In the Heat of the Night Film Blog

1. How does the film relate to Chapter 25 in Foner?

In the Heat of the Night is a film rich in southern sixties attitudes. Virgil Tibbs is wrongfully picked up at a train station on Sparta, Mississippi. He is picked up because a prominent person in the town was killed – and they thought he had done it because he was black, sitting at a train station and had a substantial amount of money. After bringing him to the police station, the chief, Bill Gillespie, finds out that Tibbs is in fact a very good homicide detective from Philadelphia. The fact that Tibbs was wrongfully picked up in the first place attributes significantly to the viewer’s perspective of southern ideals at this time. In chapter 25, Foner discusses the changing black movement. This shifted the focus of the civil rights movement from “access to schools, public accommodations, and the voting booth to the economic divide separating blacks from other Americans.” (Foner 973) This economic divide is extremely prevalent in the film. As southern blacks were not able to work in as many occupations as northern blacks were. Tibbs, for example, was a homicide detective in the North. But, his black counterparts in the South did manual labor and picked cotton. He was not welcomed because of his white style of dress and his northern attitude. There were several occasions where Mr. Tibbs was close to being beaten up or killed by white southerners. The economic divide between the whites and the blacks in the south is shown as a significant gap throughout the film. Foner also discusses The Supreme Court and its “push toward racial equality, overturning numerous local Jim Crow laws.” (Foner 995) Foner sites Loving v. Virginia (1967) because this abolished laws that prevented interracial marriage. Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. prohibited discrimination in the sale or rental of housing. Foner refers to this as, “eliminating ‘badges of slavery,’ such as unequal access to housing…was essential to fulfilling at long last the promise of emancipation.” (Foner 996) These laws are significant because the more progressive attitude towards blacks in the North was not the same in the South. Even though there had been legislation passed that prohibited certain discrimination, the white southerners were protected by corrupt sherrifs and police officers as well as biased juries and judges. The laws really did not matter as much as the overall white feeling towards blacks and In the Heat of the Night shows this very well.

2. What was the symbolism behind when Police Chief Bill Gillespie told Detective Virgil Tibbs “you’re just like the rest of us ain’t you?”

When Bill Gillespie said, “you’re just like the rest of us ain’t you?” to Tibbs, it’s symbolic of Gillespie’s own attitude towards blacks and Tibbs’ attitude toward southern whites. Gillespie says this to Tibbs when they are leaving Endicott’s home – after he slapped Virgil. Mr. Tibbs was so frustrated with Endicott, that he said, "I can pull that fat cat down and bring him right off this hill!" This attitude coming out of Virgil is the same attitude that Gillespie exudes in reference to Tibbs. His frustration with the black homicide detective from Philidephia is similar to Tibbs’ frustration over the seemingly guilty, but rich and white, Mr. Endicott. This is a moment in the film where the writers try to justify both Gillespie and Tibbs’ prejudice in certain situations – leading Gillespie to realize that Tibbs is not that different from himself.

3. In the Heat of the Night was released in 1967. Do you think it offers a pessimistic or hopeful vision for the future of race relations in the United States? Do you feel the film’s vision is realistic given what was happening during the time period? Be sure to fully explain why or why not and to give at least two scenes from the film to support your answer. You might also want to consider the cultural context of the film by connecting this question to the rise of Black Nationalism.

I think that In the Heat of the Night offers a hopeful vision for the future of race relations in the United States. Gillespie’s attitude towards Virgil significantly changes by the end of the film. This shows that even southern whites can learn to live side by side with blacks. I think it is realistic – all things considered. Small-town situations like this happened, but the ability of white and blacks to cooperate in order to reach an overarching common goal, is an important lesson the movie displays. I think that the film did a good job of depicting the southern white males’ attitude towards a new, intelligent and educated northern Negro in their town. When Virgil is driving down the road and is being tailgated and bumped into by a car full of white teen boys, he is eventually cornered in a barn and they threaten to beat him up. They would have, if Gillespie had not come to save the day. These boys call Gillespie a “nigger lover” for saving Tibbs from the fight. For this, he punches the boy who uttered the phrase in the stomach. Although at this point in the film, Gillespie was not extremely fond of Tibbs, he still came to his rescue because he knew Tibbs would have been killed without his help. This scene realistically depicted the attitude both young and old southern whites had towards northern blacks, and blacks in general. I also think the film was realistic because, for example, the other police officers were happy when Gillespie ordered them to lock up Tibbs on charges of withholding evidence, which were the results from the FBI lab from the high profile murder case in the town. Even the police officers, who were learning to respect Tibbs, were slightly relieved to have him behind bars. Gillespie knows he is incorrect in his detainment, but says nothing. Gillespie releases him soon after. But, the police officers act as though Tibbs still does not know as much as they do because he is black. The irony is that Tibbs is far more educated than any of the men working as police officers in Sparta, Mississippi. They assume, because of the color of his skin, that he was up to no good, and was not as intelligent as they were. The rise of black nationalist groups were also on the minds of southerners, as they heard of new uprisings and proposed legislation for equal rights. This was apparent in the attitudes of whites towards progressive northern blacks like Virgil Tibbs.

4. Pick one character from the film and explain what you think he or she “stands for”—what do the filmmakers want the audience to learn from thinking about the character and what does this depiction reveal about the American culture in the 1960s?

