In “Black Panther Is Not the Movie We Deserve,” Christopher Lebron discusses the reasons as to why the movie “Black Panther” is underestimating black American men. The place called Wakanda is a fictional place in Africa, where Wakandans’ are isolated from all of those who are anti-black racism. They are well aware of the dreadful treatment many African Americans have to go through in the United States. As Christopher mentions “a man of African nobility must fight his own blood relative whose goal is the global liberation of blacks,” there are two men T’Challa who is the leader of Wakanda and Killmonger who is trying to take away the throne of T’Challa. Killmonger who is seen as a bad guy just because he is trying to liberate his people from the racism they have to go through. This is an example as to why the movie “black panther” is underestimating black American men because Christopher Lebron shows us how there is a side where Killmonger is trying to set free African Americans and how T’Challa is just trying to contain his nation from white supremacy. This is where there has been many debates because the movie portrays the bad guy because he is trying to make a stance and urge for help to liberate African Americans.

An idea that interested me was when Lebron mentions “Even in a comic-book movie, black American men are relegated to the lowest rung of political regard.” In the movie a white men who is a CIA is seen as the one who helps save Wakanda. But, as for “bad guys” such as Killmonger was not even portrayed as a good guy, he was the one who was actually trying to help his people even if it meant there had to be violence involved. Despite his father being murdered by his own relative and being left in poverty by his family, he still gets no recognition whatsoever for at least helping to liberate African Americans which is outrageous and racist.

In Christopher Lebron’s article, “‘Black Panther’ Is Not The Movie We Deserve” he discussed many different points about Black Panther. For instance, Black Panther is a movie about black empowerment in which the only redeemed blacks were African nobles. One thing that I found surprising was women’s stance in this movie. According to Lebron, he states, “They are the film’s brightest spot: the black women of Wakandan descent are uniformly independent, strong, courageous, brilliant, inventive, resourceful, and ethically determined . . . Thus, the movie deserves praise for its gender politics—save in relation to the only black American woman”. In Black Panther, all genders are in a sense equal in power because both genders are being recognized. In black panther, Lebron states how there was racism in the movie because a white man became the hero in the movie all about black empowerment. According to Lebron, he states, “Even in a comic-book movie, black American men are relegated to the lowest rung of political regard. So low that the sole white leading character in the movie, the CIA operative Everett Ross (Martin Freeman), gets to be a hero who helps save Wakanda. A white man who trades in secrets and deception is given a better turn than a black man whose father was murdered by his own family and who is left by family and nation to languish in poverty. That’s racist”. A white man that wasn’t very trustworthy was given a better role than a black man who suffered his way to the top in a way to empower the black race.

Christopher Lebrons interpretation of the movie “Black Panther” surprised me. Less than a month of being out in theaters the movie, made a billion dollars. His analysis of the movies was very interesting and his point of view was different from most. Many individuals considered this a movie that promoted African American culture. The way he analyzed was as if this movie degraded it in a way. For example when he says “In the United States, he learns of the racism black Americans face, including mass incarceration and police brutality….., and he plots to develop weapons using vibranium to even the odds for black Americans.” He gave me a whole other perspective of the movie. We watch movies and we are quick to categorize the villain and the hero, and in this case there can be both.  N’Jobu, the father of Killmonger, were categorized as these bad guys. Yes, N’Jobu was using the vibranium to make weapons, but those weapons were going to be used to help African Americans against those who terrorize them. T’Chaka, HIS OWN brother ends up murdering him, leaving his son without a father. His analysis made me think. He also mentions how there always has to be a white savior. T’Challa was able to confide in a C.I.A spy, whose job is to be deceitful, but he couldn’t confide in his cousin.He couldn’t confide in his cousin, who grew up with no father. Instead he kills him. Doesn’t killing N’Jobu just clarify the stereotypes against African-Americans? T’Chaka, leader of Wakanda, kills his own brother, and refuses to aid the foreign who also struggle. “There is no reconciliation. Killmonger yanks the spear out of his chest and dies. The sun sets on his body as it did on Michael Brown’s.” The way he uses a real experience is powerful. N’Jobu was killed by his brother, and the movie ends with T’Challa killing his cousin. Killmonger meets the same death as his father. There was no saving him.

