Tags
20th Century America, Civil Rights Movement, Dorothy Vaughan, Hidden Figures, Interesting Women, Janelle Monáe, Katherine Johnson, Mary Jackson, NASA, Octavia Spencer, Racial Issues, Taraji P Henson, The 1960s
I know that I promised my next post would be with the historical consultant for The Eagle. But I just saw Hidden Figures (2016, dir. Theodore Melfi, based on the book by Margot Lee Shetterly) and I really wanted to get my thoughts about it down in blog form. So I promise I’ll get to the interview in my next post.
Spoiler Alert: If you’re planning on seeing this movie, you may want to put off reading this, since I talk about major plot points.
Hidden Figures tells the fascinating story of three African-American women who worked at NASA in the 1960s. All three were originally hired to work as ‘computers’, women who did the low-status work of laborious mathematical calculating and double-checking the work of higher status male scientists in the era before the birth of electronic computers. Katherine Goble Johnson (Taraji P. Henson) is a mathematician whose calculations proved invaluable to the launch of the Atlas rocket that made John Glenn the first American to orbit the Earth. Dorothy Vaughan (Octavia Spencer) is the head of the ‘Western’ Computing group, a group of African-American female computers kept separate from the ‘Eastern’ Computing group, who were white women; realizing that her job will eventually be made obsolete by the arrival of an IBM computer, Vaughan teaches herself Fortran and becomes an expert in computers. Mary Jackson (Janelle Monáe) pursues her ambition of being an engineer for NASA.
All three women encounter racist obstacles at NASA. Johnson struggles with the fact that the only bathroom African-American women can use is located literally half a mile away on the Langley campus where she works, forcing her to take extended breaks simply to use the bathroom and thereby drawing the ire of the division head Al Harrison (Kevin Costner). Vaughan is long overdue for a promotion; she has been acting as the supervisor of the Western Computing group, but hasn’t been given the title or the pay of a supervisor, and the woman she reports to, Vivian Mitchell (Kirsten Dunst) doesn’t seem to care. Jackson needs to take night classes in order to apply for the engineering position, but the only school that offers such classes is segregated, and she has to persuade a judge to allow her to attend the classes.
Ultimately, all three overcome their obstacles. Johnson repeatedly demonstrates her invaluableness to Harrison, who increasingly bends the rules to allow her to participate in the work of getting Glenn safely into space and back. Vaughan masters the newly-installed IBM computer before anyone else, and then teaches the other members of the Western Computing group how to work with it, thus saving all of their jobs and giving them a future on the cutting edge of computer science. This convinces Mitchell to arrange Vaughn’s over-due promotion. Jackson persuades the judge to let her attend the night school classes she needs and by the end of the film is on her way to becoming an engineer.
The story is well-told all around. The script is funny and does a good job of making the mathematical problems of early space flight intelligible to a general audience. The performances are all solid, especially Henson’s. And the costume designer does a very subtle job of highlighting the exclusion of African-American women from NASA; the white men tend to vanish into a sea of identical white dress shirts and dark ties, while the black women stand out in demur but colorful skirts and blouses, highlighting the absence of ‘colored’ people whenever they’re not around.
The story it tells is an important one. These three women all played important roles at NASA and made major contributions to American space exploration for several decades. Their story deserves to be told, and it’s exciting to see the movie do so amazingly well at the box office. All too often, American history is presented as the accomplishments of white men, and Hidden Figures does a good job of reminding us that women of color have made great contributions to the country as well. It’s particularly nice to see a biopic about African-Americans who aren’t entertainers or athletes. These women are important not because they’re pretty or can sing, but because they’re smart. And the film confronts the problems of segregation head-on, particularly in Johnson and Jackson’s storylines. Americans need a reminder of just how ugly and unjust segregation and Jim Crow were.
The problem with the film is that in the pursuit of its goal of highlighting the struggles these three women had with segregation and racism, it significantly misrepresents what was going on at NASA in the 60s.
