Under Color of Authority: TV Takes on the 1992 L.A. Riots, 25 Years Later
Header image courtesy of ABC
What are you even supposed to say? A quarter century later, what are you supposed to say about the appalling Rodney King verdict and its sickening aftermath? That it was wrong? The word doesn’t begin to cover it. That it should have been foreseen? I’m pretty sure it was. That it was the fault of the jury, the defense team, the police chief; the officers who obeyed the order to stay out of south central Los Angeles while it burned to the ground? The rioters who beat and shot passersby and torched their own neighborhoods in a blind rage? The Korean shop owner who’d shot that black teenage girl in the back of the head and the mousy white judge who’d overturned the guilty verdict and given the murderer probation because “I know a criminal when I see one”? That it was the fault of the long, long history of tolerance for excessive force and racism in the LAPD? Of the stable blue collar jobs that had drained from the area, leaving a wake of poverty and despair and drug dealers and gang wars?
Short answer? Yeah. For starters. Slightly longer answer: It’s both simpler and more complicated than any of those things and much as “why?” is a question we always want to answer, it’s probably not the right question any more.
To commemorate the 25th anniversary of the riot or uprising or “incident” that torched Los Angeles in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King trial, National Geographic, A&E, Netflix, Showtime, ABC and the Smithsonian Channel have all produced films on the subject, and I recommend that you watch more than one, though it will be painful. Actually, do it because it will be painful. Seriously. Each of them has its own methodology for contending with the “why.” All of them together make it clear that what we need to be asking now is, “What will it take for human beings to wake the hell up and start actually learning from our own history?”
It was, arguably, the first “viral” video. The world saw it. Over. And over. And over. We saw it and were horrified and no matter how many times they played it we never stopped being horrified. A black man who had provoked a high-speed chase through the streets of Los Angeles was removed from his vehicle and beaten to within an inch of his life by four white cops, illuminated by the spotlight of a police helicopter. A man in the building across the street saw what was happening and documented the incident with his video camera. He tried to take the tape to the police. The police didn’t want it.
But the media sure did. In fact, the tape was seen so many times that the defense attorneys moved to re-venue the trial because public attention had made it impossible to get a fair hearing in Los Angeles. (Public attention would have made it equally impossible to get a “fair” trial in the Aleutian Islands.) Nonetheless, the motion was granted and the trial moved to a town in Ventura County where approximately one in three adult residents was in law enforcement. The policemen who savaged Rodney King were acquitted, to worldwide shock, of having used “excessive and potentially deadly force under color of authority.” What happened next remains the most destructive civil disturbance in U.S. history (and one of the most destructive, period). The 1992 Los Angeles riots lasted five days, claimed 55 lives, injured more than 4,000, and caused $1 billion in damage to the city. Depending on your age, you might or might not have a clear memory of it: That footage was sickeningly familiar to me. And if you’re a little older you probably know that this was not the first time a riot broke out in Los Angeles over rampant racism and police brutality. It was just the most lethal.
So far.
Showtime’s Burn Motherfucker, Burn!, directed by Sacha Jenkins, probably goes the deepest into the decades preceding the 1992 riots, in particular Watts in the 1960s but also the Pachuco riots of the 1940s. It spends less time on the actual Rodney King case and the disastrous aftermath of the verdict, but it will ground you very firmly in the reality that what happened in 1992 was anything but unpredictable.
On the other end of the spectrum is Spike Lee’s Netflix production, Rodney King, which stars Roger Guenveur Smith in a one-man dramatization of the life and death of “the first reality TV star.” Epistolary, explosive and heartbreaking, Guenveur’s performance will make you want to look away-but you won’t be able to.
National Geographic’s LA 92 does a masterful job of presenting fact and footage without filters or commentary—it feels almost like a slideshow, and that does have a certain power, but I found myself wishing they’d dig deeper. Like the Showtime documentary, it hearkens back to news coverage of the Pachuco riots (also known as the “Zoot Suit” riots) of June 1943 and the commentator’s horrified questioning about whether something like this might happen in Los Angeles in the future. But it raised a number of questions that it didn’t seem to answer. I guess some questions don’t have answers. Maybe that’s the point.
John Ridley’s Let It Fall: Los Angeles, 1982-1992, on ABC, is a gut-wrenching and kaleidoscopic oral history, combining the commentary of both police and civilians; it’s multi-generational, multi-ethnic, and provides perhaps the richest sense of context for the riots; by the end of this one you’ll understand that in most ways, the riots were basically inevitable and not particularly about Rodney King. Los Angeles was a tinderbox long before the night he was battered by those cops. Their acquittal happened to light the match, but anything might have.