In James Baldwin’s “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?”, Baldwin goes on to explain the importance if launguage and how it defines you as a person and people should be allowed to have their own language because language is something that makes a person who they are. This is evident when he says, “People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their circumstances, or in order not to be submerged by a reality that they cannot articulate.” He is basically saying different languages are created by different groups of people or even stem from other languages in order for them to express themselves because they do not want to live in a world in which they can not communicate or express themselves. I actually agree with this because it is clear that everyone likes to be connected and expressing themselves. This is especially evident now in the time of the internet because you see everyone sharing everything about themselves and commenting on other people’s posts. I also agree with when Baldwin says “It goes without saying, then, that language is also a political instrument, means, and proof of power”. Here he is basically saying that language is at the center of everything, because you need language for power and language is what is used to influence anyone from people in the street to government officials. This goes back to the fact that different groups create their own languages. A common language or languages is what holds a group together it’s why the slaves did not have the power to rebel for so long, they were weak as a group because they did not share the core of what gives a group their power, a common language. A common language is the base of power in any group, nation, or just people in general. This is why all people and groups should be allowed their own language and why black English is indeed a language.

In “If Black English Isn’t a language, Then Tell Me, What is”, by James Baldwin talks about the importance of language. And he goes aheads and says that “People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their circumstances, or in order not to be submerged by a reality that they cannot articulate” (Baldwin 2). Meaning that people create languages depending on their their circumstances and reality. Which leds to groups creating “different languages”, accents, or slangs for the same language, since every group and nation have different experiences. Balwin adds on to this idea on the third paragraph when he talks about places like Quebec, Marseilles and Martinique, and even though they all talk french, “as it turns out, they are not saying, and cannot be saying, the same things”.

He adds on to the importance of language by saying that “language is also a political instrument, means, and proof of power”. He talks about how with language you connect (or disconnect) with people, giving you the power to communicate with groups, communities or the public in general. Then he jumps on talking about how back then how dangerous language was since, since it said alot about you. He brings up examples like how back then by revealing your language “You have confessed your parents, your youth, your school, your salary, your self-esteem, and, alas, your future.” (Baldwin 4).

He talks about how the importance of language is related to “Black English” and how it should some how be respected by white people since “Black English is the creation of the black diaspora.” (Baldwin 7). Meaning that the “Black English” was created from black history on America, and attributed to the fact that Blacks had to in part assimilate and create a new language, since they were being brought as slaves from different tribes, and they had to figure out a way for them to understand each other.

But one thing I found “interesting” about this article, was the fact that Baldwin said “The brutal truth is that the bulk of white people in American never had any interest in educating black people, except as this could serve white purposes.” (Baldwin 11). Since even though it is true that alot of white people back then were racist because of the jim crow laws, and civil rights movement, other groups of white people helped on helping for the equality of races in America.

James Baldwin’s op-ed “If Black English Isn’t a Language Then Tell Me, What is?” was a really insightful and astonishing piece. It was composed of Baldwin not only emphasizing but demonstrating the importance and the depth behind language. Previous, to reading this op-ed I was very narrow-minded about the meaning of language, to me it was simply a means of communication. However, throughout reading this op-ed it showed me that it was indeed so much more. As Baldwin stated, “The argument has nothing to do with the language itself but with the role of language.” Through this, he conveys that language is not just a verbal way of communication but it is a way African Americans built a community. A language is a form of identification or identity. His stance throughout the op-ed was that “black language” should be acknowledged as a language. It dates back to the time period of slavery, in which people of color “blacks” were oppressed by the “superior whites.” The slaves were transported as if they were chained up dogs, all emerging from different tribes who spoke different languages. They had no form of communicating with one another in these extenuating circumstances driving them to create their own language. According to Baldwin, “People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their circumstances.” Through this, he was trying to demonstrate that the means and circumstance are what emerges a language. The goal was and is survival it was sadly the “brutal necessity” of having to endure these circumstances and this struggle. Therefore, Baldwin wanted to call attention to the fact that giving into what is known to be the “common language” comes at the price of “one’s temporal identity.” He refused to allow blacks to define themselves by a (common) language that “has never been able to recognize him.” For blacks, their identities were something they intended to hold onto, therefore, through not acknowledging “black language” it completely undermines this.

“A child can not be taught by anyone who despises him, and a child can not afford to be fooled”(Baldwin 2). I found this line, in particular, to be very interesting because it went into the idea of how the white Americans generally had no interest in educating the black. The whites simply seemed to always have purely selfish intent on educating blacks. I also found it interesting that Baldwin calls attention to how it was not the person of colors language posed an issue, it is their experience.

Overall, I found the op-ed very interesting and intriguing to see how his stance could really develop and change my point of view completely on the importance of language and the evolution of it. However, I did find some of the phrasing and wording confusing due to the fact Baldwin used an abundant amount of figurative language. Although it had its confusing parts the op-ed sparked a lot of emotions and used pathos adequately to get its point across.

