It was the summer of 1963, everyone called her Baby, and it didn’t occur to her to mind. This iconic opening line introduces Frances “Baby” Houseman and sets the stage for Dirty Dancing, a film that continues to captivate audiences decades later. Beyond the catchy soundtrack and memorable dance sequences, Dirty Dancing offers a compelling lens through which to examine aspects of whiteness, particularly white liberal idealism. As we delve into understanding whiteness, this beloved movie provides surprisingly insightful material. Even if you’re unfamiliar with the film, this analysis will illuminate the nuances of its themes.
The Naiveté of White Liberalism: Baby’s Character
Baby Houseman perfectly embodies the archetype of white liberal idealism. She is portrayed as principled, intelligent, and well-read, yet simultaneously comes across as somewhat arrogant, deeply inexperienced, and ultimately naive. We first encounter Baby in the backseat of her family’s car, engrossed in a book about class inequality while en route to a luxurious holiday resort. Her aspirations are grand – joining the Peace Corps, traveling the globe, and performing good deeds, all on her own terms.
Baby’s conviction in her ability to make a difference is evident, but it’s underpinned by a reliance on her privileged socioeconomic background and the influence of her father. Interestingly, she depends on a traditional masculine figure, a reliance that clashes with her burgeoning feminist sensibilities. Early in the film, Baby expresses a belief that she will never find a man as exceptional as her father. She is eager to intervene and help others but lacks self-awareness and a deeper understanding of the world beyond her sheltered existence.
This portrayal of Baby mirrors aspects of white liberalism. A stark example of this was seen during the Black Lives Matter movement in June 2020, when countless individuals, predominantly white, posted black squares on Instagram as a gesture of solidarity. While seemingly supportive, this act of “performative allyship” often lacked genuine substance. These well-intentioned but ultimately superficial actions can be driven by ego, guilt, shame, or a complex mix of these emotions.
Extending this comparison, one might question if whiteness, much like Baby, will ever truly detach itself from its “father” – white supremacy. White supremacy is, after all, the system that grants whiteness its power and privilege. It acts as a protector of whiteness, similar to how an overprotective father shields his child. The crucial question becomes whether whiteness can break free from this paternalistic influence and evolve beyond the need for such protection. Previously, this series explored the detrimental paternalism of white supremacy, focusing on villainous father figures in popular culture. Now, it’s essential to consider the characteristics of the “patronized child” – the temperament, attitude, and character traits that allow the “patronizing parent” to maintain control and influence. Understanding this dynamic is key to unpacking the complexities of whiteness as portrayed through the lens of Baby in Dirty Dancing.
