Freedom Writers: The Life of a Teacher and her Students in a Book in a Movie
Tupac Shakur, a highly influential artist of the 1990’s, wrote, “Long live the rose that grew from concrete when no one else ever cared.” In his metaphor, he celebrates the tenacity of those people, including himself, who can survive from underprivileged circumstances. Shakur argued that other people, however, would focus on the aesthetics of the rose and overlook the conditions. Shakur may have been wrong when he said no one else cared. Freedom Writers follows a biographical account of Erin Gruwell, a new teacher at Woodrow Wilson High School, and her work with at-risk teenagers following the 1992 Los Angeles Riots. Gruwell deals with strong racial tensions amidst a voluntary integration program. Focusing on her unorthodox teaching style, the film depicts an underdog story of tolerance and confronts the self-deprecating mindsets of Gruwell’s students. Although the film carries a heavy emotional appeal, it forgoes depicting traditional pedagogy in favor of Gruwell’s unconventional methods. The film spans four years, but has been condensed to two hours. Despite the time constraint, the liberties taken with Gruwell’s experience do not heavily affect an authentic portrayal within the movie.
Freedom Writers portrays education as a solution to overcoming adversity. Instead of a film that displays discipline and control, it emphasizes developing a mindset that can survive outside of school. During a confrontation between Gruwell and her students, one of the students, Marcus, admits, “… just do your little babysitting up there…When I look out in the world, I don’t see [any]body that looks like me, with the[ir] pockets full unless the[y’re] rapping a lyric or dribbling a ball.” Gruwell challenges these notions with an inverted hypothetical, but what if they can’t? Because of these low expectations, the students have adopted a defeatist attitude. As a result, Gruwell changes her curriculum in an effort to bring out their potential and show them other options exist.
Coming of age movies always have the dedicated teacher archetype that breaks traditions and challenges authority; Erin Gruwell serves as a real world example. In the film, unsupportive administration and unsympathetic colleagues take away valuable resources from Gruwell. She loses advice, textbooks, and moral support simply because of her peers’ biased views against her students. Instead of conceding to their views, she finds ways to fund all materials, events, and field trips in an effort to expand her students’ thinking. Based as a reward system, she defends, “I can’t promise them something I can’t deliver; it only proves what they already believe.” The film covers major events such as the books they read for class, the class’s trip to the Museum of Tolerance, their meeting with Miep Gies, the person who harbored Anne Frank, at their school, and getting computers donated so they could write their eponymous Freedom Writers Diary. Knowing that when the movie finishes and we can still see what Erin Gruwell has accomplished, we have something else besides a happy resolution; we have proof that we can make a change.
The film shows how the will of one person can affect others. Erin Gruwell achieves many things, most importantly, getting all of her students to graduate and attend college. Kids whom other people had no hope for changed with patience and an open mind and can be viewed as adults. Not all this happened through the effort of just one person; Freedom Writers teaches audiences about cooperation paired with determination. Whenever Gruwell faces a problem, such as her unsupportive administration, she first tries placating everyone. When that fails, she searches for alternatives such as support from the superintendent. This pattern of roadblocks occurs throughout the movie in different forms. Gruwell supplements her lack of funding with jobs, fundraising, and concerts. She inspires her class with appearances from Holocaust survivors. She brings her class together by showing despite their race they share the same struggles. Through Gruwell’s determination, people believe in her and support her to great lengths.
Gruwell’s curriculum structures around tolerance; a message which led from inspiring her classroom to using it as a tool for change. The students use their diaries to get their voice out there; Paramount Pictures uses Gruwell’s experience tell the story. With this kind of exposure, it builds support for Gruwell’s cause. When discussing field trips with an administrator, she argues that most of her students “have never been outside of Long Beach.” Similarly, by making this film, this allows an opportunity for people to see this kind of classoom. Just like the students, the audience view education through a different perspective and gain insight. Before someone views a student labeled “at risk,” they should at least acknowledge the person there as well.
