The White Family of West Virginia - Movie Review Example

? The Wild and Wonderful Whites Number Introduction The White family of West Virginia is a puzzle. Here we have a fiercely proud and close-knit family with celebrity status as one of the last families to practice mountain dancing; yet, they are also notorious as one of the wildest outlaw families in West Virginia. They are legendary, and also notorious. Their history is littered with crime and violence, but they still find joy in being one family. A large piece of the puzzle of the White family is their involvement in crime. Why do they commit them? What started it? How do they feel about it and how does it affect their lives as a family? The documentary on The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia sought to answer these questions, and by using some theories of crime, we can decipher why they do what they do. Using the theories of crime, this essay aims to take a peek into the inner workings of the minds and motivations of the legendary and notorious White family of West Virginia. Classic Theory The classical theory of criminology is all about three things: it believes that all individuals, including criminals, have free will, rational manner and manipulability. It means that when a crime is committed, it is done out of free will, that the criminal chooses to do it; Rational manner means that crime is committed by the criminal within a rational bid for profit or personal gain, meaning the crime is made when the criminal’s gain is more than the risks; Manipulability is all about the fact that all humans have behaviors that lead to their own self-interest. Knowing this makes people, and criminals predictable and manipulable by knowing the patterns that they would take to get what they want (Tibbetts & Hemmens, 2012). According to De Haan and Vos (2003), this theory explains all forms of crime by thinking that all criminals did things within reason. It assumes that all crimes are done rationally for their benefit. A study from Lehtinen and Kuorikoski (2007) argues that the limitations of the classical theory are the unrealistic assumptions of human behavior. Classical theory assumes that all humans follow a certain set of behaviors in the pursuit of their own interests, which is not always the case. Social Learning Theory The Differential Association, Social Learning, and the Subcultural theory are all about criminals acquiring their criminal behavior from associations with criminal definitions. To them, their definition of crime makes it justifiable to do what they do. Some even approve of criminal conduct, making it easier for the criminal to commit a crime. People who are always around people that are antisocial tend to adopt their antisocial behavior which can also lead them to committing crimes. A study by Church, Wharton, and Taylor (2009) applied this theory to juvenile delinquents. They investigated the delinquents’ relationships with their families, their self-image, and their behaviors. They learned that by improving the delinquents’ self-image, they can reduce the chances of delinquency. They also found out that being around, other delinquents can increase the chances that the child will be a delinquent too, no matter what the person’s race may be. Labeling Theory The labeling and reintegrative shaming theory of crime is about how criminals find it difficult to break free from society labeling them as criminals. They are stigmatized, and they feel that there is no other person that they can be since all that people see in them is the criminal. This develops their criminal identities and makes it difficult to fit in with society. A study by Bernburg, Krohn, and Rivera (2006) talk about how labeling increases the likelihood of subsequent delinquency. In a lot of cases, the stigma of being a criminal increases the chances that the person will involve himself with other deviant social groups. Treating them as criminals will get them to act like criminals. Cechaviciute and Kenny (2007) had a study that showed how delinquents who felt that they were labeled engaged in more delinquent behavior than those who were not labeled. The White Family The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia was about family spanning multiple generations notorious for their disregard for the law among other eccentricities. They were both famous as tap dancers, and infamous as criminals. They are a living Legend. They first gained fame through the cult documentary, The Dancing Outlaw, which focused on the eldest son Jesco White and his proficiency for mountain dancing, his idolization of Elvis, and his reputation for huffing gasoline, which led to him destroying part of his brain. The rest of the family showed itself to be just as charismatic, as eccentric, and as self-destructive as Jesco. The movie featured four generations of the White family. It showed the matriarch of the family, 85 year old Bertie Mae White. She was the wife of the famous mountain dancer D. Ray White, and she was the mother both by blood and adoption of dozens of children who turned out to be outlaws. The next generation consisted of Mamie, Jesco, Bo, Poney and Sue Bob. They lived a life of crime and gratification, except for Poney who went to Minnesota to raise a family as a house painter. The grandchildren were even more rowdy. In fact, Mousie, the daughter of Mamie was first featured in the movie coming out of prison. Bo’s children Kirk and Derek both had histories of substance abuse, violence, and promiscuity. Brandon, the son of Sue Bob, was seen throughout the movie in jail for shooting his uncle. Bertie Mae’s great-grandchildren were too young to have committed any large crimes, but it is curious as to how they will turn out in such a family (Taylor & Julien Nitzberg, 2009). Among the numerous crimes of the white family over the generations, they have shown impulsiveness, fits of violence; they have engaged in robbery and they possess numerous firearms. They have killed and have intended to kill; Brandon even had a shootout with policemen who were pursuing him. They even engage in recreational drugs such as marijuana, Xanax, cocaine, and whatever they can lay their hands on. They sell some of these drugs for a living. They express little remorse for most of their crimes; there was even a scene wherein Jesco bragged about places he stole from when he was younger. They like to make light of their smaller crimes and support each other whenever one of them commits a crime. In one case, after one of the family members tried to kill one of their spouses, another member helped clean up the blood and dispose of the weapon. Discussion From their crimes, how they felt about them, and the situations surrounding their lives, we can see traces of the classical theory of crime. They engage in criminal activity because for them, there are more gains compared to a probability of a prison sentence if they get caught. They sell drugs as a source of income because they know how to keep away from the police, showing them gain without a drawback. Rationally, to them, it is a reason to commit the crime. The family likes taking matters into their own hands, and they commit their crimes out of free will, even though some crimes such as the shooting and the shootout with the police were partly because Brandon was emotionally unstable at the time and was under the influence of drugs. The point is, they knew what they were doing, and they had their own goals that they felt they could achieve at a cost they could live with, which is evident in the classical theory of crime. Another theory seen in their crimes is the Social learning theory. Their whole family consists of a family of outlaws. They pass on their views on law and morality to their children. In