Representation of Ethnicity in 'Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt' and 'Popchips'

Representation of Ethnicity in 'Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt' and 'Popchips' - Rhys Wallett

In the trailer for Netflix's Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, there is a very peculiar representation of race portrayed for all races. Let's start with the representation of black people, with the primary representation of the race being embedded in Titus Andromedon, in which he is portrayed as excessively homosexual and 'fabulous' per se. This is shown in the duo shot of Kimmy and Titus which the mise en scene shows Titus going "Ooh"! with a sassy tone, wearing a rainbow headband (which is iconography for the LGBT community) and wearing a tank top which we can see the top right of a love heart in the mid shot. This is interesting as this definitely subverts numerous stereotypes regarding coloured people such as how they must be, stereotypically, boring, have an accent and engage in criminal activities and instead, Netflix has decided to make Titus a gay icon, with evidence such as how he says "It is, girl.",  breaks into dance sporadically dressed as a Roman and possess a generally effeminate posture when confronting Kimmy about why she is "scared of velcro.". Yet this can be open for debate as while it does provide a progressive representation of different ethnicities, can the same be said for sexuality? On a side note, you could argue that how they have shown Titus, a 'fabulous' homosexual, this is regressive for the LGBT community as it can create the ideology that if you're gay, you're extravagant, which we know is now true.

In addition, there is also a minor reference to the Spanish Culture and ethnicity, but it isn't necessarily progressive. We see this in the first which the mise en scene shows a long shot of 4 females, 3 Caucasian and one of Spanish ethnicity surrounding a Christmas tree in a bunker. The shot shows Donna wearing a purple unflattering dress, with next to all of her flesh being concealed and singing along. A critic may argue that this lack of skin shown, which prevents Laura Mulvey's theory from being prevalent, could be because that Netflix is attempting to prove an idea that no one wants to see a person of Spanish heritage as 'sexy'. They must be dressed fully and unflatteringly and as she has no individual voice, could suggest how she must conform, obey and remain silent in society, which could be considered hugely regressive. In addition, when looking at the mise en scene of the women, the 3 Caucasian women (Kimmy, Cyndee and Gretchen), they have more of a 'Hollywood' body, with skinny waists, long hair and white skin. This could suggest how Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt may be showing that only those with white skin can be 'sexy' per se as they have body types ideal for modern beauty, meanwhile, Donna has a bit more cellulite and has a more of a plump figure, which society would find less attractive.

In contrast, while there is an advantage to being Caucasian shown in the show, their representation as a race is far from perfect, with Kimmy and Jacqueline being key factors to this. If we start with the eponymous character  Kimmy Schmidt, we get themes of uniqueness, stupidity and joy. The theme of 'stupidity' can be shown in the very first scene when she is singing "Apocolypse, Apolcolypse, we did it with our dumbness." in the bunker, due to her being a member of a cult for 15 years which is laughable as she has been forced to believe the world died of an apocalypse because humans are dumb. This makes for humour when she is rescued, although when she is free, she still acts foolish such as how when the mise en scene shows a long shot of Titus showing Kimmy her living arrangements, a crappy wardrobe with failing walls, to which she says "I will be VERY comfortable here" which shows that her childish attitude allows her to be excited over what a general adult audience would find unsatisfactory and appalling as living arrangements. Plus when she proceeds to attack a man who is offering her her bag in the long shot, she proves to be funny as she is unaware that this social construct is considered polite and noble, therefore her incorrect response shows her confusion while adapting to modern society.

Plus, the character Jacqueline brings mostly negative representations for those of white ethnicity, as she proves to be excessively rich, ignorant and bossy with an example of when Jacqueline is interviewing Kimmy and says "Then get me up at 10, but don't wake me up." This confusing juxtaposition of a sentence can add humour as we know that said task is impossible as an audience, so we get a vaguely idiotic but highly snobbish theme from Jacqueline. Plus when she shows to offer water, to which Kimmy declines, she throws it in the bin, showing total ignorance to saving money, the environment and general intelligence which shows how she is stuck up. This could suggest that white people are stereotypically all rich, snobbish and ignorant, which is regressive as it creates an ideology that if you are white, you must be excessively rich and cruel.

And when we are analysing this Popchips advert, we can definitely emanate ethnic and racial representations which can be regarded as racist. For starters, they prove to almost glorify Indian ethnicity and use common stereotypes to appeal to the audience. A first example would be how the miss en scene shows a medium close-up shot with the man smiling broadly and raising his hands giving a thumbs up. This gesture is stereotypically loin med to those of Indian heritage and the Indian culture, as it can link to the stereotype of 'The Indian Cab Driver' which involved them smiling broadly and giving a somewhat foolish thumbs up when engaged in conversation and receiving tips. This hugely limiting and regressive stereotype which has been portrayed in the print ad portrays the Indian culture in a negative way, and tells a mainstream, audience, the majority most likely a Caucasian audience, that those of Indian ethnicity all act in this manner, which a post-modern reformer audience would consider tomfoolery.

Plus, we can use the title in the ad as evidence of potential discrimination of the Indian culture, as the noun "bombay" has been used in replacement of the noun "bomb", which is a commonly used phrase. Instead in some blatantly terrible way, they have made the phrase stereotypically "Indian" if you will. Plus, an Indian audience would most likely take offence to this as Bombay (now Mumbai) is a key and essential part to Indian culture, only to become now a form of marketing scheme.

Furthermore, the clothes he is wearing can be disrespectful as he is wearing clothes that would be traditionally worn in Bollywood culture, a beautiful dance essential to India's history. To now be the clothes of a 'cab driver' stereotype who is smiling to promote Popchips, can be considered highly degrading and offensive as they are mocking, twisting and glorifying India's rich history to promote their brand of chips. Overall, this ad is hugely regressive and there seems to be no progressive ideologies shown in this ad at all.