NACA and NASA
The organization we think of NASA began life in 1915 as NACA, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. It existed until 1958, when it was shut down and replaced with NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NACA began hiring African-Americans to work as computers already in 1941, but like many branches of the American government in the period, NACA was segregated. It had a system of bathrooms, cafeterias, and other facilities for whites, and less well-maintained parallels for blacks.
However, when NASA was formed in 1958, it wasn’t segregated. For example, NASA abandoned the system of segregated bathrooms, even though many of its properties were carried over from NACA. The story about Johnson having to run back and forth between buildings to use the bathrooms is actually a story that Jackson told about NACA in the 1950s. In the film, Johnson has to make several bathroom trips, once in the rain, trying to do her calculating work on the toilet so as not to fall too far behind in her work. Finally, when she breaks down and complains to Harrison, Harrison angrily goes out and uses a crowbar to tear down the sign labelling a particular bathroom as being for colored women. It’s a great scene that produces cheers in the audience, but it’s simply untrue.
Similarly, Vaughan was denied the supervisory position she deserved for some time, but that was during the 1950s. By the time the film opens in 1961, Vaughan had already been a supervisor for 3 years. Jackson was offered a position in an engineering team and then had to find a way to get into those classes, whereas the film suggests that she is kept from applying for the position because Mitchell is somewhat racist and unwilling to bend on the rules. So far as I can determine, the film consistently projects the segregation of 1950s NACA half a decade forward onto 1960s NASA.
NASA in the 1960s was actually a tool for desegregation. Already when he was the Senate Majority leader, Lyndon Johnson saw NASA as a way to advance African Americans by hiring and promoting them into better-paying and more respectable positions. It’s no coincidence that NASA desegregated in 1958; Johnson was the head of the subcommittee that oversaw the passage of the government act that created the agency.
Katherine Johnson herself denied experiencing the treatment the film shows her receiving. “I didn’t feel the segregation at NASA, because everybody there was doing research…You had a mission and you worked on it, and it was important to you to do your job…and play bridge at lunch. I didn’t feel any segregation. I knew it was there, but I didn’t feel it.” Likewise, Jackson only recalled one instance in which she felt disrespected, and the man involved subsequently apologized when he realized that he was in the wrong.
So by painting early 1960s NASA as a strongly segregated environment, the film is somewhat unfairly tarring NASA for NACA’s failings, and denying NASA’s modest role in helping advance the interests of African-Americans. The real racism that the women experienced in this period seems to have been from the communities around Langley. Vaughn had difficulties finding a place to stay. In the 1960s, many of the black male engineers encountered threats and violence from the white locals, and one white NASA employee was so badly injured and threatened that he left NASA entirely. Had it chosen to, the film could have made its point more honestly by contrasting the comparatively accepting environment of NASA with the much more racist environment beyond its gates.
Racism or Sexism?
The more I think about the film and read about the background, the more I find myself thinking that the real problem Johnson, Vaughan, and Jackson experienced wasn’t so much racism (although they clearly did encounter some of that) but sexism. Consistently, there is a pattern of the men doing the important, high-status work (such as figuring out the physics of space flight and designing the capsules) while the women (both black and white) are relegated to the low-status work of computing, even though the film makes clear that doing so is a waste of their talents, especially Johnson’s. Apart from Johnson, the only other woman in the Space Task group, Ruth, appears to be a secretary, and there are no women at all in the engineering group that Jackson is involved in.
Johnson repeatedly insists that she needs to be involved in the key meetings where decisions are made, because excluding her means that she has to wait to get the data she needs, which often renders her work obsolete by the time she’s finished it. She persuades Harrison to bend the rules for her to sit in on briefings with the Air Force, and eventually he invites her into Mission Control when Glenn’s flight happens (a decision that the film claims probably saved Glenn’s life). The issue here is not that she’s African-American, but that she’s a woman and the men around her are uncomfortable with her presence.
While the film suggests that the white computers earned more than the black computers, the truth is that the two groups were paid the same, but that their pay was 40% less than the equivalent male pay, even during the NACA period.