I think that Virgil Tibbs stands for the progressive, educated black male and his ability to achieve success - even in the south. Without the negative attitudes of the white southerners, Virgil Tibbs would not have been as big of a success. He proved that although racial equality was non existent in the south, it was present somewhere — it was possible for an intelligent black man to have an excellent career. He stood for the changes in the south and the beginning of a very long battle. The civil rights movement was growing significantly in the south, especially because this film is set after Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat in 1955. The bus boycott that followed that incident made an impact, as 90% of blacks did not ride the bus for over one year. The racial 'temperature' in the south was significantly high - with each movement pushing subsequent white movements like the KKK. Virgil Tibbs represents both the civil rights movement, and the overall racial attitude in the south. He made the southerners' racism obvious to them — making them uncomfortable because he was a police officer but still subservient in their eyes. Gillespie does not like treating him like an equal at first, but comes to protect him later on. The character of Virgil Tibbs does a great job of revealing the true attitude of the south, while also commenting on the progress of the civi rights movement in other places.

Gold Diggers of 1933

Gold Diggers of 1933 addresses the difficulty that most people had during the depression – while showing that some families were not affected by the economy. The film opens with the rehearsal of a play run by Barney Hopkins. The bank comes to repossess everything because he was unable to pay. They even go so far as repossessing the costumes Trixie, Polly Fay and Carol are wearing. These girls become a significant part of the film. Later in the film, these girls are unable to pay their rent and end up stealing milk from their neighbor. This is significant because they could not afford breakfast – so they each intended on eating a slice of bread and some stolen milk – but they were forced to return the milk. When the girls hear that Barney intends on putting on another show, they realize that they do not have enough “proper” clothing for them to all go out and try to be cast in the show. They end up picking one female to go, putting the best dress on her. Their neighbor, Brad, is a singer-songwriter who catches Barney’s attention when he is at the girls’ apartment discussing future productions. Brad is part of an affluent family from Boston. He offers Barney $15,000 in cash – but no one believes he can deliver the money. When he does, they think he is a thief. These instances show the class-divide caused by the depression. Those who were significantly wealthy before the depression still had money, while those that were making ends meet before were now unable to pay their bills. Foner mentions the Works Progress Administration (WPA) on page 811. This organization was most famous for its projects in the arts. Hundreds of artists were employed decorating public buildings and painting murals. It also hired writers to create “local histories and guidebooks to the forty-eight states and to record to recollections” of everyday Americans. (811) Part of the WPA, the Federal Theater Project put on plays, the Federal Music Project created orchestras and choral groups and the Federal Dance Project sponsored ballet and modern dance programs. Because of the WPA, many American were able to experience theater, music, and dance programs for the first time. The girls in Gold Diggers of 1933 would have benefited from these federal programs, but they were not created until 1934. Situations like this may have been the reason for these programs.

1. How are gender roles and sexuality represented in the film?

Gender roles and sexuality are represented in the film in a pretty traditional manner. Men in the film are shown to hold more ‘significant’ jobs than their female counterparts. The relationship between Brad and Polly is an example of this. Because Brad belongs to an affluent family, his Brother, Lawrence, comes with his lawyer to pay off Polly and end their relationship because she is not seen as a respectable female counterpart for Brad. This is mainly because of her occupation as a showgirl. Her friends pretend to be Polly and use Lawrence and his lawyer Peabody to take them out to dinner and buy them hats. This shows the societal expectation for female dependency on inherently more successful men.

2. Can the idea of a story of a musical within an actual Hollywood musical film been seen as a form of social commentary about the Great Depression? In other words, is The Gold Diggers of 1933 simply a form of entertainment or would we as historians interpret the film, thinking of it as a primary document, as a form of social critique?

I think that Gold Diggers of 1933 can be seen both as a form of entertainment and as a primary historical document. Its entertainment value lies in the content. As a musical film about the depression, it was very relatable to the average American. This would increase the volume of people willing to purchase tickets with their limited income. As for the film acting as a historical document of social critique, the film shows the struggles every day Americans experience – such as eating, paying rent and finding work. Usually, films glamorize real life. But in Gold Diggers of 1933, the situation the showgirls are in is not fluffed up. They are struggling to eat and pay their bills just like the majority of Americans. This film can be interpreted as a social critique through the analyzing the characters’ social situations as well as their overall day-to-day life.

3.Are the issues of class and social status addressed in the film? Are any New Deal values about what it means to be an American reflected in depictions of class and social status?

Issues of class and social status are addressed in the film. The most obvious example is the relationship between Brad and Polly. Because Brad is from an affluent family, he is not supposed to associate himself with showgirls like Polly. Showgirls are viewed as “parasites” and “gold diggers” which Polly’s friends easily make hilariously obvious to Brad’s brother Lawrence and his lawyer. They make Lawrence and Peabody buy them hats and expensive dinner – just because they think that showgirls are parasites. The differences between the social class of the showgirls and the social class of Brad’s family are astounding. Brad is able to give Barney $15,000 for the production of a play, while the girls are forced to steal milk from their neighbors. The New Deal values about what it means to be an American are reflected in the depictions of social class and status. The gap between classes (the gap that is supposed to be present between Polly and Brad) does not exist in their relationship. But, the mixing of social classes was not a New Deal value; the lack of this cohabitation is more of a New Deal value.