If you are a TV viewer, you've no doubt seen the TV trailers for the upcoming movie of the same name. The movie appears to follow the fate of three black women who worked as 'human computers' at NASA during the Mercury missions era. I thought the trailers looked interesting and did a little digging and found that the movie is based on a book. So I put in my request to the local library. Within a week, I was deep into the story. My thoughts are about the book, not the movie as I haven't seen it yet. but that doesn't stop me from voicing some thoughts of the eternal books vs. movie arguement.
The story opens in the late 1930s and early 1940s. Germany is pressing their neighbors and have made significant inroads into the use of airplanes as an offensive weapon. Fighter and bomber designs are significantly superior to what their opponents have.
The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics was a relatively inconsequential program within the US government that had been studying, refining, and testing new airplane designs for quite some time. In the early 1940s, Dorothy Vaughan, a Farmville, VA math teacher, saw an ad in the local post office for mathematicians. Specifically, females to work at the NACA located in nearby Hampton, VA (near Norfolk, Newport News, and Virginia Beach). She was hoping for a summer job. The ad was meant for white women at the local all-girls college. But the region's black newspapers extolled the wartime job opportunities so Dorothy applied to be what was called a human computer in NACA's Langley Aeronautical Memorial Laboratory. The job was to crunch the numbers that the (white) engineers gave them. As the 40s marched on, so did the need for a whole bunch of STEM types: science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Wasn't long before a whole office full of black 'computers' was hired.
For Virginia in the 1940s, these math jobs were almost unheard of for blacks. Back then, Virginia wasn't the best example of progressive social enlightenment. It was one of the last to accept Brown v. Board of Education, actively fought against equal pay for equal work, and was visibly segregated on and off the Langley campus.
While Dorothy wasn't the first black female computer, she was one of the most sought after by the engineers because of her accuracy and her commitment. Her successes led to opportunities for black women hired after her. In particular Katherine Johnson and Mary Jackson both of whom were instrumental in the early days of space flight. Johnson would be the go-to person in calculating takeoff, flight, and re-entry trajectories for most of the Mercury flights.
As with most adaptations by Hollywood, they take some liberties to present a reasonably coherent story (and dialogue) within the typical 2ish hour time frame. From what little I know about the movie, the screenplay has deviated from the book to follow Vaughan, Johnson, and Jackson through their time at Langley. The book, however, digs far deeper into the social injustices reaped on blacks in the mid 20th century, the state of Virginia in particular.
Shetterly takes us inside the homes, neighborhoods, churches, picnics, socials, sports, and more of the lives surrounding these uniquely gifted women. In doing so, she shows us how these women had to walk a delicate line between the good things their jobs were giving them and what they were giving to their job vs. the realities of life as blacks in a deeply divided state. Langley may not have had overt racism on the campus, but it was there. Newspapers were asking, “Help us to get some of the
blessings of democracy here at home first before you jump on the ‘free other
peoples’ bandwagon and tell us to go forth and die in a foreign land”
(1942
Norfolk Journal and Guide).
In the late 1940s, Virginia and Hampton had "colored water fountains,
bathrooms, segregated seating in diners and public transportation. NACA had those,
too. Less by design and more by behavioral history – everybody just did it
because they’d always done it. Except for bathrooms. ‘Colored’ bathrooms
remained." And when far from the cafeteria, wasn’t long before one female
computer had to go and just used the closest toilet. Passive resistance or an
overfilled bladder? No matter. The die was cast and another wall tumbled inside Langley way before it fell off the campus.
As the book moves into the late 1950s and Sputnik, then into the 1960s and Kennedy's wish to put a man on the moon, there were other social triumphs: “Civil
Rights act of 1964. Voting Rights Act of 1965. Jim Crow laws that defined
workplaces, modes of transportation, public spaces, voting fell state by state.
But economic and social mobility that had been held hostage by legal
discrimination remained stuck.”
In the middle 1960s, Star Trek helped solidify science and technology in the mainstream living room. Shetterly tells the story of Nichelle Nichols (Urhuru) who wanted to leave the show after one year. However, at an NAACP event in LA, Nichols met Dr. King (an devoted fan of the show) and mentioned her desire to
return to the stage. “You can’t leave the show! We are there because you are
there.” The public saw the future in Star Trek and in that future, a black
woman was effectively the 4
th in command of a starship. She had to stay. She stayed, but not until after some serious soul searching.
Despite NASAs successes, Shetterly lets us know that even in the lifetimes of many who will read the book (and see the movie) “so much money was spent between 1969-1972 to
put a dozen white men on an express train to a lifeless world. Negro men and
women still could barely cross state lines without worrying about predatory
police, restaurants that refused to serve them, service stations that wouldn’t
let them buy gas or use the restroom. And the government wants to put a
white man on the moon?”
My point is that the book is really in two interconnected lessons. One lesson is the story of a number of black computers (not just the three in the movie) and the pivotal role they played in the rapid advancement of American aeronautics and space travel. The second far more important lesson is about the societal ills that were the way of life and the changes that occurred between roughly 1940 and 1970. Both are history lessons, but overall, Shetterly uses the computers as vehicles to present just how bad things continued to be 80 years after Lincoln's Proclamation.
I grew up in the DC suburbs of Maryland in the 1950s. Family vacations were spent in rural NC east of Raleigh. Farms. Tobacco. Segregation. I can vividly remember seeing those signs over water fountains and bathroom doors. Shetterly is unapologetic in her presentation of what mid 20th century blacks had to face and overcome, even (or especially) the educated mathematicians of the day.
Back to the Hollywood vs. 'the book' argument. Of course they will be different. The mediums dictate that a commercial movie can never present the entirety of a book. Hollywood takes liberties. When John Grishman was asked if he was happy with the way his book The Firm was presented, he said once he signed on the dotted line, the story was no longer his. So while we readers may look down our collective noses at film adaptations, I give you Schindler's List. Like many, I thought Spielberg made a brilliant movie and was inspired to read the book by the Austrian Thomas Keneally to read about what had been left out of the movie. How different was Steven Zaillian's screenplay from the book? To say night and day tells you little. Personally, I thought the book was almost unreadable. A relatively incoherent mess. I was stunned and impressed that a screenwriter could take that book and come up with the story the Spielberg so brilliantly directed.
Bottom line: don't assume that a book will always be superior to the movie. Read one and see the other. Then draw your own conclusions. I'm planning on seeing the film when it opens in about two weeks. If I had to form an opinion right now, I think the two will differ significantly and while reveling in the joy of the movie I will also be appreciating what the screenwriter had to do to put a cinema-worthy story on paper from a book that is essentially a sobering, but exquisitely written, history lesson.
ECD