantways.

Banishing History Oneofthemainclichésoftheeducator“savior”filmhastodowithpolitics.Morespecifically,thisclichéconcernsthepoliticsoftheeducatorsinthesefilms.MyargumentisthatDanDunne’s“left”politicalorien-tationstandsincontrasttothepoliticalorientationsoftheeducatorsinanyotherteacherfilm.Tosetupmyargument,Iwillfirstanalyzethepoliticalmessagethatisencodedinoneoftheblockbustersoftheeducatorsaviorfilmsubgenre,Lean on Me. Lean on Me(1989)isafictionalized(yetclosetothefacts)accountoftheexperiencesofJoeClark,anAfricanAmericanprincipalofEastsideHigh,anurbanschoolinPatterson,NewJersey,from1983-1991.ThefilmdepictsClark’s“toughlove,”authoritarianmethodsfordealingwiththemanyseriousproblems thatEastsideHighSchool faced.By theend,thefilm’spreferredmessageisclear:becauseofClark’sdraconianpoliciesandmethods,heturnedEastsideHigharound,andClarkisaheroiceducationalfigure. Onmyownadmittedlyoppositionalreadingofthefilmtext,themostideologicallyproblematicmessageofthefilmcrystallizesinonespecificscene.Clarkisonthestageoftheschool’sassemblyhall,andbehindhimaredozensofstudents,mostofwhomareAfricanAmerican.Intheaudi-encearehundredsmorestudents,nearlyallAfricanAmericans.Clarkholdsamicrophoneandfacesthestudentsseatedinthehall,explainingthat the students on stage are drug dealers and users, and that because

James Trier 25

they“areincorrigible,”theyarebeing“expurgated...forever”fromtheschool.Atthispoint,whatseemstobetwodozenplainclothessecurityofficers(allAfricanAmericanmen)swiftlyremoveallthestudentsbyphysicalforcefromthestage.Momentslater,JoeClarkisaloneonstage.Whentheverbalcommotionamongtheseatedstudentsdiesdown,Clarkaddressesthemwithawarningandadeclaration:

Nexttime,itmaybeyou.Ifyoudonobetterthantheydid,nexttimeit willbeyou.Theysaidthisschoolwasdead,likethecemeteryit’sbuilton.ButwecallourEastsideteams“ghosts,”don’twe?Andwhatareghosts?Ghostsarespiritsthatrisefromthedead.I want you to be myghosts.Youaregoingtoleadourresurrectionbydenyingexpecta-tions that all of us are doomed to failure. Mymottoissimple.Ifyoudo not succeedinlife,Idon’twantyoutoblameyourparents!Idon’twant you to blame the Whiteman!Iwant you to blame yourselves!Theresponsibilityisyours!

ThoughIfindClark’s“blamethevictim”rhetoricandtonequiteproblematic,whatIfindmoreproblematicisthephilosophyofpersonalagencythatClarkimpliesinthis“Mymottoissimple”speech.Onmyreading,thekeytermsare“blame,”“succeed,”“responsibility,”“parents,”and“Whiteman.”ForClark,successlikelyreferstoremaininginschool,studying hard and getting good grades, passing standardized skillstests,graduatingfromhighschool,obtainingajoborgoingtocollege,payingtaxes,notbreakinglaws,gettingmarried,beingagoodneighborandcitizen,havingchildren,buyingahome,takingvacations,openingdoorsofopportunityyourself,andsoon.ForClark,iftheseeventsdonoteventuallytakeplaceforthestudents,itwillbetheirownfault,which hemakes clear in the line, “The responsibility is yours!” ForClark,exercisingagencyisessentiallyaninterpretiveexperiencethat,ifexercisedproperlyandroutinely,willinevitablyleadtosuccess.Heimpliesthattakingresponsibilityisaninternalactofinterpretingourexperiencesinawaythatdoesnotattributecausestoanyothersources.Clarkexpresseshisbeliefthatthereisacleardangerinattributingcausestoothersourcesinhisreferencesto“parents”and“theWhiteman.”Theterm“parents”indexesnotonlyone’sfatherandmotherbutmanyother“personal”and“local”elementsofone’slife(otherfamilymembers,relatives,one’shome,neighborhood,school,church,job,largercommunity,andsoon).Theterm“Whiteman”refersbothtoourcountry’shistoryofWhiteracismaswellastothefactthatthecontrolofallthepowerfulinstitutionsinoursociety(theeconomy,thegovernment,thelaw,themedia,highereducation,andsoon)restsalmosttotallyinthehandsofaWhitepowerstructure.Clarkcommandshisstudentsnottolookforanyoutsidesourcestounderstandthecircumstancesoftheir


lives.Todosoistoplaywithfirebecausesuchsearchesforcausesmaytemptonetoattribute“blame,”andforClark,to“blame”istofailinone’sinterpretationofone’slifeexperiences.Inafightingfirewithfireinternalaction,Clarkimpliesthatthewaytowardoffsuchatempta-tiontoblameothersor“thesystem”istointernalizetheimpulseandblameourselves.Thisisthesimple—andahistorical—formofagencyforClark.3 Incontrasttotheahistorical,“blamethevictim”politicalmessagethatJoeClarkespousesinLean on Me,DanDunnearticulatesapoliticsthatopposessuchamessage.WhereasJoeClarkexhortsstudentstoblamethemselvesiftheydonotsucceedinlife,DanDunneteacheshisstudentstostudyhistoryforhowvariouspowerfulforceshaveshapedthepres-entpolitical,social,andculturalconditionsthatthestudentslivein.WeseeDanteachinghisstudentsthismessageinfourimportantclassroomscenes,eachofwhichIwilldescribeinthenexttwosections.

The (Althusserian) “Machine” OnesceneinvolvesfootagefromthesuperbdocumentaryBerkeley in the Sixties(1990),whichisdescribedontheDVDcoverasfollows:

The1960scometolifeinthisgrippingfilm[which]capturesthedecade’sevents—thebirthoftheFreeSpeechMovement,civilrightsmarches,anti-VietnamWarprotests,thecounter-culture,thewomen’smovement,andtheriseoftheBlackPanthers—inalltheirimmediacyandpassion.Dramaticarchivalfootageinterwovenwithpresent-dayinterviewsand18songsfromtheGratefulDead,JimiHendrix,JoanBaez,theBand,andtheJeffersonAirplanemakeBerkeley in the Sixties[quotinghereablurbfromtheVillage Voice]“probablythebestdocumentaryontheSixtiestodate!”