So I think that the real problem with the film, at least for me, is that it was trying too hard to make its point about segregation, a point it could only make by misrepresenting the degree of segregation at NASA. Instead, the real story in the material seems to be the way that NASA was excluding women of talent from important roles. Their obstacles were clearly intersectional, involving both their race and their gender, but the film discourages us from thinking too much about gender by highlighting a simultaneous divide of gender and race; the scientists and engineers are all white men and the computers almost entirely black women (the exception being Vivian, who leads the white female computers, but who is never shown making any intellectual contributions to the project and who mostly acts as an administrative obstacle to Vaughn). The result is that whenever gender emerges as an issue, race is almost always there at the same time. There is one scene when Johnson’s future husband (an African-American) makes a sexist remark, but that’s almost the only moment when gender is highlighted as an issue. So the film tends to subsume gender issues under race issues in a way that makes it hard for the audience to see the gender component of the problem.
None of this makes Hidden Figures a bad movie, merely a movie that privileges its message over the facts. It tells an important story that people need to know. I just wish it had been a bit more honest with the facts.
(I feel a need to point out that I’m not a specialist in either American history or NASA history. I’m basing my comments on information I’ve been able to dig up online, and it’s possible that I’ve missed evidence that NASA was a more segregated environment than I realize. I’m certainly not suggesting that NASA was magically free of racism in the 1960s. It clearly wasn’t. I’m sure that these women encountered many obstacles due to their race, but they weren’t the specific obstacles the film offers.)
Correction: An earlier version of this post described John Glenn as the first American in space. I should have written that he was the first American to orbit the Earth, since Alan Shepherd and Gus Grissom both flew high enough to be in what is defined as space prior to Glenn’s flight, but neither of them achieved orbit. I regret the mistake. Thanks to T Rosenzveig for catching it!
Special Note: If you got to this post because some racist shitstain posted a link here in a rant about how the women depicted in this film made everything up, let me clarify the post. These women were not liars. Most of the racism they ran into in the film actually happened. It just didn’t happen in the 1960s under NASA; it happened a decade earlier under NACA. It was the film-makers, not the women, who misrepresented what happened when, in order to make a more dramatic movie. The problems they ran into in the 60s had more to do with ideas about gender than ideas about race. I absolutely 100% support the goal of abolishing racism, and I think it’s wonderful that this movie looks at the vital contributions a trio of little-known black women made to one of America’s greatest technological triumphs, because I think every white person in this country should understand that black scientists have made major contributions to America. So if you got here hoping to read some racist bullshit takedown of this movie, fuck off. You’re not welcome here.
Want to Know More?
Hidden Figures is still in the theaters, so it’s not available on Amazon. However, if you want to do some reading about these women, their story is told in Hidden Figures, by Mary Lee Shetterly. Another book about them is Sue Bradford Edwards’ Hidden Human Computers. Richard Paul and Steven Moss’s We Could Not Fail discusses the history of African-Americans in the space program.
Finally, you could look at Steven Moss’s unpublished master’s thesis, NASA and Racial Equality in the South, 1961-1968, which is available online.
Maggie said:
Hi! I loved your article – that photo isn’t Dorothy Vaughn though, it’s Melba Roy Mouton, who worked at NASA Goddard. https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/melba-roy-computer-at-nasa-goddard
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melba_Roy_Mouton
(Also, I think you meant a black engineer was severely beaten, not a white one?)
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
Thanks for catching my error. My source for it must have mislabeled it. I will see if I can find a better one.
And no, I mean a white engineer. There was so much resistance in Huntsville, AL, that locals began to threaten white NASA employees who were thought to be too supportive of desegregation.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Lyn Robb said:
Thanks Andrew. Very timely: as with most of these types of films I wonder at the veracity so it’s good to know this is worth seeing.
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
It’s definitely worth seeing.
LikeLike
t rosenzveig said:
thank you for the great blog post. i’ve only recently discovered your blog and i’m enjoying it a lot.
i have a small nitpick: you wrote “[…] that made John Glenn the first American in space”, however, it should read “the first american to orbit the earth”. being in space and being in orbit are quite distinct things, with the latter requiring far more energy. (if you are in orbit you are also necessarily in space, but not vice-versa).
gagarin achieved orbit on his first spaceflight, however the first two americans in space, alan shepherd and gus grissom did not go into orbit, they merely flew high enough to be considered in space (above 100km altitude above sea level). the atlas was more powerful than the redstone rocket used for those two previous flights and allowed john glenn to orbit the planet, making him the first american to do so.
