Editorials
The Hidden Curriculum: Microaggressions and Resistance in ‘MASTER’ (2022)

“You can’t get away from it Jasmine. It’ll follow you, believe me, I know.”
If there’s anything more certain than the sun, it’s the irreverent notion that a person of color is not only not qualified, but they should also feel lucky to be within the spaces they reside when “allowed”.
As of late, during this tumultuous election year, we’ve gotten used to (not really) the term “diversity hire”. In the 80s, it was the great disdain for Affirmative Action acts from the 60s. In the 50s, it was the civil rights movement. We’re 30 years shy of a century of oppression, adversity and undertow in academic institutions, and it permeates everything we can possibly think to be involved in, appointed to or admired for. In the 2022 film Master by Mariama Diallo, we explore cultural depth and neverending societal issues with race, microaggressions, and othering in the academic world.
The film opens with Gail Bishop (Regina Hall), the first Black Master of House at Ancaster University, a predominantly white collegiate atmosphere that’s almost as old as the country. She works to settle in as best she can in a home rife with pictures of old white men and cookie jars in the shape of derogatory Black effigies, but we’ll get to that later. At the same time, an eager and hopeful Jasmine Moore (Zoe Renee) arrives at Ancaster. Jasmine is given her assignment, room 302, the haunted room. Oooooh!
Well, she’s not even told that it’s haunted. It’s alluded to quite haughtily by the Welcome Crew.
It’s a shame the steep spiral downward in trauma this film takes because these experiences, save for most of the supernatural pieces, are true to life. The wonder of starting new, being a part of something that sparks joy. Being the first Black anything academically is always seen as a how-did-they-get-that-couldn’t-be-because-they’ve-earned-it, and it’s a mountain on top of a mountain. For Jasmine and Gail, the hike is just beginning.
A Live One:
Jasmine takes to the haunted room, and realizes, quite startlingly, that she has a roommate, Amelia (Talia Ryder). Amelia and Jasmine hit it off nicely when it’s just the two of them, but when they are joined by Amelia’s more affluent, more snotty (and also white) friends Cressida (Ella Hunt) and Katie (Noa Fisher), the tables turn out of Jasmine’s favor. She’s constantly interrupted when she shares her own stories in order for them to tell their own. She is picked on, cornered, and subjected to soft-handed bullying at the hands of these girls’ possible paramours as well. It’s a common situation for any person of color in a predominantly white space. The period of adjustment takes longer because the goalposts keep changing. And the game of making you and keeping you ill-adjusted is an ongoing sport.
Now, the haunted room theory permeates Jasmine’s waning emotional and mental state as she begins to have hellish nightmares: losing time, waking up believing she’s being attacked by an entity or treated like a specimen to be studied. Jasmine uncovers the death of the first Black student who resided in that room, and from that point on, the thinly veiled and petty racist cracks become less subdued.
Jasmine’s struggles with belonging and the doubt of her aptitude begin externally. A valedictorian, a brilliant mind, and a bubbly personality squashed into a shell of Blackness. The Black lunch staff is all smiles with the white students but when Jasmine comes through the line, she’s treated brusquely, silently as if to say, you think you’re something special by being on that side of the aisle. It’s such a visceral scene because society has made its perpetuated caste system for so long, there’s bound to be some internal issues that folks struggle with. Sometimes it causes anger, jealousy or shame. In this scene, it’s a mix of it all and cuts deep in less than 120 seconds.
In light of being a suspect, she’s investigated when an alarm sensor goes off in the library. When it’s revealed that Jasmine has nothing belonging to the library, the urge is to check her bag. The accusatory tone of the librarian and the growing crowd behind her only adds to the humiliation. Guilty until proven innocent. During a class with the only other person of color, her instructor, Dr. Liv Beckham, discussed color usage in The Scarlet Letter. Jasmine believes that using the color white so often points to Hester’s daughter Pearl’s innocence, but you can tell she wants to dive deeper than that – much deeper. When white student Cressida chimes up that the white points to white people of that time and their ignorance and disdain for color or non-conforming women. Listen.
I know many people of color who viewed this film and felt everything Jasmine’s body language was showing. For real, Cressida?! If that statement had come out of Jasmine’s mouth, would she be seen as the angry Black woman? The race card thrower? The reverse racist? Surely, and not as the wise, forward-thinking, woke, and diversity-first crown-wearer like Cressida gets to be. And there’s another rub. Don’t be too smart, don’t be too confrontational, don’t question the system.