ThesceneopenswithfootageofastudentactivistandleaderoftheFreeSpeechMovement,MarioSavio,deliveringanimpassionedspeechin1964toahugecrowdgatheredatSproulHall,whichistheadministra-tionbuildingatUC-Berkeley.Savio’swordsareasfollows:

There’satimewhentheoperationofthemachinebecomessoodious,makesyousosickatheartthatyoucan’ttakepart,youcan’tevenpas-sivelytakepart,andyou’vegottoputyourbodiesuponthegearsanduponthewheels,uponthelevers,uponalltheapparatus,andyou’vegottomakeitstop,andyou’vegottoindicatetothepeoplewhorunit,tothepeoplewhoownitthatunlessyou’refree,themachinewillbepreventedfromworkingatall!

Atthispoint,thecamerapullsbackandweseethatDanhasshownhisstudentsthissceneinclass.Danthenasksthestudents,“Whatisthis

James Trier 27

machinethathe’stalkingabout?It’skeepingusdown.Whatisit?”Thefollowingdialogueexchangestakeplace:

Jamal:Like,robotsandstuff,right?

Dan:Umm,itcouldberobots.Itcouldberobots,butlet’ssayit’sametaphor.He’ssayingthismachineiskeepingmedown.Nowwhatisthat?Whatkeepsusfrombeingfree?Ms.Drey?

Drey:Prisons.[ShehadvisitedherbrotherMikeinprisoninanearlierscene.]

Dan:Absolutely,absolutely.Prisons.Okay?Prisonsaredefinitelyapartofit.Whatelse?

Terrance:White.

Dan:Whiteisdefinitelyapartofit.TheMan.

Lena:Theschool.

Dan:Theschool.Exactly.Thewholeeducationsystemispartofthemachine.Whatelse?

Stacey:Aren’tyouthemachine,then?

Dan:[Affectinga“blackcent”]Ohnoyoudidn’t.What’dyousay?

Stacey:Aren’tyouthemachine?

Dan:You’resayingI’mthemachine?

Stacey:Yeah.You’reWhite.You’repartoftheschool.

Dan:Ohyeah, Iguessyougotapoint.All right,so I’mpartof themachine,butifI’mpartofit,soareyou.Youare,too.Weallare.Andthisisthething,remember?Everythingismadewithopposingforce.Wemaybeopposedtothemachine,butwe’restillverymuchapartofit,right?Iworkforthegovernment,theschool,butI’malsoverymuchopposedtoalotofitspolicies.Youguyshatecomingtoschool,right?

Students:Yes!

Dan:Hollerbackifyouheardme—

Students:Holler![laughter]

Dan:Youhateit,butyoucomeanyway.

Student:Sometimes.

Dan:Sometimes,exactly.

Atthebeginningofthescene,MarioSaviousestheterms“machine”and“apparatus”synonymously,andonewaytoanalyze thedialogic


critiquethatunfoldsinthissceneisthroughAlthusser’s(1971)chapter“IdeologyandIdeologicalStateApparatuses”4(atextthatMarioSaviolikelyknewverywell).Forexample,Althusserexplainedthat

inMarxisttheory,theStateApparatus(SA)containstheGovernment,theAdministration,theArmy,thePolice,theCourts,thePrisons,etc.,whichconstitutewhatIshallcall...theRepressiveStateApparatus[RSA].RepressivesuggeststhattheStateApparatusinquestion“func-tionsbyviolence”—atleastultimately(sincerepression,e.g.administra-tiverepression,maytakenon-physicalforms).(pp.142-143)

Drey’sidentificationof“Prisons”isstraightoutofAlthusser’sdefinitionofRSA.AndwhenTerranceidentifies“White” (whichDanalsocalls“theMan”)asanotherpartof “themachine” thatkeepspeople frombeing free,hemightbesaid to capture thekernelofa critique thatarguesthatalloftheinstitutionsthattheRepressiveStateApparatuscontainsarecontrolledbyaWhitepowerstructurethathasownedandrunthiscountrysinceitsbeginnings.(RecallthatforJoeClark,suchacritiqueof“White”wasasignofweaknessandevasionofpersonalresponsibility.) Althusser(1971)alsotheorizedanotherkindofapparatus:Ideologi-calStateApparatuses(ISAs).Theseapparatusesbelong“entirelytothepublicdomain”(p.144),andtheyincludechurches,cultureindustries,media,politicalparties,theeducationalsystem,andothersuchinstitu-tions.WhatdistinguishesISAsfromtheRSAisthatthey“function ‘by ideology’”(p.145),whichistosaynotbyphysicalviolencebutbygainingconsentthroughnon-violentmeans,consentgiveninsomecaseswill-ingly,orinothercasesunwillingly,butgivennonetheless.AndoftheISAs,Althusser(1971)arguedthat“whatthebourgeoisiehasinstalledasitsnumber-one,i.e.asitsdominantideologicalStateapparatus,istheeducationalsystem”(p.155).ThearticulationbetweenAlthusserandthescene in Half Nelsonoccurs,ofcourse,inLena’sidentificationoftheschoolasbeingpartofthe“machine,”andthenDanandStacey’sback-and-forthdialogueabouthowDanasateacher—andallthestudents—arealsopartofthe“machine,”eveniftheyareoftenunwillingparticipantswithinit. The typical viewer of this scenewould likelynot be thinking intermsofAlthusser’stheorizationoftheRSAandtheISAs,butthesameunderstandingof thescenewould likelybearrivedat,which isthatDanisengaginghisstudentsinapoliticaldiscoursethathasthegoalofraisingstudents’consciousnessabouthowpoweroperatesinsociety.WhereDanisdialogicandencouragesstudentstoquestionandcritique,JoeClarkinLean on Meisauthoritarianandcommandsstudentstobesubmissiveandnottoquestionthepowersthatbe.

James Trier 29

The Three Laws of Dialectics Alongwithintroducingthenotionof“themachine,”inthreeotherclassroomscenesDanalsoprovidesstudentswithadefinitionof“His-tory”andteachesthemaparticularwayofunderstandinghistoricalchange:dialectics. Inonescene,whichoccursveryearlyinthefilm,Danwritesthisonthegreenchalkboard:

WhatisHistory?

