Moyosore Bankole
Communication 300
September 30, 2012

Critical Review

Introduction Race and gender relations are one of the most explored themes in movies, music, books, and etc. Often times, ineffective communication leads to the misinterpretation of each other’s actions, leading to inaccurate race bias. This race bias can be referred to as racism. Typically people in society are somewhat discreet about their racism and it is not something they openly admit to. The movie Crash, daringly tackles the issues of intercultural communication, and race in an unconventional way. It takes racism and makes it an open conversation amongst the characters to ensure the viewers can clearly identify each characters racial bias. As the characters in this movie communicate, there is frequent use of racial slurs, profanity, as well as racially driven insults and stereotypes, to further exaggerate the bigotry present in the film.
Crash provides a series of examples that show just how powerful effective and ineffective communication can be when it comes to social relations. This film touches on various communication theories and concepts, in which many of the scenarios presented in Crash can be explained. These theories and concepts include: symbolic interaction theory (self concept), assumptions of communication accommodation theory (indirect stereotyping), assumptions of expectancy violations theory (violation valence), and cultural communication.
Synopsis

Director Paul Haggis’s, 2005 explosive film, Crash, tells a very provocative story of how absolute strangers can impact each others lives in both negative and positive ways. In a seemingly coincidental chain of events the multicultural characters of this movie are in one way or another connected. Within a thirty – six hour period in Los Angeles California, about eight main characters lives are intertwined, as they encounter very intense and uncomfortable race relations. Some of the characters include: a Caucasian politician who uses race as a political ploy; the wife of the politician, who has recently been carjacked by two African American men and believes that her stereotypical views of other races are justified and cannot be considered racism; the carjackers who use their race as justification for their actions; two Caucasian police partners, one who is racist and uses his power to harass non – whites, and the other who hates his partner because his racist beliefs, but who may also subscribe to the same views subconsciously; An African American actor and his wife, who believes that her husband is a sell out and does not embrace their African American heritage enough, especially after an incident with the racist white police officer; an Asian man who is run over , but is hiding Asian immigrant slaves in his van; a Persian convenient store owner who feels a lack of protection from the American government after his store was robbed and purchases a gun; and a Latino locksmith who’s main concern is his family’s safety. Each of the characters in this movie is put in tense situations that force them to confront their obvious or not so obvious racism and battle the effects of stereotyping.
Symbolic Interaction Theory (Self Concept) According to West and Turner (2010), self-concept, “is the relatively stable set of
Perceptions that people hold of themselves” (pg. 82). In addition, “ self concepts provide an important motive for behavior”, (pg. 83). Through out the movie Crash, most if not all of the characters displayed a very distinct self-concept. In the case of the two African American carjackers, they view themselves as “black men in a struggle”. They believe they are wrongly stereotyped as being “thugs”, thieves, and violent. Ironically enough, they use societies view of them as an excuse to partake in the same behaviors in which they are being accused of. Seconds before carjacking the politician and his already racist wife, they engage in the following verbal exchange:
“Anthony (to Peter): “Look around! You couldn’t find a whiter, safer or better-lit part of this city. But this white woman sees two black guys, who look like UCLA students, strolling down the sidewalk and her reaction is blind fear. I mean, look at us! Are we dressed like gangbangers? Do we look threatening? No. Fact, if anybody should be scared, it’s us: the only two black faces surrounded by a sea of over-caffeinated white people, patrolled by the trigger-happy LAPD. So, why aren’t we scared?”
Peter: “Because we have guns? Anthony: “You could be right.” After this exchange, they proceed to rob the couple. Although the excuse they use to justify their action seems backward, the self-concepts they have developed through interaction with others and society, have clearly been the motive behind their behavior, whether positive or negative. Unfortunately, in this scenario they are further perpetrating the stereotype of black men, and validating the politician’s wife racial views. Assumptions of Communication Accommodation Theory (Indirect Stereotyping) After the car jacking, the Caucasian politician and his wife return home and the wife is insistent they change the locks in fear that the carjackers would have access to her home. A Hispanic young man eventually changes their locks. After seeing the locksmith, the wife demands the locks be changed again. The dialogue is as followed:
Rick: “Jean—”
Jean: “And you could mention that we’d appreciate it if next time they didn’t send a gang member.”
Rick (lowering his voice): …”You’re talking about that kid in there?”
Jean: “Shaved head, pants down around his ass, prison tattoos?” Indirect stereotyping would be a theory that explains why she classified a person she didn’t know as being a gang member. According to West and Turner (2010), indirect stereotyping, “imposes out dated and rigid assumptions of a cultural group upon that group”, (pg.474). Samovar and Porter report, “stereotypes can be either positive or negative and they help us to “make sense” of the world by categorizing and classifying people and situations we encounter”, (1991). Jean creates a whole image for a locksmith she doesn’t even know because she assumes all Hispanic men that look like him are gangsters. We can assume her views are based off of previous encounters with Hispanic men and what she has seen in the media. According to Samovar and Porter (1991), “ stereotypes are one of the obvious barriers to intercultural communication”, (1991). If she would have put her prejudices aside and communicated with the locksmith, she would have found out he was actually a family man, who was working to take car of a young daughter and wife at home. In reality he was not a “gangster” at all.