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
You are correct. I will correct my post. Thanks!
LikeLike
Cat said:
Hey, I have a tiny TINY nitpick here that I think you would want to know about. You keep referring to Katherine Goble Johnson as “Jackson” in the blog post. You might want to fix that, for accuracy’s sake. 🙂
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
I thought I had fixed that. Grrr. Sorry about that.
LikeLike
Jose Villalobos said:
There’s nothing laudable about lies, especially when they’re meant to promote hatred against America. Young black men are told all their lives that the system is against them, so why should they go to school or work hard? This movie is vicious propaganda.
Whites oppress blacks, and men oppress women. Except they have to lie to tell such a story. It’s classic marxist agitation to divide us into opposing groups and stir up war.
John Glenn never mentioned Katherine Johnson. Her calculations took 6 months, and she was one of many people involved. There are no records of any kind that even mention her and John Glenn in the same context, because it’s complete fiction. She received awards for other things, so she wasn’t hidden. There were books about black people at NASA, so they weren’t hidden. Nothing in the movie actually happened.
LikeLiked by 2 people
aelarsen said:
So pretty much everything you’ve said here is complete bullshit. You’re right that in the famous quote from Glenn, he doesn’t mention Johnson by name, but he clearly knew her and respected her mathematical abilities.
Go spew your racism and attempted revisionism elsewhere. I won’t tolerate it on my blog.
LikeLike
Jose Villalobos said:
John Glenn never said that. Hidden Figures is the revisionist story, and I’m just telling you the truth. But you hate the truth. Nothing I said was racist, but you hate me because you’re full of hate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
aelarsen said:
I’m a professional historian. My concern for the accurate representation of the past is assuredly much greater than yours. The fact that you choose to make a personal attack on me demonstrates you’re not serious about the facts. So I’m going to save us both the trouble of debating these issues because you’re not willing to debate the issues (since you immediately resorted to a personal attack), by simply deleting any further posts you make. Go somewhere else.
LikeLike
Vivian Xang said:
He said absolutely nothing racist. You are the bigot for accusing others of racism just because they have a differing view.
He makes a good point, the movie is inaccurate and this inaccuracies are used to generate racial animosities, and yes, even make America look bad.
You seem to closed-minded to even consider this valid viewpoint.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lgwooden said:
You’re easily triggered. History is exasperating, especially if your preferred version of it doesn’t match reality. That’s bad if you’re a “professional” historian, problematic even. I liked your take on it, a little too much self-hate, but a good read. Just stay objective. The world is flawed – you can’t fix that with bullshit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
aelarsen said:
If you’re referring to my thoughts about historical accuracy, it’s pretty much my job and my goal on this blog to be ‘easily triggered’ about historical accuracy. That’s like saying the CDC is easily triggered by disease outbreaks.
If you’re referring to racism, damn right I’m easily triggered by it. Every decent human being ought to be.
LikeLike
Maurice Ndeke Blackman said:
This article is 100% white supremacist lies and Nazi propaganda. They even say in the title that they think lies are good, so how can you trust someone who loves lies? People shouldn’t be allowed to put such racist hate on the internet, and I would ban it if I could. Anyone who calls Hidden Figures “lies” is racist trash. NASA wants to colonize space with the white man’s science, built on the oppression of black women who did all the work. NASA is evil and so is the science they teach.
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
Apparently you misunderstood the point of the title. The ‘lies’ element is that the movie collapses the racist obstacles the women encountered at NACA in the 50s with the NASA period of the 60s, when NASA was one of the leading government agencies engaged in desegregation and the promotion of blacks.
The article itself is as historically accurate as I can make it.
Science isn’t ‘white’ or ‘black’. It just is, and it works regardless of your race/ethnicity. That’s not to say that scientists can’t be racist, but science itself is race-neutral.
LikeLike
Maurice Ndeke Blackman said:
So pretty much everything you’ve said here is complete bullshit.