1. Opposites2. 3.

Danthenasks thestudents, “What ishistory?”Terranceshoutsout“Opposites,”towhichDanteaseshimabouthowwellhecanreadtheboard.Anotherstudent,Stacey,offerstheresponse“Change,”andDanexpandsonthistermbyprovidingthefollowingdefinitionofhistory:

Historyisthestudyofchangeovertime.Andwhat’schange?It’sthis.[Danpresseshisfiststogetherattheknuckles.]It’sopposites.It’stwothingsthatpushagainsteachotherinoppositedirections.Sothecivilrightsmovement,okay,it’sessentially,it’stwoopposingmentalities.IntheSouth,themajoritybelievesallmenarenotcreatedequal,andthere’saminoritywhobelievesthattheyare,sothatminoritystrugglesandfightsandpushesuntileventuallyitbecomesthemajority.[Dantheninjectssomemomentaryhumor,kiddingthestudentshere]AmIboringyou?Huh?Let’sgiveyousomeexamples,okay,ofopposingforces,like,um,I’mgoingtogonightandday.Whatelse?

Studentsthenreplywithavarietyof“opposites”:“Bigandlittle”;“Leftandright”;and“Youandme”(Danreformulatesthelastexampleinto“Teacherandstudent”). What is important tonoticehere is that alongwithprovidingadefinitionofhistory,Danhasalso introducedoneof the three “lawsofdialectics”articulatedbyFrederickEngels.5 In Dialectics of Nature (1883),6Engelsexplainedthat“thelawsofdialectics...canbereducedinthemaintothree.”Engelslistedthesethreelawsas:

1.Thelawofthetransformationofquantityintoqualityandvice versa;2.Thelawoftheinterpenetrationofopposites;3.Thelawofthenegationofthenegation.

Inthisscene,DanhasreformulatedEngels’s“lawoftheinterpenetra-tionofopposites”intothesimplerformulationof“Opposites.”7Accord-ingtoBertellOllman(2003),theideaof“contradiction”isatthecore


ofdialectics,andwhatOllmansaysaboutcontradictionresonateswithDan’sexampleofthelawof“Opposites”:

Contradictionisunderstoodhereastheincompatibledevelopmentofdifferentelementswithinthesamerelation,whichistosaybetweenelements[“opposingforces”inDan’sexample]thatarealsodependentononeanother....[And]theirpathsofdevelopmentdonotonlyintersectinmutuallysupportivewaysbutareconstantlyblocking,undermining,otherwiseinterferingwith,andinduecoursetransformingoneanother[inDan’sexample,the“minoritystrugglesandfightsandpushesuntileventuallyitbecomesthemajority”].(p.17)

Inanother classroomscene,Dan introducesEngels’s “lawof thetransformationofquantityintoqualityandvice versa,”whichhere-formulates(andwritesontheboard)as“TurningPoints.”Wealsoseethatontheblackboard,theterm“Dialectics”hasreplacedthequestion“WhatisHistory?”(fromthepreviousscene)thathadbeentheheadingofthelist.Danillustratesthe“turningpoints”lawoftransformationinaninterestingwayforthestudents.Heasksforavolunteer,“somebodywhofeelsstrong,”andthenthecameracutstoashotinwhichweseeDanandTerrance(whosenicknameis“T”)sittingindesksandengagedinanarm-wrestlingcontest.8TerranceisusingtwohandsandseemstohaveDanalmostpinned,andasheandTerrancearmwrestle,Danexplainstotherestofthe(veryinterested)studentsabout“turningpoints”:“Sowhatwe’vegothereistwoopposingforces—Terranceandmyself.Andwe’repushingagainsteachother,andaslongasoneisstronger—anditlookslikeit’sT—thechangeisslowandconsistent.Butoncetheothersidebecomesstronger”—nowDangrimaces,musteringallhisstrength,orsoitseems,andreversesthedynamicofthearmwrestlingmatch,so that he pins Terrance in one surge of power—“there’s a turningpoint.”DanandTerranceshakehandswhiletheydisengage,andDansays“Thankyou,T.”Thentotherestofthestudents,Dansays,“Makesense?Okay.Now,turningpointscanhappenlikethat”—DangesturestowardthedeskwhereheandTerrancewerearmwrestling—“theycanbephysical,ortheycanhappenonagreaterscale.” Ofthis“lawofthetransformationofquantityintoqualityandvice versa,”Ollman(2003)explains:

Whatiscalledquantity/qualityisarelationbetweentwotemporallydifferentmomentswithinthesameprocess.Everyprocesscontainsmo-mentsofbeforeandafter,encompassingbuildup(andbuilddown)andwhatthatleadsto.Initially,movementwithinanyprocesstakestheformofquantitativechange.Oneormoreofitsaspects—eachprocessbeingalsoarelationcomposedofaspects—increasesordecreasesinsizeornumber.Then,atacertain[turning]point—whichisdifferent

James Trier 31

for each process studied—a qualitative transformation takes place,indicatedbyachangeinitsappearanceand/orfunction.(pp.16-17)

Danbrieflydescribesanotherlawofdialectics—thatof“thenegationofthenegation”—inanotherscene.ThoughDandoesnotnamethislaworwriteitontheboard,hesays“Number3,”referringtothelistofthelawsofdialecticsontheboard,andadds:“Changemovesinspirals,notcircles.”Thenheexplains:

Forexample,thesungoesupandthenitcomesdown,buteverytimethathappens,whatdoyouget?Yougetanewday.Yougetanewone.Whenyoubreathe,youinhaleandthenyouexhale,buteverysingletimethatyoudothat,you’realittlebitdifferentthantheonebefore.We’realwayschangingandit’simportanttoknowthattherearesomechangesyoucan’tcontrol,butthereareothersyoucan.

Of“thelawofthenegationofthenegation,”TomBottomore(1983)ex-plainsthatthislaw“claimsthatintheclashofoppositesoneoppositenegates another and is in its turn negated by a higher level of historical developmentthatpreservessomethingofbothnegatedterms(aprocesssometimesrepresentedinthetriadicschemaofthesis,antithesis,andsynthesis)”(p.120). Having described the scenes in which Dan defines history andintroduces the three laws of dialectics, I will now turn to a discussion abouthowthefilmrepresentsthepositiveeffectsofDan’steachingonhisstudents.Inotherwords,isthereanyevidencethatDan’s“political”teachinghasraisedhisstudents’criticalconsciousness?