When Jasmine confronts Liv for giving her a poor grade in class and praising the white students, Liv construes that Jasmine was from an “inner city, poor graded school, things work differently here”. Jasmine has to fight to tell her she’s not a hard knock case, she’s from the suburbs, AND she was the valedictorian, to which Liv is like oh gee wilickers I didn’t know. The casual assumptions about her intelligence and background, especially from Liv, sting, in the same ways the attitudes from the lunch crew stung. Jasmine’s experience is compounded by the ingrained and institutional barriers that exist for Black and Brown students. She’s constantly having to prove herself academically and socially, play maid and errand runner, and in a coup de grace to further distance and isolate her from her roommate, she’s made into a pawn as Amelia’s crush. Tyler (Will Hochman) begins to flirt and make out with Jasmine in a “how scandalous is it that I’m hooking up with the Black girl” way, because that’s a scandal ‘round his parts! Extensive spiritual sigh.
She’s constantly reminded that she doesn’t belong and is some sort of bone of contention for many members of the school and faculty. It’s almost as if, even though all of our barrier-breaking, that these spaces are not designed for us to succeed, much like corporate and government spaces; the navigation of personal and racial bias has you exhausted before you even end your workday.
And Nothing Ever Changes:
Gail’s situation is less nuanced and much heavier in the “you should feel incredibly lucky we’ve decided to let you do this” vibe. There is not a person of color out there in an academic, corporate, or government setting (and let’s go further, a friend group) where they didn’t feel tokenized or like a box tick. As a tenured professor, Gail Bishop represents the more mature side of this coin for Black women in academia. Despite all her successes, she’s constantly countermanded and undermined, not to mention low-key chided by her colleagues with comments like, “Should we call her Obama?”. The microaggressions are more serrated for her, especially when her all-white board – mirroring Jasmine’s all-white “friend” group – cast doubt on her professional merit and her ability to be impartial when faced with a serious situation regarding another professor of color. She’s deemed unqualified and unsuited for the prestigious gift they’ve given her. It’s this type of structural inequity and institutional racism, not to mention gross lack of cultural awareness on the part of predominantly white institutions that create this caustic and hostile environment where stereotyping and discrimination often impact promotions, tenure opportunity and space for new Black and Brown professors. Is Gail as secure as she thinks she is? All signs point to no with conditions.
Despite all of her glossy ideals and sense of friendship and availability with her student, the lion’s share of the faculty at Ancaster have deep-seated racial bias that’s imbruing on the school through Jasmine and Gail’s experiences and not only are they none the wiser – they don’t seem fussed enough to care. When Jasmine is overcome by visions, nightmares, and just enough racism to push her over the edge and out of a window, Gail tells a recovering Jasmine not to let them drag her down. Fight.
“You can’t get away from it Jasmine. It’ll follow you, believe me, I know.”
Advice Gail should heed herself. As that tension between her and the faculty escalates after poor Jasmine’s suicide, Gail knows that even though they create shiny diversity programs and exude a semblance of a beacon for marginalized academics, they don’t truly care for Black or Brown students. The microscope will always be at full magnification, the scrutiny and judgment on eleven and the bias, sky high. Our experiences, knowledge, achievements, and mental prowess will always be viewed through a lens of skepticism.
By the end, Gail knows that she is merely that token, that box tick to get things done and having the public ignore their racist ways as long as a Black patsy is standing at the front of the line to prove they don’t see color. Nothing is ever going to change. Not for her, not for any other student of color, ever.
Diallo’s film was released with mixed reviews, and I understand it’s a polarizing film. It’s a stark look at what it’s like to be a Black woman in higher education, and I don’t think people were ready for the “Are we the baddies?” conversation. Thinking back to my college days, I was met with millions of microaggressions at the time that I didn’t know weren’t just part of life. Majoring in Business, we were asked to make a business plan for a business we’d like to create someday. I chose a bookstore/record shop, basically a small-town Borders. When I presented it to my professor I was met with, and I quote, “Oh wow! I was expecting like a hair salon, weaves and nails and stuff.” Hmm. Even having the highest GPA in the course, I was constantly asked to further cite my sources as the reports were “just a little too clean”, something my white counterparts were never asked to do.
It’s hell representing yourself and all you’ve accomplished, and in just a few months, that light is dulled, diminished, and, in Jasmine’s case, snuffed out far too soon.
