Dear Friends,
Earlier, I posted a message that thanked everyone for their overwhelming love and support for my book, “Nina Mae McKinney: At the Dawn of Black Hollywood Stardom.”
Unfortunately, it has not been “all love.” I have been reluctant to address this directly, but I do not think I will stop thinking about it until I do so.
Recently, my book—“Nina Mae McKinney: At the Dawn of Black Hollywood Stardom”—received a one-star Amazon review based on lies. Either that person did not read my book or found some of its content upsetting and decided to lash out against me with lies vengefully.
To see that the review makes false statements, one only needs to skim through the “Read sample” on my book’s ad page or my book’s “Table of Contents,” “Introduction,” or “Works Cited.”
The “Introduction” (and even the book’s advertisement on Amazon) explains the book’s purpose, making it clear that it is not just a biography. My book covers Nina Mae McKinney’s life more fully and more accurately than any other work to date, as it relies on primary sources and tries to fill in the gaps by raising questions. It also tries to make sense of the world Nina Mae lived in (and why things were the way they were), which is another reason for my book’s approach to its subtopics and discussions about other historical figures.
“Nina Mae McKinney: At the Dawn of Black Hollywood Stardom” is not just a feel-good piece devoid of trials and suffering. For example, racist and sexist people will likely hate my book for its unavoidable and frank discussion about the deeply-rooted racism and sexism of the United States.
Everyone’s contribution to the topic of Nina Mae McKinney and similar topics through articles, book chapters, and books should be appreciated. I do not intend to harshly criticize or disrespect anyone, especially “giants” who have paved the way for me and others. Likewise, I do not deserve the disrespect I have received.
To be fair, I have produced the most thoroughly researched work on Nina Mae McKinney, which should be evident to anyone who reads the book or even views its extensive “Works Cited” (bibliography) section and appendices. I have analyzed many primary sources that other writers have not used.
“Nina Mae McKinney: At the Dawn of Black Hollywood Stardom” has 358 more sources than the only other book ever written about Nina Mae McKinney. It also exceeds the amount of information found in any chapter, article, or other secondary source produced by other authors. I am the first person to put this much effort into writing about Nina Mae. Such an effort was decades overdue, and that might have steered some resentment my way.
My book also provides documentation to correct the misinformation about Nina Mae that has often been repeated orally or found in online sources and previous publications. That should be appreciated, for the sake of knowledge and truth, not resented and attacked with no basis. Yet it could be another source of resentment, not necessarily from earlier writers but from fans of their work.
This work began as my Ph.D. dissertation, a three-year process. A dissertation or a work derived from one, including “Nina Mae McKinney: At the Dawn of Black Hollywood Stardom,” has resulted from extensive research as well as the compilation and analysis of vast information. The long and drawn-out process, from proposal to defense, involves intensive scrutiny. My dissertation chair (also my advisor and my professor in several courses) was proud of me, and the Dean of the Graduate School (who read every dissertation) stated in an email to my dissertation chair that my dissertation was one of the best he read.
This book is not just a “synopsis” of Nina Mae McKinney’s film “Hallelujah.” Chapter 6, “The Groundbreaking Role as Chick in ‘Hallelujah,’” discusses and analyzes the film and its historical context. That includes valuable information such as the working conditions and the reception and impact of the film, Nina Mae, and her character, Chick.
The reviewer also exaggerated my discussion of actors other than Nina Mae McKinney. Chapter 2, “Mechanisms at the American Film Studios,” is important because it covers the “how” and “why” of the early Hollywood studio system. That includes a discussion about racism and sexism, Nina Mae’s main obstacles, and comparisons to specific white actresses and non-white actresses from Nina Mae’s era. Chapter 7, “The First Black Star in Hollywood,” a 24-page chapter in my 230-page book, is relatively brief and relevant. I considered omitting it but decided to retain it because the chapter introduction clearly explains its inclusion and because the book’s early readers found it informative, not random or unnecessary. Not every film history scholar already knows this information, but more importantly, my book is not just for scholars. The topic of Nina Mae McKinney is too important to be reduced to such a limited audience.
Alternatively, the lie-based review might have been written by a distant relative of Nina Mae’s who was upset about the truth of Nina Mae’s detachment from the South and her relatives, including my book’s elaborate explanations for, and questions about, Nina Mae’s circumstances. My book’s objective is to pay tribute to “Nina Mae,” a woman who was unjustly silenced. I certainly meant no harm to anyone, past or present, and it would seem self-centered and unreasonable for anyone to be upset about what I wrote in my book. We can all acknowledge the facts and raise questions but still love Nina Mae. Things did not have to be perfect in the past for us to love Nina Mae now and in the future.
The comment that “the author admits that he was unable to connect with any relatives who knew her” is misleading. The reviewer must not have known that Nina Mae was born in 1912 and had no surviving children, although these facts are clearly stated in my book. The people who knew her best preceded her in death and took any stories they had to their graves. My book quotes a named relative and another unnamed relative who never met Nina Mae personally. They did not know much but shared what they knew, which my book presents. All of the other distant relatives to whom I reached out said they knew nothing about her personal life. My book explains that my attempts to find more relatives who could give me information were fruitless. Even with the advantage of my being from her hometown, the chances of finding someone who knew her personally were slim to none. It would have been wonderful if possible, but it was not. Fortunately, it was nonessential to the completion of my book. My book includes extensive research, including primary sources such as Nina Mae’s genealogy. None of this information required contact with her relatives, and most of it does not appear in earlier works.
We should never “review” someone’s work when we know that we have not read it word-for-word and analyzed any part to which we took exception in an unbiased manner. Anyone who truly takes the time to read a book carefully is free to dislike or disagree with the content, including the approach, information, questions raised, or conclusions. However, such discontent should be objective and supported logically, not left to sensationalism, irrational statements, or blatant lies.
The idea that I did not have enough information to write a book is preposterous. It is impossible to overcome the loss of some information over time, especially for less well-known figures, but I have done more to exhaust the possible research than anyone else. Claiming that Wikipedia, IMDb, or a chapter in another author’s book has more information on Nina Mae McKinney is absurd. It is a deliberate insult and an undeserved personal attack from someone who does not want me or my book to be successful.
Like anyone else, I am only human. Now that I have vented, I can move on.
Thank you so much.
Sincerely,
Dabian T. Witherspoon, Ph.D.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61562404515339