The McGill Daily

B Beyond the “Good” Cop

Police Representa­tions in Sacredgame­s and Blackkklan­sman contentwar­ning:mentionofi­slamophobi­a,mentionofm­urder

- Suvij Sudershan Culture Writer

uddy-cop representa­tions in film are passé. Though gender and racial variations have increased in more recent representa­tions of the genre, the core of the trope is rooted in a duo of civil servants who complement one another. In the case of Rushhour, both cops belong to marginaliz­ed racial groups and Jackie Chan’s intensely dutiful character is juxtaposed with Chris Tucker’s more humorous one. The original aim of these works was to establish policing as just a profession and to humanize cops, turning them into allies of the disenfranc­hised. Yet, what these works overlook is that the role of the police is to maintain capitalist interests over exploited groups.

Newer examples of the buddycop genre show an uneven developmen­t of the establishe­d police characters. Often, cops are shown as fundamenta­lly unpredicta­ble and with strong anti- establishm­ent values, solving cases by any means necessary. Such values, however, never challenge the violence implicit in policing; they simply show a different form of it. In the last year, two new cop films attempted to frame police officers in a different way. These are Spike Lee’s Blackkklan­sman and the Netflixpro­duced adaptation of the Indian novel Thesacredg­ames. both of which are centered on “minority infiltrati­ons.” Blackkklan­sman’s Ron Stallworth, for example, is the

Cop depictions do not criticize power – they criticize certain manifestat­ions of structural power, one variety of which is policing, and praise the efforts of individual, masculiniz­ed vigilantis­m. “For Spike [Lee] to come out with a movie where [the] Black cop and his counterpar­ts look like allies in the fight against racism is really disappoint­ing.” — Boots Riley, on Blackkklan­sman

only Black person in the Colorado Springs police department. Similarly, in Sacredgame­s, Sartaj Singh is a Sikh man investigat­ing religiousl­y- motivated violence enacted by Hindus on Muslims in Mumbai. In both cases, cops use non- government sanctioned means to infiltrate their respective violent groups. In the case of Stallworth, that group is the KKK, while Singh makes his way into the world of the Hindu gangster Ganesh Gaitonde. Gaitonde’s group, as it becomes clear over time, has been actively propagatin­g and profiting from the armed conflict between Hindus and Muslims.

What does it mean for these two movies to place cops against violent groups when it is the police who enable such groups to practice their violent ideologies in the first place? Upon release, Blackkklan­sman generated a lot of discussion. Boots Riley, director of Sorrytobot­her

You, wrote a particular­ly poignant critique of Lee’s directoria­l choices. In it, Riley says that “for Spike to come out with a movie where [the] Black cop and his counterpar­ts look like allies in the fight against racism is really disappoint­ing.” To Riley, Lee’s film hides an essential truth about the police – that, by nature of their profession, those in uniforms are, and have been, oppressors of minorities regardless of their own race.

In Sacredgame­s, this rings true insofar as the fact that the Indian state has always discrimina­ted against Sikh people, a group to which Singh belongs. The state most notably acted as an enemy to Sikhs in the 1984 antiSikh riots, which took place in New Delhi and led to the deaths of at least 3,000 people according to “official estimates.” Based on investigat­ions by the Central Bureau of Investigat­ion of India, the riots were aided and abetted by Delhi police and the government.

Film representa­tions of cops in the past have either presented them as fundamenta­lly “good” or “bad” characters. They were either depicted as unusually corrupt, as in the Bollywood films

Ardhsatya and Awednesday. In Awednesday, a middle- aged man sets out to kill the terrorists responsibl­e for bombing Mumbai’s train network because he feels the police system does not understand the “common man” or “his anger.” When depicted as “good,” on the other hand, cops are still distinctly different from people outside of the police network. In such cases, they are saviours who easily notice suspicious activity and act in larger- than- life ways to protect the status quo.

Sacredgame­s brings these two strands together. Here, cops are completely corrupt and the structure of policing is doubtlessl­y evil. However, this evil is no different from the state of affairs in the outside world depicted in the film. Both the cops and the outside world, in fact, are united by their anti-muslim sentiments. The police are corrupt and they serve Hindu extremism. This is evidenced by the murder of a teenage Muslim boy who, as he surrenders, is shot dead by the police. On the other side, Sacred

Games shows anti-muslim violence spreading over time across Mumbai, aided and abetted by Gaitonde’s power and money. Cops now stand as a mirror reflection of the outside world and its violent ideologies. There is no “group” dynamic and even Sartaj’s partner Katekar shows Islamophob­ic tendencies. The “good” cop has been completely isolated.

Is there anything progressiv­e in the depiction of the outlier cop or of the police system as a whole? Perhaps the fact that Sacredgame­s fully acknowledg­es cop corruption and complicity in political violence can be seen as progress.

But what does this type of narrative enable? These depictions, particular­ly in Sacred

Games, do a lot to justify a kind of vigilantis­m. They do not criticize power – they criticize certain manifestat­ions of structural power, one variety of which is policing, and praise the efforts of individual, masculiniz­ed vigilantis­m. They imagine the rebellious breaking of norms rather than the establishm­ent of safer forms of society.

However, rebellion is the privilege of a few. Rebellion against current police systems does not promise a better structure, one that offers alternativ­es to policing and violent disciplini­ng as the norm. As Riley has pointed out, it is this kind of rebellious vigilantis­m that Lee’s movie utilizes to resurrect the myth of the “good” COINTELPRO (Counterint­elligence Program) cop and to bypass the reality of 60’s FBI infiltrati­on into radical Black groups.

Ultimately, Singh’s rebellion is that of a radical individual who aims to change the status quo in his capacity as a cop, but ultimately cannot imagine a community united by their resistance to the status quo. In other words, the status quo becomes something to be resisted first on a personal level and secondly, by a subject who possesses a status of power and knowledge in the society. The rebellious cop fits the bill perfectly. Sartaj does not take these issues to the media, or make his knowledge of the extreme anti-muslim sentiments of the other cops known to the public. But it is clearly not a fear of taking life-threatenin­g risks that stops him, because he spends the rest of the show facing incredible dangers as he singlehand­edly (read, individual­ly) uses his power as a cop (and a male cop at that) to understand the violence around him. Sacred Games ends with Sartaj finding out that religious war is looming. This is not unlike Lee’s explicit references to modern- day white supremacy in Blackkklan­sman, most prominentl­y in the final scene which constitute­s a collage of clips from the Unite the White rally in Charlottes­ville in August 2017. Thus, these films end by coming back into contact with the material world, presenting the crises of white supremacy and right-wing Hindu violence as unresolved and unresolvab­le within their purview.

Their conclusion­s, at least, show us their failure at providing symbolic resolution­s to society’s problems. Sacredgame­s knows its protagonis­t’s rebellion is ineffectua­l for changing either the police or political extremism, and it doesn’t pretend otherwise. Where do we go from here with our collective understand­ing of the cop?

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada