Screenwriting : Politically correct racial decriptions for a 1950s racially charged script by Michael L. Mizrahi

You exist now. So you should use the most correct and non-offensive words possible. You characters should use the language of their era.

There's nothing you can do to change the past. It was what it was back then. Write it they way you have to but if I were you, I would make a note and attached it to your screenplay so whoever is reading it can know or understand why you used such words. I had to use the word slave and slaves a few times but what else I could use. The slave owners in early 1600s used that word to describe all the black people. I apologize to all black Americans but simply there's no other way to write about that time period.

Use the language of the era. I grew up in the '50s - the common language of the era would be highly offensive today's so you can't write a nonoffending treatment using the true language of the times and have your story ring true. In those days words such as 'negros, niggers, colored, waps, spics, cans and japs' were in pretty common usage and had no derogatory insinuation what so ever.

Just from the plot description, you have no choice. For it to be authentic, you're going to have to use some offensive language. As for the voice, it would be a lot less confusing if you stick with one. Is the voice a different speaker each time? If so I'd say go with BLACK MAN or BLACK WOMAN and add a NUMBER after each. Or you could make them a character such as JAMES or JACKIE, but make a note that they never appear and they are to be recognized as black american. I'm just trying to help. In the end it's up to you. It's your art.

Personally, I would “tell it like it is” and be authentic in characterization, plot, action, and description (the story), but I would use the language of today. However, I would not be “clinical” and absolutely would not be didactic in tone. For example, I’d use Black instead of African-American. If speaking through a character or adding dialogue, they would speak of the era, using slang, racist terms, the colloquial of their every day, etc. Of course, it’s your project, Michael, you know it best, so it is up to you. ;) Hope that helps!

Beth, just my opinion; never attempt to rewrite or gloss-over history. History IS what it was; we need to learn from it so as not to repeat it (learn from our mistakes).

Depends on the tone you want to achieve, but for realistic dialogue I'd say it as it was back then. It's not your job to rewrite history, just look at Django Unchained or 12 Years a Slave. Arguably the best performances in those movies came from DiCaprio and Fassbender, the most despicable characters in the script. Why? Because they felt real, they touched our nerves and made us feel what the protagonists had to go through.

It's 2021 so if you're worried about offending anyone you can rest easy: you will, even if you write Forrest Gump.

Agree with @Doug Art cannot be executed in a climate of fear about words commonly used in a particular period of history. I would "highlight" the bigotry to encourage even more growth and even more change as opposed to sweeping under the carpet. Good point @Jose DiCaprio's dialogue in Django Unchained really pricked the soul and audience felt the pain the protagonists were going through. A whitewashed, sugar coated, woke speech would not have had the same effect in the film.

Thanks for the comments. Keep 'em coming. I'm listening. But please no more comments on dialogue. I think that's a given. Thank you.

You might read books reflecting that period and the dialogue used then, such as the derogatory term "honky" for whites. Check out the book "Let Justice Roll Down" by black civil rights activist John Perkins.

Most of you guys read the whole question, so thanks for your thoughts. In the TREATMENT, I'm going with a quote/unquote "Negro ____" in the begining to highlight the period of segregation. After that I'm using the word, black as description, because it's necessary. (and that's how i grew up) Am using a quote/unquote "WOP" when introducing the non-English speaking, off-the-boat, Italian gangsters for voice (all these scenes are in Italian). After that, I'm using Italian gangsters. I don't think I'm going to say anything to the exec's in advance, beyond the logline. Thanks for helping me with this process.

Michael, I think you are doing the right thing with that. Appreciate your sensitivity to the matters and your approach to seeking guidance for the least offensive method to accomplish your mission. As a biracial guy, I try not to take offense to theoretical/historical depictions of the relationship amongst races. We are relatively familiar with our history and I work not to assume art depicting that history as offensive. It sounds like your final determination seems fair and feasible!

Just so everyone knows, the forum censors will summarily delete posts deemed offensive, e.g. those containing the word “Voldemort” to excess. Except not “Voldemort.”

Doug, huh? I never said to “gloss over” anything, nor implied as such. Nor did I say anything about rewriting history. Nor did I say anything about censoring. I agree with you wholeheartedly about society facing and learning from the past. I answered the OP’s question about word choice in a treatment for execs, and I shared what I would do, personally. I said I would be authentic in the story. And I have. I have written a script that dealt with similar issues, set in the 1920s, dealing with the Klan, segregation, the tragedy and horrors of racism, etc. Perhaps reread my comment. I said IF SPEAKING through characters/adding dialogue (in the treatment), they (the characters) would speak of the era, use slang, racist terms, etc. Using both in the treatment: the language of today and language of the era through character dialogue. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.

@Beth. i don't know what Doug's talking about either. And the use of racial slurs in his post was completely unnecessary.

Michael, I was born in 1955...and at the time (and many years afterwards), African Americans not only were known as "Negroes," but were also called "colored people." (Never DID like the term "Negro.")

If "colored people" makes the 1950s voice you're out to depict authentic, go for it.

I wish you all the VERY BEST on your project, Michael...and I hope we CAN get to the point where we human beings can just call ourselves PEOPLE. Period. (Well, I can dream...)

In description I write what I see. I have a character detective in a film called Harrington (I think, years since I wrote and read it). I just referred to him as Black with arms that come from years in a gym.

In dialogue you have to speak for the character. If someone is a racist pig, they’ll speak like a racist pig. I am also with @Jim Boston on the use of Negro as well. It believe it was white people trying to make their prejudices sound fancy by using a Spanish derivation for Black.

Racial skin colour is also geographic. In the USA people are comfortable saying African American. That doesn’t work in the Southern Hemisphere. I’d say most non-white Aussies are Indigenous or Polynesian. For that reason I’ll stick with a visual description and drop the race. For me people are tall, short, fat, thin, man, woman, black, white, old, young.

Interesting topic. And very challenging when writing and not wanting to sound prejudiced. At the time of the US War Between the States, they were called "darkies", later, "negroes" from the Spanish influence. There's a style of music referred to - at the time - as negro spirituals. Not sure what we are supposed to call those songs now. African-American is a bit of a mouthful at times. Also, in Canada, it doesn't work to say African-Canadian and mean the equivalent to African-American, as we have many people living here who have moved from Africa. And Africa is a very large continent, made up of several countries...

I have a screenplay that takes place in mid-1950's. In those days, it was "Negroes",

"colored people" and "Indians". So to be authentic, stick with those.