Erin Gruwell taught English to the same class for four years straight and even followed some to the college level. An early scene in the movie shows a time lapse of what may be a day and several periods or several days of the same period. The film never explicitly explains certain details like this which for some may cause problems. In reality, Erin Gruwell had 150 students but the film only shows a select 30 of them; of these 30, the film focuses on a dozen’s stories. In art, everything the artist leaves on the canvas must be viewed as intentional. The finalized movie can be a mixture of hit and miss events and hopefully be good or it can be refined and reworked until it is a masterpiece. The stories the film focus on likewise must be viewed as intentional. For true authenticity however, a problem arises: if only those dozen from only one class could make the movie, what does it say for the other 138 stories? One student, Jamal, claims to have seen “more bodies than a mortician,” but his story does not make it. Producers may take liberties with the story to ensure a clean movie experience. In the two hours allotted, consolidating certain details may smooth out the story and still maintain its message. For example, in Erin Gruwell’s first year, she worked as a student-teacher. The introduction of her mentor would explain the finer detail but hampers the overall story. In addition, because of the biographical account, most scenes are selected for their impact. The scene discussing the parallels of a caricature of one of the black students, Jamal, and the Holocaust marked the first important lesson about tolerance. The hero confession Marcus makes to Miep Gies demonstrates how even “a teenager can, within their own small ways, turn on a small light in a dark room.” One could argue the accuracy of these scenes but the journals keep the story honest. Voice-overs within the movie are taken from the The Freedom Writers Diary verbatim. So instead of challenging if the scenes in the film actually occurred, one should be critical of the validity of how polished the arguments and conversations are in the movie.
The events that made it into the movie are important enough, chosen to represent the ideals of the movie. Oddly enough, it is better to ask about scenes that did not make the movie. In a classroom of at-risk students, summers are glaringly absent within the movie. It may be excusable because the movie revolves around the classroom and the filmmakers know what happens to each character. In the interest of time, these events may have been left out because they do not reinforce the movie’s message or that another scene better portrays it. Also, in a classroom activity, one question showed that every student knew where to get drugs. One of the students, Andre, finds time in the movie to deal drugs. Surprisingly, a subject the movie could educate its audience but remains untouched after those brief scenes. One can infer that Andre stops dealing but it doesn’t make complete sense. Although surrounded by these drugs, not one of the students is ever shown under the influence. If the movie did show scenes of this nature, it may have hurt the movie despite its accuracy. Liberties taken with this may have been made in the interest of time but more importantly to reach a wider audience.
In the climax of the movie, the English Department Head, Margaret Cambell asks Gruwell if she can “repeat the [successful] family environment [Gruwell] created in every classroom? For every grade? For every student?” Gruwell honestly answers that she doesn’t know. The movie leaves the success of Gruwell’s unorthodox methods in question but at the end of the movie, title cards give solid answers. In 1999, the students’ book was published and afterwards, Gruwell and her class establish the Freedom Writers Foundation whose mission seeks to emulate the success of their class. With these revelations, the film presents a special case of success in the classroom set against seemingly insurmountable challenges.
For the story of Erin Gruwell and her Freedom Writers to be completely and accurately portayed, it will take more than a two hour movie. The film culls and crafts the best events to properly communicate a story of tolerance and achievement and takes minor liberties with history. These changes are small compared to other details that are left out. Fortunately, the book and other media sources, like documentaries, serve to bridge these overlooked portions. The film itself succeeds in arguing its purpose and presents an alternative way of looking at education.
Tupac Shakur claimed that, like the rose growing from concrete, no one else ever cared. He
had not met Erin Gruwell who refused to let any of her students slip through the cracks. Tupac might have found solace if only he heard Erin tell her student, “… I know what you’re up against. We’re all of us [sic] up against something… I am not letting you fail. I see who you are. Do you understand me? I can see you. And you are not failing.” No one else ever cared is false. Erin Gruwell saw past the aesthetics and saw the circumstances. She tried to help and succeeded. Maybe finally, Shakur can admit that someone did care.
