I think one of the more interesting, and understandable, ideas brought up in Halls article was after he addressed inferential racism, addressing three stereotypical roles/characters. These were:
1) The "Slave-Figure", who Halls describes as "Devoted and childlike, unreliable, unpredictable, and undependable." However, this character is not only in media about slavery, and it is not a role always played by African-Americans.
2) The "Native" Hall describes as the character who runs in the wild and is free, but also a "savage" type. This person, (I think, but this area confused me a bit) is the one who threatens the "isolated white figure."
3) And the "Clown" or "Entertainer", Hall describes as the person who is putting on a show for "The Others" (Who are "the others??") and the character we laugh at or with. We admire the "entertainer" by we are "put off" by the "clown" because of the stupidity.
I realized that in any show I watch, there are definitely these three characters. Do you think that Hollywood views these three characters as a necessity in their productions? Is it "the same" as the way story-lines (plot, rising action, climax, resolution, etc.) are essential for productions of movies and novels? Also, do you think that, since ideologies CAN transform, maybe Hollywood will produce movies without these roles?