Master’s prestigious Ancaster is more than just a setting, it’s a symbol of a broader societal issue with race, privilege, and power. Black and Brown academics are devalued by design. It’s a vacuumed microcosm of a society that promotes diversity and meritocracy, all the while creating and perpetuating systemic barriers that prevent Black and Brown groups from thriving without mobilizing or leaving all together. Master keenly explores how microaggressions add up. Assumptions about intelligence, qualifications or the capacity to succeed, reveal a deep unspoken bias that infiltrates marginalized women beyond the classroom.
Editorials
Healing Powers: Elizabeth Sankey’s ‘Witches’ (2024)
Elizabeth Sankey, writer and director of Witches, was institutionalized due to postpartum psychosis. Prior to her hospital admission, she found a group of women on WhatsApp with whom to air her fears about being a mother. All women in the group had a history of pregnancy or trying to become pregnant. All would be, by our strict social ideals, bad women: the WhatsApp coven included women with thoughts of killing their children and themselves.

“Are you a good witch or a bad witch?”
What a horrible question.
In our society, steeped in patriarchal values, this question implies that a woman, the witch, is either behaving or misbehaving, obeying or disobeying. The question limits women in who they are and what they could become. Film has much to do with social and cultural perceptions of what a woman should be. The horror genre, especially, has had the ability to imprint itself on popular culture and mold social ideas of a “good” woman and “bad” woman. “Good” women, often Final Girls, traditionally abstain from sex, drugs, and alcohol; they are down to earth, amicable, and care about others, oftentimes more than themselves. Their opposites, the bad women, are outcasts, messy, and complicated. Their distinctions are always obvious, even color-coded. Though The Craft (1996) brought a chicness to the teenage witch, by the film’s end, the bad witch, Nancy, is institutionalized, left writhing enchained in her bed, incoherently yelling. This was the fate of many “bad” women. Remove them from society, as they are uncontrollable. The witches must be burned.
Elizabeth Sankey, writer and director of Witches, was institutionalized due to postpartum psychosis. Prior to her hospital admission, she found a group of women on WhatsApp with whom to air her fears about being a mother. All women in the group had a history of pregnancy or trying to become pregnant. All would be, by our strict social ideals, bad women: the WhatsApp coven included women with thoughts of killing their children and themselves.
Who can we trust?
Motherhood is a tricky subject. American history has shown that while we need mothers, their lives are often overlooked, the baby taking center stage. The opinions and fears of mothers are left to the wayside, resulting in feelings of isolation and anxiety. After all, pregnancy can be life threatening, and is in no way as clean as it had been presented on film for decades. The maternal mortality rate has hardly changed since 2019, with approximately nineteen deaths per 100,000 live births, according to the CDC. In 2021, according to the American Medical Association, the Black maternal mortality rate was 2.6 times higher than white mothers. Suicide is a leading cause of death for recent mothers. Sankey correlates medical shortcomings, bias, discrimination, and lack of mental health resources with the skepticism women feel when sharing pregnancy-related mental struggles with doctors. Crucially, Sankey urges that guilt and shame are preventing women and those capable of pregnancy from getting the help they need, fearful they will be judged and labeled as “bad mothers,” or worse, their children are taken away from them. There is a historical basis for this, with links to 17th century America.
“Embroidered on our bones”
Sankey includes several testimonies from victims of the Salem Witch Trials, many of whom were town herbalists, midwives, and healers. These women were the ones who helped others give birth and cared for them during their healing process. However, if you were socially linked to a perceived witch during the trials, you too could be implicated. The lessons that had been learned from those trials and the hundreds of others across America in the 17th and 18th centuries were not to trust a healing woman.
Sankey posits that many perceived witches of Salem suffered from various mental illnesses, leaving them vulnerable to discrimination from accusing townspeople. No longer was the healing women counted upon for birth assistance — that was now the domain of male doctors. For centuries since, women have been taught to police their neighbors and friends, lest they be accused of being “bad.” Those accused suffered the social, physical, and mental consequences. There is hope for mothers when covens are reclaimed. Once perceived as wild women celebrating the devil and conjuring demons, the coven can and should be a source of not only support, but guidance.