Assumptions of Expectancy Violations Theory (Violation Valence) One of the major turning points in this film included the Rookie cop who hated his racist police partner. After witnessing several of his partner’s racist actions, he was convinced he was nothing like him. In a tragic turn of events, his subconscious racism/biased took over, and ultimately turned him into what he despised in his partner, a racist. During this scene, the rookie cop is off duty and sees a black man walking along the road. As a nice jester, he offers him a ride to his destination. While in the car they have a conversation in which they realize they have a lot in common. The black man realized that he has the same bobble head the off duty cop has on his dashboard, and reaches over in his pocket to show him. The rookie cop gets nervous because he expects the black man to have a gun. Immediately, the cop shoots the black man only to discover that he didn’t have a weapon, but he had the same bobble head that was on his dashboard. According to West and Turner (2010), “violation valence refers to the positive or negative assessment of an unexpected behavior. Violation valence focuses on the deviation of an expectation”, (pg.139). This scene represents both the positive and negative valence experienced by the Rookie cop. Initially he was very surprised that the Black man and him had so much in common, and they seemed to get along. Although he did not view himself as a racist, his pre-conceived notions did not expect the black to behave that way. Negative valence was displayed when the rookie cop acted on what he expected the black man to behave, and shot him for no reason. At this pivotal point in this movie, the rookies cop’s subconscious racism was exhibited. Once again effective communication could have prevented this tragedy from taking place.
Cultural Communication Gandy (1998) suggest, “As people from different cultural groups take on the challenge of effective communication, cultural values sometimes conflict. We can misunderstand each other, and react in ways that can hinder what are otherwise healthy relationships. Oftentimes, we aren't aware that culture is acting upon us. Sometimes, we are not even aware that we have cultural values or assumptions that are different from other”, (1998). The movie Crash, addressed many of the common social stereotypes in society and provided examples as to how language bariers can cause issues. West and Turner (2010), define cultural communication as, “communication between and among individuals whose backgrounds vary”, (pg.41). Many of the misunderstanding in this movie come from language barriers. According to Jandt (2001), “Language is one of the most obvious barriers to intercultural communication but perhaps not the most fundamental. People who do not share a language or who feel that they have imperfect command of another person’s language may have some difficulties communicating” (2001). Gandy (1998), also states, “it is perhaps most important for people to realize that a basic understanding of cultural diversity is the key to effective cross-cultural communications. Without necessarily studying individual cultures and languages in detail, we must all learn how to better communicate with individuals and groups whose first language, or language of choice, does not match our own”, (1998). In one scene the Hispanic locksmith is trying to explain to the Persian storeowner that he needs a new door and not a new lock. The Persian does not seem to understand what he is saying and responds with yelling and confusion. After trying to get his point across to the Persian storeowner several times, he gives up and the storeowner is not aware of his door issue. The result of this miscommunication was the store getting robbed and the owner assuming the Hispanic locksmith had something to do with it.
Pros & Cons Crash’s depictions of race and ethnicity put an interesting twist on racial stereotyping. It’s brash and in your face nature seemed to emphasize just how ridiculous some of the stereotypes were. I found they did a great job at showing various degrees of racism and how one can subscribe to racist actions when put in certain situations. In one way or another all people have preconceived notions about various groups of people. The film showed that the difference between a racist and a non-racist is almost indistinguishable; it is easy for an individual to walk that thin line. This movie concluded with all the characters needing each other in one way or another, which suggested that we are all people and situations in life are race less.
However, I felt that the movie didn’t really dispel any stereotypes or improve communication between the characters. It is almost as if the characters in the story further perpetrated the stereotypes. This movie also failed to hold each character accountable for their deplorable behavior. For example, when the rookie cop shot the unarmed black man, there was no consequence for his behavior. In fact, he planted a gun on the innocent man to make him appear as the aggressor and “dangerous black man “ in the situation. Another example would be, the Persian Store Owner shooting a gun at the Hispanic locksmith, but miraculously not killing him or his daughter. There was no resolve, and the film was open ended. It is almost as if they were saying stereotypes are a part of society and things will not change.
Conclusion
Furthermore, Crash provides a series of examples that show just how powerful effective and ineffective communication can be when it comes to social relations. This film addressed many of the common stereotypes present in today’s society. Many of us may not be racist, but we have in some way, shape, or form has subscribed to preconceived notions about different types of people. Although I believe bias is natural, I also believe that it is possible for individuals to have healthy positive relationships with other cultures, genders, religions, and etc. Through open mindedness and cultural sensitivity, society can learn to communicate more efficiently and effectively, which may prevent many of the scenarios presented in this film.

References
Jandt, F. E. (2001). Intercultural communication: an introduction. Thousand Oaks: California Sage.
Samovar, L. A. & Porter, R. E. (1997). Intercultural communication. Belmont, California:
Wadsworth Publishing Company.
West, R. & Turner, L. (2010). Introduction to communication theory, analysis application. New York, New Yok: McGraw Hill.
Gandy, O.H. (1998). Communication and race: A structural perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.