that environment, they encourage the making of new outlaws out of every generation. Early on, the children are exposed to violence, harsh language, and antisocial behavior which they might mimic when they grow older. The fact that they help each other out and enable their vices also enforces their being criminals. By helping them commit crime, and by allowing them to engage in substance abuse and drugs, and encouraging violence, they make it “OK” for them to be outlaws. It makes them feel that their behavior as outlaws is acceptable because even though the rest of society does not agree, their family is behind them all the way. They make jokes about killing people they hate, and the rest of the family laughs along, encouraging the behavior, not knowing it will escalate to doing drugs as a family, to hiding evidence and obstructing justice. The social learning theory applies to this family in how they stick together as an outlaw family. As a family, they act outside the law, which makes an impression to the younger members that as long as they are together, it is ok to do whatever they want. Even from the beginning, their patriarch, D. Ray White, saw the injustice and corruption of the rich and how they benefitted from the suffering of the poor. He saw this and understood how it worked, and thought that if they can benefit from working outside the law, then so can he for his family. For him, his crimes are justified because no one was arresting the rich who were cheating the miners in his day. In fact, a study by Kingston, Huizinga, and Elliot (2009) about social disorganization can apply to what D. Ray went through. There was a social structure with a high number of delinquency opportunities that D. Ray exploited, and was later exploited by the later generations of their family. Later generations of the family found various other justifications to their crimes. Some were out of rage, or revenge. This family has a criminal subculture which reinforces the criminal behavior of its members. The subcultural structure could also be one of fatalisms. Since they lived in a mining town without many other options for income, they have come to grips at an early age, the concept of death. They know how dangerous working in the mines is, and by working there anyway, they achieve a sense of acceptance of death as inevitable, making them less afraid of it. This translates to their recklessness and their impulsiveness for immediate gratification. They would rather live a life of laughter, and be quick to anger because they feel that they might die any moment. This subculture weakens the fear of death and punishment, which makes crime come easily to them. The last theory that can be seen from this family is the theory of labeling. Being labeled as criminals as a family has created a problem for them. Because of their notoriety as criminals, they were not able to find a good job that is why they resorted to selling drugs as a source of income, aside from growing their own produce. Poney experienced stigma from his family’s name in school and during his early career, which prompted him to live in Minnesota for a chance at getting a job and having a proper life away from his family’s tarnished reputation. Their notoriety as criminals and as mountain dancers has made them a spectacle to other people. They are a living legend as an outlaw family, and they know it. They revel in the attention, and it allows them to make light of a lot of their crimes. Conclusion The classical theory of crime, the labeling, the social learning, and the subcultural theories apply to many aspects of their criminal lives: They do what they do without anyone coercing them; They do it of their own free will; They do it for personal gain, even though they know about the consequences of getting caught; they know how society sees them in some parts criminals and other parts legends, and yet this does little to dampen their behavior. Some members commit more serious crimes while others try to escape from that way of life. They have lived the lives of outlaws for generations. They are unashamed as they defy the law time and time again with their own sense of justice for what they do. The most remarkable about them is not what they did wrong; it is the fact that they fiercely stick together as a family. They commit crime together; they help each other out, and when they are in prison, they know that they still have the same family waiting for them on the other side. They may fight and hurt each other, but in the end, they stick together. They may not have the cleanest of family histories, but they are tight. It seems the White family do what they do simply because for them, they have the right of it; for them, there is always a valid reason for what they do (a cheating partner, an insult, etc.); for them, they can always go back to family if they go to jail. The three theories seen here: The classical, the Labeling, and the cultural learning theories paint a picture of a family mislead by false notions of what is right, what is wrong, the value of things lost when you are caught for a crime, the value of life, and respect. In the classical sense, they do what they do because the benefits outweigh the risk of punishment at getting caught. In labeling theory, they commit crime because people see them as such, and that makes it difficult for them to be otherwise, so they would rather embrace it. In the cultural learning sense, they grow up in violence and crime from the previous generation, and they see that they are still present, still alive, still part of a loving family, and that reduces the fear of getting caught committing crime. If they can do it, the new generation could to. These are just some theories on why the White Family does what they do. Legends are legends because people cannot completely understand them. No matter how much we theorize, we may never understand the Legend of the White family of West Virginia. References Bernburg, J., Krohn, M., & Rivera, C. (2006). Official labeling, criminal embeddedness, and subsequent delinquency: A longitudinal test of labeling theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43, 67-88. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/tibbetts/study/articles.htm Cechaviciute, I., & Kenny, D. (2007). The relationship between neutralizations and perceived delinquent labeling on criminal history in young offenders serving community orders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 816-829. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/tibbetts/study/articles.htm Church, II, W., Wharton, T., & Taylor, J. (2009). An examination of differential association and social control theory: Family systems and delinquency. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 7, 3-15. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/tibbetts/study/articles.htm De Haan, W., & Vos, J. (2003). A crying shame: The over-rationalized conception of man in the rational choice perspective. Theoretical Criminology, 7, 29-54. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/tibbetts/study/articles.htm Kingston, B., Huizinga, D., & Elliot, D. (2009). A test of social disorganization theory in high-risk urban neighborhoods. Youth & Society, 4, 53-79. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/tibbetts/study/articles.htm Lehtinen, A. & Kuorikoski, J. (2007). Unrealistic assumptions in rational choice theory. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 37, 115-138. Taylor, S. (Producer), & Nitzberg, J. (Producer/Director). (2009). The wild and wonderful Whites of West Virginia [Motion Picture]. USA: Tribeca Film. Tibbetts S., & Hemmens, C. (2012). Criminological theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/tibbetts/study/articles.htm Read More