The Spellbook
Sankey breaks her documentary down into five chapters. In the form of spells, she outlines how to survive maternal madness. She calls on viewers to “fall into madness,” “step into the circle,” “speak your evil,” “invoke the spirits,” and, finally, “embrace the witch.” I posit, however, that her most important spell is the third. Speaking your evil is extremely daunting. One woman in particular admitted to frightening thoughts of sexually harming her child as a result of maternal OCD. “It was torture,” she stated. She chose self-harm instead of sharing these uncontrollable thoughts with anyone, let alone other mothers. Sankey, herself battling murderous thoughts from postpartum depression, felt as though she was in her own horror film, with an overwhelming sense of doom – “Living, breathing terror.” She told no doctor of the “hideous scenes” playing in her head. Instead, she looked inward. Am I evil? The WhatsApp coven sprang to action to get Sankey help when she revealed she had suicidal thoughts after days without sleep. “If we didn’t, who would?”
The medical center where Sankey was admitted was for mothers and their children. She was stripped of any potential harmful belongings, and then left alone with her child. This was extremely unsettling and traumatic for the other mothers, with some revealing it was their “biggest fear.” Under 24/7 surveillance, the therapy began. “Now,” Sankey states, “I was surrounded by witches.” These women became each others’ support, and the doctors worked through patients’ perinatal mental health issues. Removed was the stigma of “bad” motherhood. The testimony from Sankey and her fellow patients is raw, real, and frightening. Stepping into the circle requires tremendous strength and trust.
Embrace the Witch
I want to be a mother, but I am scared. As with most of my fears, I turn to horror films to sort myself out. I think of Rosemary Woodhouse, whose own husband assaulted her, and, like a patient named Dr. Cho, saw the devil in her child’s eyes. She was gaslit, denied care, and almost died during the early months of her pregnancy. After birth, she was discarded. She was no longer of use, though she was granted permission to raise the spawn of Satan. She had no agency or autonomy. This is what scares me most, as I have heard too many horror stories of women not being believed. Worse, as someone living with a mental illness, I worry I will be perceived as a “bad” mom.
In the US, findings from the 2020 Maternal Behavioral Health Policy Evaluation (MAPLE) study show “2683 out of 595,237 insured mothers aged 15 to 44 across the US had suicidal ideation or thoughts of self-harm […] the greatest increases seen among Black; low-income; younger individuals; and people with comorbid anxiety, depression, or serious mental illness.”
What if my depression becomes unbearable after giving birth? What if I have thoughts of harm? What if I become a statistic?
It was Sankey who, despite the harrowing testimony, calmed me. I know I can look to my sisters. Witches is a cathartic documentary, with empathy at its core. I urge my fellow mothers-to-be to join the coven, to embrace the witch. Embracing the witch means to heal — to shed society’s expectations of “good” motherhood. You are enough. And you are certainly not alone.
To hell with “good” and “bad,” so long as you are a witch.
You can stream Witches on Mubi.
Editorials
‘House of Wax’ (2005) Is Secretly a 2000s Alternative Time Capsule, and a Masterwork of Horror Atmosphere
Supposedly a remake of the 1953 Vincent Price film with the same name, it could have less to do with the original. A familiar setup sees a group of college kids en route to their school’s football game, caught out of luck with a broken down car. That’s where the fun begins. They wind up camped out near a ghost town, seemingly empty except for one Bo Sinclair, who promises to help them out. As they begin to notice, it seems the only operational business is a wax museum…From then on out, we are welcomed into one of the wildest, genuinely creepiest slashers in modern memory. With dingy movie theaters, a nightmare-inducing wax museum, and one of the most nauseating and original MOs of any slasher villain, the flick feels like a walkthrough of a skillfully organized haunted attraction. Plus, it is crammed with 2000s nostalgia, with visuals that make it feel like you’re watching a full-length Hawthorne Heights music video and a soundtrack that cements it as one of the most 2005 movies of, well…2005.

Ahh, the mid-2000s. Brendan Urie was chiming in with, “Haven’t you ever heard of closing the God Damn door?”, metalcore blasted on every station, the smell of black eyeliner and nail polish wafted through the air, and everyone could only see about half of what was around them because of the deeply gelled fringes. Essentially, emo was all the rage. However, despite its clear, of-its-era connections to alternative subcultures, the horror genre was at a weird point in its expansive existence. Between countless torture porn sequels, Japanese remakes, and an endless slew of oversaturated slashers, many films were grouped in this era as “trash”. While, undoubtedly, some of them were, this generalization caused many phenomenal films to go unnoticed or completely under the radar. This is the case with 2005’s House of Wax.