Go spew your racism and attempted revisionism elsewhere.
Someone should delete everything you write, as censorship is the proper response to historical accuracy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Julie Rodriquez said:
You sound like you are either trolling or utterly stupid.
White supremacist? The non-liberal, fascist-leftist new buzzword?
Worldwide, it’s only white-majority western liberal democracies that give so much freedom to minorities. Go to Africa or Asia and see how it is for a minority. There is your supremacists!
You lose you shit when some guy tries to point out the TRUTH. It wasn’t desparaging anyone or any race or gender.
Maybe the real issues we have in america today are black prividge and a desire for black
supremacism.
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
There is no such thing as ‘black privilege’ in the US, at least not in any general sense.
LikeLike
James Fulkerson said:
Regarding Blackman and Villalobos (sound like they’re one and the same from their posts), who peed in their Wheaties? I saw the movie, thought they did a good job with it overall. I’ve never seen any movie that purports to tell a story from history that didn’t play fast and loose with something (like conflating a real fatal crash recounted at the beginning of Tom Wolfe’s book THE RIGHT STUFF with the X-1 program in the movie version), but that doesn’t mean that the resulting movie isn’t worthwhile or that the spirit of historical fact hasn’t been honored. In some cases, quite the contrary. Your setting the record straight on HIDDEN FIGURES simply attempts to point out that there were errors in the movie (relatively minor ones), but it did address real issues of the times (prior to the ending of Jim Crow).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Marco said:
Thanks for another interesting read! I’ve been going through all of your posts chronologically (again) and wanted to write something about this (the comment section actually)
And Although im of course aware that anything concerning race, women’s right or homosexuality naturally attracts the internets worst in greater numbers, the comment section here struck me as unusual for your blog.
First of all I was always surprised/impressed how patiently you communicate with even the stupidest of idiots (I remember for example that wildly homophobic rant under an earlier article)
Compared to that Villalobos’s comment was quite tame. White supremacist revisionism perhaps But surely not the worst you’ve had to read here.
You chose not to engage with him any further (which I completely understand and if I’d operate a blog I’d certainly have way less patience)
But what struck me as “weird” was your response to Ndeke Blackman. (Which is obviously the same guy – come on, did you seriously miss that?^^)
It was a poor attempt from an alt-righter to appear as an intolerant, regressive liberal.
It was actually much more racist, dumber, hateful and the first comment just from the perspective of an “alleged” leftist. By choosing that nickname he wasn’t even trying to be subtle.
Yet you replied much calmer and actually tried to debate/explain.
It seems to me that that was his point: (Which the alt-right is constantly trying to make)
that liberals tolerate racism/violence/hate from the left but not the right.
Those were just my thoughts I had while reading. I’ll continue enjoying your blog nevertheless.
PS: finally do kingdom of heaven!^^
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
I’m glad you like the blog!
20+ years of teaching have taught me a lot about patience and teaching. It’s largely a function of how much patience I have on a particular day and how likely I think someone might learn something from a substantive response.
And, to be honest, I find white racism far more offensive than the much less common black racism (which is rare because actual racism, as opposed to prejudice, requires some measure of institutional power to enact prejudice). Whites have way more power in this country than blacks, and there’s a substantial architecture of state power designed to support white racism (up to and including the current occupant of the White House). I also have some sympathy for the roots of black racism, which stems in part from a desire for a more respectable past than the one imposed on them by Western culture. I totally get the desire for a past one can be proud of. See my discussion of the ethnic composition of ancient Egypt.
LikeLike
Marco said:
Maybe that’s my misanthropic side but I hold to the believe that all people are equally horrible.^^
So I would strongly disagree about black racism being less common than white racism.
It’s just that like you say, western countries (espcecially america) are run by and for white people – and rigged against (poor) blacks.
(I’m simplifying a bit for brevity sake – of course there’s also many impoverished white communities that are off just as bad as the black ones)
About the “desire for a past one can be proud of” I’m cautious. See John Oliver’s last show about the confederacy for example and how that leads to southerners denying the truth about the civil war/slavery because they’d like a past they can be proud of.