In “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What is?” written by James Baldwin, he provides his perspective on what language truly represents. In James Baldwin’s op-ed, he states, “it goes without saying, that language is a political instrument, means, & proof of power”, conveying the idea that language brings people together. I believe he is trying to say that although there are different languages and different variations speaking all around the world, people share a common ground in understanding one another at a certain point. Baldwin says,  “People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their circumstances”, and this is exactly how and why Black English was formed. Black English was formed under historical events which occurred in America, which took part into developing this form of language. For example, he mentions that the white man never meant to teach the black man, the white man just needed them to understand them for the sole purpose of serving them. Black English is the creation of black diaspora. Another concept James Baldwin brings up in his writing is that language can be used not just be used for communication, but to classify people. It reveals the private identify of an individual as Baldwin states, and it can be used to identify people’s background, salary, school, etc.

In general, I was most intrigued by James Baldwin’s writing as a whole. As I read this, I felt the anger his words conveyed and you can really notice the emotion throughout the writing. He was angry at the fact that the white people did not want to accept Black English. He mentions that the white man never really intended to teach the black man, but only for the purpose of the black man being able to understand and serve the whites.

 James Baldwin’s op-ed “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is? It was something that I was not expecting and that many people should read it if they haven’t. Once I began to read, I felt myself agreeing with James Baldwin and understanding his way of thinking and  understanding of African American culture in America. Baldwin clarifies how the production of a language  “ comes into existence by means of necessity, and the rules of the language are dictated by what the language must convey”  (Baldwin 2). The making of Black English is a prime examples of having to adapt to your surrounding. As per Baldwin, the power that drove the making of the presence of Black English was the noteworthy language something that squares or quits something between slaves brought into the U.S. Since they came for originating from an assortment of African clans and countries, they were not able successfully speak with one another so as to keep up a network and endure. According to Baldwin “People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their circumstances, or in order not to be submerged by a reality that they cannot articulate. (And, if they cannot articulate it, they are submerged.) A Frenchman living in Paris speaks a subtly and crucially different language from that of the man living in Marseilles;”  this is showing how you can live in the same area but you can speak a whole different languages from the person living in the next town over. I interpret black English as a way for people from Africa  that have different languages to have a way to communicate to each other.

One thing that stood out was “The brutal truth is that the bulk of white people in American never had any interest in educating black people, except as this could serve white purposes”(Baldwin 3) . It show how they  were not being taught enough English to serve the white. Baldwin gave me a different point of view of black English.

In the article “ If Black Isn’t a Language, Then tell me, What is? “ by James Baldwin states that people change there language in a way for people to understand each other depending on the circumstances. For example, in the article the example the author uses is “ Blacks came to the United States chained to each other, but from different tribes: Neither could speak the other’s language. If two black people, at that bitter hour of the world’s history, had been able to speak to each other, the institution of chattel slavery could never have lasted as long as it did. “  The men spoke different languages/dialect  and they could not  understand one another. As time went on the slaves formed a black church and they started to come together to create a black English. Changing the language is a way to adapt, it can lead to a positive thing or fatal thing.  Now I also believe that the author is saying that sometimes people take some things from another language for example, the white people take some ideas from the black people, the black people won’t get credit for it. As the author say’s “ white Americans would sound like if there had never been any black people in the United States, but they would not sound the way they sound. “  if it wasn’t for the black people  they wouldn’t act a certain way because the white people would not do it unless it was already done and said.

What interested me about this was when the author says “ Blacks came to the United States chained to each other, but from different tribes: Neither could speak the other’s language. If two black people, at that bitter hour of the world’s history, had been able to speak to each other, the institution of chattel slavery could never have lasted as long as it did.“ this interested me because I am pretty sure not too many people realized (including myself) that those prisoners did not speak the same language. If you think about it if they did speak the same language would slavery have ended faster? What would the course of history be like because if they did make a

In James Baldwin’s  “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?” illustrates how language is not just used for communication but it can also be used to classify someone from a different background or race. For instance, Baldwin states, “Language, incontestably, reveals the speaker” (1). Baldwin is trying to say that as soon as someone says something, the listener is already making an assumption about the speaker’s race, ethnicity, etc. In addition, he states, “A language comes into existence by means of brutal necessity, and the rules of the language are dictated by what the language must convey” (2). Black English came as a means for African Americans to understand each other during their times of prejudice. To add on, he states, “There was a moment, in time, and in this place, when my brother, or my mother, or my father, or my sister, had to convey to me, for example, the danger in which I was standing from the white man standing just behind me, and to convey this with a speed, and in a language, that the white man could not possibly understand, and that, indeed, he cannot understand, until today”(2).  Black English was used amongst African American’s and only them.

One thing I found interesting was “It may very well be that both the child, and his elder, have concluded that they have nothing whatever to learn from the people of a country that has managed to learn so little” (3).  My interpretation of this quote is that Black English does not seem very interesting to the people of America as they seem to think it is appropriate in an academic setting,