Supposedly a remake of the 1953 Vincent Price film with the same name, it could have less to do with the original. A familiar setup sees a group of college kids en route to their school’s football game, caught out of luck with a broken down car. That’s where the fun begins. They wind up camped out near a ghost town, seemingly empty except for one Bo Sinclair, who promises to help them out. As they begin to notice, it seems the only operational business is a wax museum…From then on out, we are welcomed into one of the wildest, genuinely creepiest slashers in modern memory. With dingy movie theaters, a nightmare-inducing wax museum, and one of the most nauseating and original MOs of any slasher villain, the flick feels like a walkthrough of a skillfully organized haunted attraction. Plus, it’s crammed with 2000s nostalgia, with visuals that make it feel like you’re watching a full-length Hawthorne Heights music video, and a soundtrack that cements it as one of the most 2005 movies of, well…2005.
A Terrifying Pair of Killers
One of the absolute highlights of House of Wax are the two killers, the Sinclair Brothers. Initially conjoined at birth, these twins work in tandem to run the town of Ambrose’s waxworks from Hell. Bo is the brains, luring in teens with a disarmingly normal demeanor, and wax-faced Vincent takes care of the more troublesome aspects of the business, the brutal torture and creation of the statues themselves. It harkens back to classics from the golden era of slashers, their twisted backwoods family reminiscent of Texas Chain Saw, or even the Voorhees clan in Friday The 13th. Vincent is the Leatherface to Bo’s Choptop. The Brothers’ Mom, Trudy, made wax statues, and after her death, Vincent wanted to innocently carry on her work. However, the psychopathic Bo manipulated him to make them better…more realistic…and that meant using corpses.
The means of offing teens from these brothers are some of the scariest in slasher history. Victims are paralyzed, drowned alive in boiling wax. They are forced to suffer as wax statues until they eventually die. The mannequins in the town are wax-transformed corpses, victims preserved like in a museum. It is definitely a little cheesy, and feels a lot like an early-2010s Creepypasta, but is still considerably bone chilling compared to a simple hockey mask and machete. It is a highly original MO, not only elevating the film in its own right, but putting it a step above other films in the 90s and 2000s slasher revival.
It’s All in the Vibes
During a chase scene, Carly (Elisha Cuthbert) and Nick (Chad Michael Murray) find themselves hiding from a shotgun-wielding, trucker-capped Bo Sinclair in a grimy movie theater. The theater is disgusting, covered in dust and grime, and no living human sits in the audience-only wax-mummified corpses, laden in filth and creeping bugs. Projected on the screen is Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, a hammer-on-the-head parallel for Bo and Vincent Sinclair’s disturbed sibling relationship. As Bette Davis belts out, “I’ve Written a Letter to Daddy”, Nick and Carly sit among the figures, hoping to remain still enough so the aisle-stalking Bo does not notice and fire at them. It is a genuinely edge-of-your-seat sequence, clever in its construction and framing, the use of the human mannequin’s doubling effect creating a genuinely disorienting feeling. However, what is truly striking here, as with the rest of the movie, is the aesthetic of it.
This scene is one of many examples of a movie that perfectly knows how to construct its setting and build a phenomenal atmosphere. The old creepy movie, the dingy cinema, rows of once-living mannequins, and a stalking serial killer’s slow-moving pervasiveness? Everything clicks perfectly here, and it feels possibly more akin to a Halloween Horror Nights event more-so than a movie…and this is actually for the better.
The rest of the movie feels the same, all of it having this Halloween-ish, grungy, 2000s tone to it. It feels reminiscent of Rob Zombie visuals, the palettes featuring a lot of dim yellows and gross-out, tree-greens. It is of its time, absolutely, but gleefully so. The movie basks in the era, in every aspect.
Speaking of the era, the soundtrack is pretty wild. It truly captures the best of music in that era, Interpol and Disturbed both get songs on there, as well as My Chemical Romance getting too. Hell, it does not get more emo than your film closing out with a smash-to-black on Helena from Three Cheers. In the 2000s, atmosphere was one of the strongest attributes of horror, with House of Wax being the crowning achievement. It is disappointing how this, among many other movies, were lost or ignored due to the pure oversaturation of the genre. It is oftentimes a make-or-break for any horror film of any decade, aesthetic being debatably just as important in this genre.
House of Wax excels at all of this. Its setting, costumes, and props are all beautifully and skillfully created. Luckily, It has found its cult status in the last couple of years, but its over-the-top nature should have made it an instant classic upon release.