And here in Germany/Austria there’s regularly some politician who insists that our remembrance of the holocaust and WW2 is somehow shaming us and we should stop focusing on this part of history.
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
The desire for a past one can be proud of is perhaps the primary motive for Confederacy denialism. But I don’t have much time for that because it’s their (or their ancestors) own fault they can’t be proud of that past.
LikeLike
Pingback: Agora: Hypatia and the Heliocentric Theory | An Historian Goes to the Movies
Jim Kennedy said:
Just found this blog and like what I read. My curiosity got the best of me.Just got to wondering about inaccuracies in Hidden figures. My biggest question was did these women actually know each other and ride back and forth to work daily or was that a fictional account. What I learned about the movie was while it portrayed racism the actual truth of the matter is that there was more sexism than reacism at NASA. I grew up in Huntsville, Alabama during this time. The Huntsville City Schools were not integrated until 1964, when I was in the 7th grade and I never saw the 2 kids that enrolled in my school after the day I saw them arrive at school. I say this because the fact that NASA was already integrated may have contributed with the fact that we as a school system did not have too many racial problems at least not in school. The only incident that I can remember occurred during a basketball game in which my school was playing an away game. Fights broke out during the game in the bleachers among blacks. I don’t think any whites were involved. The 2 teams were backed up against the wall at the opposite end of the gym for protection by the referees. Both teams had blacks and whites playing on them. Anyway it seems appropriate about community understanding when the largest employer in the city/county/area is already integrated. BAsed on what little research I have managed to do about the movie I think you are spot on with your evaluation of how things really were. I get the feeling that even in Langley, Virginia that the community was less racist than most of the South considering again that NASA was integrated already, as shown by the police officers willingness to assist the women whether the event is real or not. In the racist South giveing them an escort would not have happened.
LikeLike
aelarsen said:
I believe the women did know each other, but that they weren’t close friends the way the film presents it.
LikeLike
Sebastian Max said:
I agree with the posters who pointed out the revisionism and bold-faced lies and untruths – events that never happened, work that wasn’t anywhere near as critical or important as the film makes it out to be, all to support the leftist narrative that blacks are oppressed by “racism”, which has not been true in a long time and certainly wasn’t true in meritocracies such as NASA (or really most government agencies – including the military), While there may have been segregated facilities, the important aspect of hiring staff was competence and ability, not skin color. A lot of these jobs were based on civil service exams, or the agency-level equivalent. If you passed, you were then selected based on the score you achieved vs the other applicants.
The movie doesn’t want deal with the actual truth because the movie’s producers want to tell a fictional story instead that uses a skeletal template of historical facts that agitates the viewers into thinking that black women somehow were both oppressed and yet did incredibly important work that everyone relied upon, and yet everyone covered it up for ….(some nebulous reason but related to racial bias so strong that they all engaged in a conspiracy over time to deny them any recognition – and yet, if someone were so biased they wouldn’t have hired them in the first place).
Unfortunately, this film appeals to the professional (And amateur) race-obsessed crusaders who are determined to find racism everywhere the can, because that provides more ammo to tear down the American way of life, to erase history, and to shred the Constitution so that they can impose socialism or communism – but not before looting the country to give 10 times as many blacks as have ever been enslaved in the Americas throughout all time, “reparations”….money that will be stolen from people who never owned slaves, never met anyone who did, and whose family most likely arrived in this country AFTER slavery had already been eliminated.
So the movie is really about politics, money, guilt trips, and a mad grab for power in the ongoing race war against whites. Blacks are not oppressed today of course, but these hateful and bitter people want to punish all whites in America for something a few whites to whom nearly nobody is even related, did 160 years or more ago in a small part of the country.
This film is just basically pure racial propaganda, not any different than Django Unchained, and not any less malevolent than the screeds penned by the Nation of Islam radicals or the Black Panthers. It is just naked racial aggression conducted through the power of Hollywood rather than a mob of looters or rioters. Objectives are the same, and its the tactic that is different.
LikeLiked by 1 person
aelarsen said:
Your comment is so full of shit I’m not going to waste my time critiquing it.
LikeLiked by 1 person