Ghosts in the Machine InmydescriptionoftheclassroomsceneduringwhichDandefinedhistory and introduced the dialectical law of “Opposites,” I did notdescribetheverylastpartofthatscenebecausesuchadescriptionismoreappropriatehere.RecallthatafterDangavehisownexampleofan“opposite”(theCivilRightsMovement),heaskedthestudentsformoreexamples,whichtheyprovided.WhatIdidnotinclude,though,wasoneexamplevolunteeredbyastudentnamedRoodly,whomakesajokeaimedatanotherstudentnamedGina,saying:“JustwonderingifyoucouldcountmeandGina’sbaldheadedsisterasopposites?”Therestof thestudents laugh,witha fewcryingout “Insult!”DanthenteasinglychallengesGina,saying:“Gina,comeon,tellmeyou’renotgoingtotakethat?Yougotabaldsister?Isyoursisterbald?Givemesomething.”Ginarespondstothechallengebyglancingintohernote-book,thenlookingoveratRoodlyandsaying“May17,1954.”Withthe


kidslaughingoverthisexchangeofinsultandresponsebetweenRoodlyandGina,Dangoestotheboardtowhere“Insults”isalreadywritten(it’sapermanentfeatureontheboard),underneathwhichwasatsomeearliertimewritten“Leah—August/1967.”Tothis,DanwritesRoodly’snameandthedate“May17/54.”Danthenexplainstoallofthestudents:“Iexpectsomethoughtfromyou.Idon’twantjustdatesandfacts.Iwanttoknowwhy.Iwanttoknowconsequences.Iwanttoknowwhatitmeans.Allright?”DanthenjokeswithGina:“Nowback—backtothebaldsister?[Kidslaugh.]What’sgoingonwiththat?” This“insult”aspectofthesceneisanimportantyetverysubtlemo-mentinthefilmbecauseitrevealssomethingaboutDan’spedagogicalmethod.ThemeaningofwhatishappeninghereisexplainedontheDVDofHalf Nelsonwhenthefilmisviewedwiththespecialfeature“FilmmakerCommentaryFeaturingWriter/DirectorRyanFleckandWriter/Producer Ann Boden.” We hear Ryan Fleck explain (duringthe“insult”partofthescene):“InMr.Dunne’sclassroom,ifyouinsultsomebody,insteadofgettingdetentionorsomekindoftraditionalpun-ishment,...thepersonwhoisinsultedgivesthatpersonadate,andtheyhavetogolookitupandgiveareportonit.Andthat’skindoftheideaofwherethesereportsinthefilmcomefrom.”AnnBoden(sheandFleckarelifepartners)adds,“Youwillseeveryshortly,later,Roodlywillgiveareporton‘BrownversusBoardofEducation,’whichisthatdaterightthere,”meaningthedatethatGinagaveinresponsetobeinginsulted(May17,1954). Infact,four“report”scenesappearinthefilm.Eachsceneisbrief(onlyaboutaminuteorsolong)andtheformofeachsceneisthesame.Atthebeginningweseeaclose-upshotofastudentwhoisstaringdi-rectlyintothecamera,withwhatseemslikeacleangreenchalkboardoccupyingtheentirebackground.Weseeandhearthestudentdeliveringwhatispresumablypartofalongerreport,andwithinafewseconds,theimageofthestudentisreplacedbytelevisionnewsfootageabout(andfromthetimeof)thehistoricaleventthatthestudentisreportingon.Thisnewsimageryaccompaniesthestudent’svoice,andthenneartheendofthescene,thevisualofthestudentreappears,replacingthenewsfootage.Whenthestudentfinishesspeaking,thecameraholdsonthestudent’sfaceforafewseconds,andthenthereisasuddencuttothenextsceneofthemovie.ThesereportsaregivenbyRoodly,Ter-rance,Stacey,andDrey.Thedialogueofeachreportisasfollows(intherespectiveorderofthestudentsjustgiven):

OnMay17,1954,theSupremeCourtruledonthecaseofBrown vs. the Board of Education,makingitillegalforstatestosegregatepublicschools.Thiswasamajorstepforwardinthestruggleforracialjustice

James Trier 33

andhelpedbeginaflurryofboldandheroicactionsknownastheCivilRightsMovement.”

OnSeptember13,1971,1200AtticaStatePrisoninmatesseizedcontroloftheprisonandtookhostagestonegotiatechangestotheirinhumaneconditions.GovernorNelsonRockefellerorderedamilitaryassaultontheprison,whichkilledtwenty-nineinmatesandtenhostages—everyonecausedfrompolicegunshots.Anofficialcommissionlaterstated,withtheexceptionofIndianmassacresinthelate19th century, the policeassaultwasthebloodiestone-dayencounterbetweenAmericanssincetheCivilWar.

OnNovember1,1977,HarveyMilkwaselectedtotheSanFranciscoBoardofSupervisors.Hewasthefirstopenlygaypersontoeverbeelectedtopublicoffice.Ayearlater,hewasassassinatedbyanothermemberoftheCityCouncilnamedDanWhite.[footageofDianeFein-steininmidstatementtellingreporters:that“HarveyMilkhasbeenshotandkilled”].DanWhiteclaimedthatheshotMilkbecauseheatetoomuchjunkfoodthatday.ThiswouldlaterbeknownastheTwinkieDefense.[pause,thenheturnshisheadtotheright,presumablyatDan,whoisnotintheframe].Isthatforreal?

OnSeptember11,1973,theCIAhelpedoverthrowandmurderdemo-craticallyelectedChileanpresidentSalvadorAllende.Themilitarycoupledtomassdisappearances,assassinationsandtorturesofthousandsofChileanciviliansundertheleadershipofU.S.-backeddictatorAugustoPinochet.SecretaryofStateHenryKissingersaidofAllende’s1970election,quote,“TheseissuesaremuchtooimportantfortheChileanvoterstodecideforthemselves.”

