Interracial Couples as Outcasts in Loving
In the 2016 movie Loving, the interracial couple of Richard Loving (Joel Edgerton) and Mildred Loving (Ruth Negga) experience discrimination under segregation in 1950s and 1960s Virginia. Outside forces (i.e., people in the community and institutions) continuously try to separate the couple, making it difficult for them to be together. These outside forces use a mix of nonverbal and verbal communication to make the interracial couple feel like outcasts.
Richard and Mildred Loving are made to feel unwelcome by society. J.N. Martin and T. K. Nakayama (2010) describe how migrants are often made to feel unwanted by host cultures, stating: “[T]he host society sends messages that migrants do not really belong” (326). Despite Mildred not being a “migrant,” she is still considered an “outsider” within the community she lives, Virginia, because of her race. Therefore, Richard and Mildred Loving constantly receive nonverbal communication that their relationship is not condoned by the people in Virginia. In one scene, the Lovings share a kiss after watching a car race. The white men observing them show their displeasure with the kiss by shaking their heads in disapproval. Martin and Nakayama (2010) elaborate that “Stereotyping or prejudice [can] lead to overt nonverbal actions to exclude, avoid, or distance and are called discrimination” (284). The group of white men create physical distance between themselves and the couple by standing on the opposite side of the track. In addition, couples can be made to feel like an outcast because people and/or institutions may, according to Martin and Nakayama (2010), “closely [watch the couple] to see what they are up to” (284). In the movie, this can be seen when the white men closely observe the Loving’s relationship from across the racetrack. Thereby, the white men create an uncomfortable environment that Richard and Mildred must “deal with.” The nonverbal acts that these hegemonic forces display communicates a staunch objection to such interracial coupling.
Furthermore, the dominant power perpetuates its ideology through verbal means. Martin and Nakayama (2010) argue that “those in power consciously or unconsciously, maintain communication systems that reflect, reinforce, and promote their own ways of thinking” (110). For example, Mildred is arrested, and Richard is told he cannot bail her out of jail. He goes back the next day to attempt to bail her out, but once again is told he cannot. After walking out of the jail, Richard is approached by a white police officer, Sheriff Brooks (Marton Csokas), who tries appealing to Richard’s whiteness. The police officer and Richard have a discussion and Richard ultimately confesses Mildred is pregnant. The police officer responds to this by stating: “I’ll throw your ass back in there for that. You know better.” The Lovings threaten the dominant power’s way of doing things by having mixed-race children. Martin and Nakayama (2010) argue that dominant powers have often feared interracial families for the disruption their reproduction could cause – “[interracial] families will produce more children who challenge the current race and gender stereotypes” (407). White men fear interracial relationships because such relationships could cause “the structural barriers of intermarriage [to] erode,” thereby diminishing the validity of the white man’s influence (407). The white authority tries to reinforce their ideology in order to validate their control.
If interracial couples refuse to conform, they pose a threat. Martin and Nakayama (2010) argue, “the dominant power retaliates against this open exposure of the presumed way of doing things” (237). Despite receiving nonverbal cues of disapproval, the Lovings proceed to get married. The normalized culture perceives their defiance as a threat to their system; therefore, the police retaliate by arresting the couple under the pretense that they are not technically married in Virginia. Once arrested, white institutions attempt to reinforce the ideology that interracial marriages are unacceptable an example of “power relations influenc[ing] who (or what) get to claim who (or what) and under what conditions” (Martin & Nakayama, 293). Arresting the Lovings reinforces the idea that white people get to claim marriage as an act only afforded to white couples. If the Lovings wish to be married and share the same bed, they must do so outside the state of Virginia. Non-conforming couples resist normalized ideologies, but white powers often react in destructive and oppressive ways, making it more difficult for such couples to stay together.
An interracial couple’s ability to function is effectively stopped by such reactions. In Loving, the court declares that, if the Lovings wish to be together, they are not allowed to return to Virginia together for the next 25 years. Virginia’s demands hinder the Loving’s functional fitness, which involves “being able to function in daily life in many different contexts,” by completely eradicating their ability to live within their place of origin (326). Instead of the Lovings “mak[ing] waves,” they non-assertively assimilate into the dominant culture (235). The pressure from the dominant group to conform causes the Lovings to adopt a compromising style of interaction. Martin and Nakayama (2010) state “[In a] compromise style, each partner gives up some of his or her own culturally bound habits or beliefs to accommodate the other person” (409). Rather than staying in Virginia, the Lovings decide to move. Mildred is forced to live apart from her immediate family, stop working, and become the caretaker of the children; however, Richard retains his position as a contractor. Richard is part of the dominant culture in Virginia due to his whiteness, and rather than fighting against Richard’s white culture, Mildred sacrifices her cultural freedom for the benefit of their family. In the film, systems of dominant whiteness ultimately dictate the couple’s interactions. This control puts stress on the idea of interracial coupling and inhibits full interaction with society.
Relationships can cause individuals to lose membership to other groups if they do not conform to the demands of institutional forces. In the movie Loving, the dominant power (white men) exert ideologies of anti-miscegenation towards the central interracial couple in order to maintain their control. They discriminate against Richard and Mildred through nonverbal communication to make them feel unwelcome, causing them to become self-conscious about their interactions. For whiteness to maintain authority, white institutions delimit the contexts in which interracial couples can interact which the Lovings challenge by conceiving children together. To deter more interracial couples from reproducing, racist institutions of dominant whiteness impose their power on the couple and, by preventing them from living their lives unencumbered, portray them as outcasts. The Lovings ultimately comply to this whiteness by allowing the court to decide how and where they can interact with one another.
Works Cited
Doherty, G., Firth, C., Buirski, N., Green, S., Turtletaub, M., Saraf, P. (Producer), & Nichols, J. (Director). (2016). Loving [Motion Picture]. United States of America: Big Beach. Accessed 31 October 2019.
Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural communication in contexts. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Accessed 17 October 2019.
You may also like
Related
Archives
- September 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- October 2023
- May 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- March 2020
- February 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
Calendar
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
28 | 29 | 30 |