Asisquiteclear,thecontentofthestudents’reportsispolitical,andineachreport,someaspectof“themachine”(discussedinthescenefeatur-ingMarioSavio)iscritiqued.Roodly’sreportcritiquesthe“machinery”ofinstitutionalizedracism;Stacey’sreportcritiquesthe“machinery”ofacultureofincarceration;Terrance’sreportcritiquesthemachineryofhatredthatexistsinoursocietyforgroupswhoselifestylesdivergefromthenorm(anditisalsoacritiqueofthelegalsystem);andDrey’sreportcritiquesthe“machinery”ofcovertU.S.interventionsintothepoliticalaffairs of other countries, interventions that replace democraticallyelectedgovernmentswithmurderousdictatorships.SothefilmoffersmomentaryyetpowerfulrepresentationsofthepositiveeffectsofDan’steaching.Onthesurface,however,thesepoliticalreportscenesseemtointerruptthenarrativesuddenlyandfornoapparentreason.However,theyactuallyserveanimportantandcalculatedroleinthefilm,asisexplainedbelowin“DialecticsWithinandBeyond.”


Goodbye, Mr. Chips (Hello, Mr. Dunne) Thusfar,IhaveexploredthewaythatHalf Nelsonradicallydepartsfromtheclichéoftheahistoricaleducatorintheinnercityteacher“savior”genre.Now,Iwillturnmydiscussiontotheothermainclichéthatthefilmsubverts,whichisthatHalf Nelsondoesnotofferaone-dimensionalrepresentationofaneducatorwhoisanunquestionablefigureofmoralauthority,whichisthecaseinallsuch“savior”films.Thougheverythinginmyselectivesummaryofthefilmintheearliersectiontitled“TheSongRemainstheSame(orDoesIt?)”isaccurate,Iintentionallyomittedwhatmainlysetsthefilmapartfromeveryothereducator“savior”film,whichisthattheteacher,DanDunne,isaveryflawed,complexpersonwhohasaseriouscocainehabit.ThefilmactuallybeginsatapointwhenDan’slifehasalreadybeguntospiraloutofcontrol. WelearnofDan’sheavyuseofcocaineearlyinthefilm(withintenminutes).9AfterscenesfeaturingDanteachingaclass(the“WhatisHis-tory?”lesson)andcoachingbasketballpractice,weseehiminhisshabbyapartment,10snortinglinesofcocaineoffaglass-topcoffeetable.Thenweseehiminanightclubwherehemeetstwowomen;theydance,theysnortcokeasthemusicpoundsinthebackground,andeventuallyweseeDanaloneinhiscar,drivingtomeethisdrugdealer,fromwhomhebuyssomecrackcocaine.Inascenethatoccursthenextday,Daniscoach-ingagirl’sbasketballgame,andafterward,inoneofthemostpowerfulscenesofthefilm—theonethatsetsthecoordinatesfortherestofthenarrative—Dandoesacheckofthegirl’slockerroomtoseeifanyoneisstillthere.Findingitempty,hegoesintoabathroomstallandlightsuphiscrackpipe.Atsomepoint,Dan(veryhighandsemi-conscious)hearssomeoneinthenextstall,hearsthetoiletflush,andthenhearsagirlask:“Somebodyinthere?”Dan(sweating,withalookofpaniconhisface)doesn’treply,andwhenthedoorslowlyopens,Dreyisstandingthere.Dansaysnothing,juststaresather.ThecamerafocusesonthecrackpipeinDan’shand,andDreyseesit.Shesays,“Oh,sorry,”andturnstoleave,atwhichpointDantriestogetupbutfallsback.HecallstoDrey,apologizestoher,extendshishandandasks“Canyouhelpmeup?”Shedoes,butDanisstilltoodisoriented,andsoheliesonhisbackonthefloor.Heasksforsomewater,andDreywetsapapertowelandhandsittohim.Danthenasksher,“Justdon’tgo,okay?Justforaminute?”ThesceneendswithDreykneelingbesideDan,withDanholdingDrey’shandinhis,pressingthepapertoweltohisforehead. Thisscenealone,beingunimaginableinanyteachersaviorfilms,marksHalf Nelsonasaverydifferentkindofteacherstory.IfHalf Nelson wereatraditionalteachersaviorfilm,thisearlyscenewouldlikelyfunc-

James Trier 35

tiontosetupsomekindofdrasticchangeinDan’sdruguse—perhapsDanwouldpromiseDreythathewouldstopusingdrugsifshewouldkeephissecret.Then,throughtherestofthefilm,wewouldbeabletoseeanewlycleanandsoberDanashevaliantlyattemptstokeepDreysafefromtheneighborhooddrugdealer,Frank.Fortunately,thefilmrefusessuchacliché.DreydoesnotrevealDan’ssecrettoanyone,andsowhatweget issomethingmuchmorecomplexandnuancedthanmightbeexpected.

Dialectics Within and Beyond In a review of Half Nelson (Canberra Times,2007),thedirectorRyanFleckisquotedassaying:“[Myfather]toldmehewasdoingthisthing[ondialecticsforkids,seefootnote7]andIlookedatitandthought,oh,thisisgreat,thisideaofopposingforces....Thisisperfectforthischaracter,who’stryingtoteachhispupilsthattheycanchangetheworldbuthe’salsotryingtoteachhimself”(p.4).Evenwithoutthisacknowledgementbythedirector,mosteveryonewhoseesHalf Nelson will discern how importanttheideaof“opposingforces”is,bothtotherepresentationoftheteacherthatitconstructs,aswellastothedevelopmentoftheplot.AndbecauseIhavealreadyintroducedadiscussionofdialectics,InowcandrawonitasIcontinuemyanalysisoftherepresentationofDanashemovesthroughthefilm’snarrative.11

Dancanbeviewedasacinematicfigurewithinwhomtwoforcesare“opposing”oneanother.Oneforceisthatpartofhimthatcausedhimtobecomeateacherintheinnercityandthathasmadehim(andstillmakeshim)agoodteachercommittedtoissuesofsocialjusticeandpoliticalengagement;theotherforceisthatpartofhimthatcauseshimtousedrugstothepointofself-destruction.FromwhatIhavealreadypresentedintheprevioussections,wecanderivesomesenseofthedual-ityofDan’spersonality.Theclassroomandpoliticalreportsscenescanbethoughtofasbeingtheeffectofhis“positive”side,whilethelockerroomdrugsceneisaneffectofhis“negative”side.WhatwasnotmadeclearintheprevioussectionsofthisarticleisthatthetensionsbetweenthesetwoaspectsofDan’spersonalitybuildandplaythemselvesoutdialecticallyasthenarrativedeepens.Andthereisaspiralingmovement,arecurringdynamicatworkwithinthenarrative,whichisbroughtoutthroughacarefulprocessofjuxtapositionofscenes. Thisprocessofjuxtapositionisapparentearlyinthefilm.The“WhatisHistory?Opposites”classroomsceneisfollowedsoonafterbythesceneinwhichDreydiscoversDan’ssecretinthelockerroom,whichitselfissoonfollowedbyRoodly’spoliticalreportabout“Brown vs. the Board of


Education.”Here,thenegativedrugsceneappearswithintwopositivepedagogicalscenes,andtheeffectofthejuxtapositionofthesescenesisthatacontradictioninDan’spersonalityismadevisible.Thisdynamicof“opposites”thatisperformedthroughthejuxtapositionoftheseearlyclassroomandpoliticalreportswithdrugscenesrecurslateroninthenarrative,whenDan’sdrugusegetsevenmoreoutofcontrol. Thisthemeof“opposingforces”or“opposites”notonlyplaysitselfoutwithinDanbutalsobeyondhisinternalexperiences,inhisrelationswithothers.Themainrelation,ofcourse,revolvesaroundDrey,anditoccursbetweenDanandFrank.Asmentionedearlier,DangraduallybecomesawareofwhoFrank is (theneighborhooddrugdealer) andhowhehasdesignsonDrey,hopingtolureherintobecomingadrugdelivererandeventuallyadealer,likeherbrother.ThefilmjuxtaposesmanyscenesthatshowDreywithDan(bothinandoutoftheclassroom)andDreywithFrank,mostlyintheirneighborhood.AndthoughFrankdealsdrugs,heisnotastereotypeofthedrugdealer.Hedoesn’tusedrugshimself,heishandsomeandseductive,andhefeelsprotectiveofDrey,evenwhileatthesametimeheistryingtoinvolveherinhisdrugoperation.Inotherwords,likeDan,Frankisnotaone-dimensionalfigure,andthoughhehashis“negative”side,therearealso“positive”aspectsofhispersonality. Throughaseriesofscenes,thetensionsbetweenDanandFrankbuild,andtheconfrontationbetweenthetwooccurswhenDreyasksDanifhethinksshewilleverenduplikeherbrother,Mike.Danistakenabackbyherquestion(shocked,really),andinthenextscene,weseehimatFrank’shouse.HeexitshiscarandstridestowardFrank,whoisoutsidewithsomefriends.Atthispoint,thefilmseemssettobringaboutaturningpointinDan,perhapsshowinghimastheteachersaviorthefilmhassecretlybeenplanningallalong.SoDanconfrontsFrank.HeasksFranktoleaveDreyalone,andafteraseriesofexchanges,thisdialoguetakesplace:

Frank:Whyareyousofuckingangry,man?

Dan:Becauseyouarenotlisteningtome—

Frank:I’mrighthere,baby,tellmewhatyou’retalkingabout.

Dan:I’mtellingyoutodosomethinggood.

Frank:Oh.

Dan:Areyoucapableofthat?

Frank:Oh,sonowwebacktothepointofwhatisWhiteisright,right?So—

James Trier 37

Dan:—Fuck,thishasnothingtodowiththatandyouknowit—

Frank:—no,no,no—it’sgoodforDreytohavesomebodylikeyoulook-ingoutforher.Mr.ModelA1fuckingcitizen.

Dan: Idon’tknow.Idon’tknow!Fuck.BecauseI’msupposedtodosomething,right?ButwhatamIsupposedtodo?

FarfromdepictingDanasasavior,whatisbroughtoutinthissceneisthateventhoughDanisstilldrivenbythedesiretoprotectandcareforhisstudents,eventothepointofriskingphysicalharm(atthehandsofFrank),henolongerhaswhateverhemighthavehadtomakeanykindofdifference.Asadrugabuser,hehasnomoralauthority(whichFrankmakescrystalclear),andhealsocannotsustainthewillhemusteredtoconfrontFrank.AfterheasksFrank,“ButwhatamIsupposedtodo?”Frankoffershimsomethingtodrink,andeventuallyheasksDanifhewantssome“candy,”andafewshortsceneslater,weseeDanaloneinhis car, high, late at night, headed for trouble. Thoughthisthemeof“Opposites”playsoutinmanyotherwaysinthefilm,mypurposeinthissectionistobesuggestive(throughafewexamples)ratherthanexhaustiveinmyanalysis.

The Dialectic Continues IbeganthisarticlebyexplainingthatmymainintentionwastoanalyzethefigureoftheteacherinHalf Nelsonintermsoftwomainclichésofthe“teachersavior”film.Iidentifiedoneofthoseclichésasbeingthatcinematicteachersaviorsarealwaysfiguresofunquestion-ablemoralpurityandauthority,andasIhavesoughttoshow,DanDunneisunquestionablynotsuchateacher.Hisheavydrugusehasnotonlyturnedhispersonallifeintoadisaster,butithasalsobeguntocompromisehisprofessionallifeasateacher,whichisbroughtoutveryearlyinthefilm(whenDreyfindshimstonedandbarelyconsciousinthegirl’sbathroom)andlateronwhenhemountsadoomedefforttotakethemoralhighgroundinhisconfrontationwithFrank,thedrugdealerwhohaspredatorydesignsforluringDreydeeperintohisworld. TheothermainclichéthatIidentifiedisthatcinematicteachersav-iors are also ahistoricalintheirpedagogyandintheirunderstandingofhowchangecanoccur.ForJoeClarkinLean on Me, change could only occuroncestudentsacceptedthattheyweresingularlyresponsiblefortheirlifecircumstancesandtheirfuturedevelopmentinsociety,andhechidedthemfromlookingtohistoryforexplanationstohelpthemunderstandtheirlifecircumstances,claimingthattodosowouldallbeamatterof“blaming”others(peopleandinstitutions)forone’sown


personalweaknessesandfailings.AsIthinkIhaveshown,Half Nelson departsfrom(andarguablysubverts)thisclichéoftheahistorical savior figurebyofferingarepresentationofateacherwhoengageshisstudentsinthinkingabouttherolethathistoricalforceshaveplayedinshapingcurrentsocietalcircumstancesandinstitutions.DanDunnedrawsonpoliticaldocumentaries(thesceneofMarioSaviofromBerkeley in the Sixties),introducesatheoryofhistoricalchange(dialectics),andcre-atessituationsforstudentstoengageinhistoricalresearch(thereportstheygive),allofwhichcongealsintoapedagogythatcentrallysituates“History”asafocusofstudyanddiscussion. IalsostatedatthebeginningthatIhadconceptualizedthisarticleasanintroductorytextthatmightbeassignedtostudentswhowouldsubsequently engage in further analyses of Half Nelson.WhatIwilldonowissuggestsomepossibletopicsfordiscussionorfurtheranalysis,andbecauseIhaveavoidedincludinganybig“spoilers”inwhatIhavewrit-ten,mostofthesediscussiontopicsfocusattentiononplotandcharacterelementsthatInecessarilyhavenotexploredinmyownanalysis.

• In the introduction, I summarized Hall’s (1980) theory ofpreferred,negotiated,andoppositionalreadings,andIhavepre-sentedmyownreadingofthepedagogicalfigureofDanDunne,anexclusivelypreferred(andadmittedlyverypartial)readingthatfocusesmainlyontheclassroomscenes.Ofcourse,anop-positionalreadingcouldbeperformedbysomeonewhowhollydisagreeswithmy interpretationsof theseclassroomscenes.Suchanoppositionalreadingmightaddressthesequestions:DoesthefactthatsomestudentsaredozingoffornotpayingfullattentiontoDanrevealthathereallyisn’taverygoodteacher?Inassigningstudentstodohomework(thepoliticalreports)aspunishment for insultingoneanother,doesDanengage inabadpedagogicalpractice?By ignoringtheofficialcurriculum(thecivilrightsbinderthattheprincipalmentions)andinsteadteaching students a theory of historical change (dialectics),isn’tDanbeing“toopolitical”inhispedagogy,ineffectforcing(albeitseductively)hisown“left”viewofhowtheworldworksontohisstudents?

•ThetopicIbeganabouttherolethattheclassroomandpoliticalreportsscenesplayinthefilm(in“GhostsintheMachine”)couldbefleshedout.Istatedthatthesescenesfunctiondialecticallyas“positive”elementswithinanarrativethatpullsDandeeperdowna“negative”path.Igaveoneexampleofhowthisprocessofjuxtapositionworkswiththe“WhatIsHistory?Opposites”

James Trier 39

scene(juxtaposedwithRoodly’spoliticalreport).Forthistopic,the rest of the classroom and political report scenes can beanalyzedforhowtheyfunctionas“positive”elementswithinanarrativethatshowsDanspiralingoutofcontrol.

•Inthesectiontitled“DialecticsWithinandBeyond,”IdiscussonekeyscenethatrevealsthedialecticalrelationbetweenDanandFrank.However,manymorescenesthroughoutthefilmdevelopthecomplicatednatureoftheirdialecticalrelation,soananalysisofthesescenescanbeundertakentofullyexploretheoppositionalrelationbetweenFrankandDan.Also,theothermaindialecticalrelationthattakesplaceconcernsDrey,whoispulledindifferentdirectionsbyDanandFrank,twoinflu-entialpeopleinherlife,eachofwhomisfarfrombeingasolidrolemodelandatrustworthyinfluence,whichcomplicatesherdilemma.SoDrey’sdialecticalrelations,astheyinvolvebothDanandFrank,canalsobefullyexplored.

• Half Nelsonoffersanexplanation,throughafewscenes(es-peciallysomeneartheendofthefilm),ofhowDanacquiredhisidealisticcommitmenttosocialjusticeandracialequity,aswellashishowheacquiredhiswayofdealingwithproblemsthroughself-destructivebehaviors.Arethefilm’sattemptsatsuchexplanationsaboutDan’spersonalityconvincingtoyou?

•JustassomeonemighthaveanoppositionalreadingtomyinterpretationofDan’steachingasitisdepictedintheclassroomscenes,sotoomightsomeonehaveanoppositionalreadingofmyoverallargumentthatHalf Nelsonbreakswithtwofundamentalclichésoftheteachersaviorgenre.Forexample,byfocusingononeteacher’sstory,Half Nelsonmightbesaidtoresidefullywithintheindividualistic“charismaticeducator”saviorfilm.Thereisalsoa“savior”themeatworkinthefilm.Soanimportantques-tiontoaddressis:DoesHalf Nelson,whichsharessomeofthecharacteristicsofateachersaviorfilm,fundamentallysubvertthemainclichésofthatsubgenre?Ofcourse,tofullyanswerthisquestionwouldrequireviewingoneormoreteachersav-iorfilmstomakecomparisonswithHalf Nelson,filmssuchasBlackboard Jungle; To Sir, with Love; Stand and Deliver; Lean on Me; The Principal; Dead Poets Society; Dangerous Minds; and Freedom Writers.

Thesediscussion topicsandquestionsarebynomeans theonlyonesthatmightbeaddressed,andmyhopeisthatotheracademicsin


educationwilltakeHalf Nelsonseriouslyasaproductivetextintheirworkwithpreserviceteachers,andthatmorearticlesaboutthefilm’spedagogicalpossibilitieswillappear.

Notes 1By “readers,” I am imagining student teachers inmethods courses orsocial foundations courses, as well as students in graduate courses that have a culturalstudiesorientation.Iamalsoimaginingthose(professorsandgraduatestudents)whoteachthesestudents. 2Mostacademicswhowritearticlesorbookchaptersaboutschoolfilmsperformfull-scaleideologicalanalysesthat(seemto)assumeareaderwhohasalreadyseenthefilm(sotheauthorincludessuch“spoiler”details).AnexemplarofsuchananalysisisGiroux’ssuperbarticleaboutDangerous Minds. (See other examplesinGiroux’s(2002)bookBreaking in to the Movies.) 3Foranin-depthanalysisofthis“ahistorical”aspectofLean on Me, see Trier,2004. 4ItisworthmentioningherethatIteachagraduatecoursetitled“CulturalStudiesandEducation,”andasithappens,IhavealwaysassignedAlthusser’schapterintandemwithBerkeley in the Sixtiesbecausethesetwotextsarticulateperfectlywithoneanotherandilluminatetheargumentsbeingmadeineachother(orsoIhavearguedinthecourse). 5Inmycourse“CulturalStudiesandEducation,”Ialsohavestudentsreadaboutthetheoryandmethodofdialectics(wereadselectionsfromOllman,2003)andthenanalyzehowsomeofthelawsofdialecticsarerepresentedinthefilmI Heart Huckabees(Trier,2009). 6See:http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1883/don/ch02.htm 7ItisworthpointingoutsomethingIdiscoveredwhenIwasresearchingthecritical reviews of Half Nelson.ThoughIhadalreadyworkedoutmyanalysisofthe“dialectics”scenes,aswellasthewholethemeof“dialectics”thatstructuresthefilm,Ifoundoutthatthedirectorofthefilm,RyanFleck,wasdeeplyinflu-encedbyhisfatheraboutthe“dialectics”themeofthefilm.InaNew York Times review,DennisLim (2006),who interviewedRyanFleck, stated: “Mr.Fleck’sfather,JackLuceroFleck,aSanFranciscotrafficengineer,wasacentralinflu-ence on Half Nelson.Adialecticsautodidact,theseniorMr.FleckmaintainsaWebsite,http://dialectics4kids.com,whichincludeseducationalstoriesandMP3’sofsongslike‘DoOurLivesGoRoundinCircles?’Manyof[DanDunne’s]classroommonologuesareliftedalmostverbatimfromthesite”(p.17). 8ThisisanapttimetonotethatthetitleHalf Nelson refers to a wrestling movethat,thoughitcanimmobilizeanopponent, itcannotbyitself leadtopinningtheopponent.Also,whenHalf Nelsonisviewedwiththe“FilmmakerCommentary”featureon,RyanFleckpointsoutaposterofNelsonMandelainDan’sclassroom,andhealsoreferstohoworiginallythescriptcalledforaMilesDavissongtitled“HalfNelson”tobeplayinginonesceneinwhichDanissittingalonehavingadrinkinajazzbar(thecostofusingthesongwastoohigh,soitdidnotmakeitintothemovie).

James Trier 41

9Dan’slastname,Dunne,evokesafeelinginthefilmthatsomethinginDanisabouttobe“done,”thoughnotuntilheis“undone.” 10Ofhisapartment,onefilmreviewer(Dargis,2006)wrote:“Danliveswithhiscatinanapartmentfilledwithbooks,pagesfromanunfinishedprojectandfurniturethatlooksdraggedinoffthestreet.It’sthekindofapartmentthatthepoorholdontountiltheycan’tholdonanylonger,thekindofdumpthatcopsbreakintosotheycanpulloutthedead,whichmakesittheperfecthomeforadeathwish”(p.8). 11MymethodofpresentationinthissectiondiffersfromtheoneIusedintheprevioussections.JustasmostofthescenesinHalf Nelson were shot as close-ups,mydiscussionssofarhavebeenfocused“closeup”onrelativelybriefsegmentsofthefilm.Now,Iwillpullbackinordertotakeinmore,andIwillmoveatafasterpace(evenimpressionistically)asIfollowDanthroughthemainnarrativedevelopments.

ReferencesAlthusser,L.(1971).Ideologyandideologicalstateapparatuses(notestoward

aninvestigation)(pp.127-186).InLenin and philosophy and other essays, BenBrewster(trans.).NewYork:MonthlyReviewPress.

Anonymous,Thepoliticsofidealism.(2007,April25).Canberra Times,p.A4.Avildsen,J.(Director).(1989).Lean on me[MotionPicture].LosAngeles:War-

ner Bros. Pictures.Ayers,W.(1994).Ateacherain’tnothin’butahero:Teachersandteachinginfilm

(pp.147-156).InP.Joseph&G.Burnaford(Eds.),Images of schoolteachers in twentieth-century America.NewYork:St.Martin’sPress.

Bottomore,T.(Ed.).(1983).A dictionary of Marxist thought.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Dalton,M. (1999).The Hollywood curriculum: Teachers and teaching in the movies.NewYork:PeterLang.

Dargis,M.(2006,August11).Teacherhasaproblem,studentknowsthesecret,and two lives intertwine. New York Times,p.E8.

Edelman,R.(1983).Teachersinthemovies.American Educator,7(3),26-31.Farber,P.,&Holms,G.(1994).Abrotherhoodofheroes:Thecharismaticeduca-

torinrecentAmericanmovies(pp.21-39).InP.Farber,E.Provenzo,&G.Holm(Eds.),Schooling in the light of popular culture.Albany,NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.

Fleck,R.(Director).(2006).Half Nelson[MotionPicture].LosAngeles:Think-Film.

Giroux,H.(2002).Breaking in to the movies.Malden,MA:BlackwellPublish-ers.

Hall,S.(1980).Encoding/decoding(pp.128-138).InS.Hall,D.Hobson,A.Lowe,&P.Willis (Eds.),Culture, media, language.London,UK:Routledge&KeganPaul.

Kitchell,M. (Director). (1990).Berkeley in the sixties [Motion Picture]. LosAngeles:KitchellFilms.

Lim,D.(2006,July30).Opposingforceslashtogetherbyfaith.New York Times,


Arts&Leisure,p.17.Ollman,B. (2003).Dance of the dialectic: Steps in Marx’s method.Chicago:

University of Illinois Press.Paul,D.(2001).CriticallyinterrogatingHollywood’svisionoftheurbanclass-

room.Multicultural Review, 10(1),20-27&58-60.Trier,J.(2001).Thecinematicrepresentationofthepersonalandprofessional

lives of teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(3),127-142.Trier, J. (2004). Detournement as pedagogical praxis. Journal of Thought,

39(4),35-52.Trier,J.(2005).“‘SordidFantasies’:Readingpopular‘innercity’schoolfilmsas

racializedtextswithpreserviceteachers.Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(2),171-189.

Trier,J.(2009).Subversiveengagementsinteachereducation.InF.Benson&C.Riches(Eds.),Engaging in conversation about ideas in teacher education (pp.117-129).NewYork:PeterLang.

half nelson and dialectics

Documents