And Victoria Alexander, I suggest avoiding such tasteless comments in the future– Save yourself the embarassment.

You must be joking. The use of Black English Vernacular, or “ebonics,” as you call it, has nothing to do with a lack of intelligence. It is a language used by the under-educated and the over-educated alike. And the use of Black English Vernacular in novels is typically a means of enabling the reader to delve deeper into the world in which the story is set. What language do you think the characters were using in the movie?

It’s nice to know that you’re a willing spectator in the study of the black experience, but not a willing participant. Keep up the good work.

“Who is Sapphire’s Machiavellian agent? How did Sapphire get the name of her novel and her name in the title? It is so outrageously egotistical and offensive that I am amazed Sapphire allowed Lee Daniels to direct and Geoffrey Fletcher to write the screenplay.”

I thought Ms. Alexander was kidding with this ignorant, ridiculous remarks, but it seems, somehow, that this is not the case. I simply cannot understand how somehow who enjoyed a film so much, could so quickly dismiss the brilliant novel from which “Precious” was based on. “Unreadable and written in ebonics?” I think it is almost comical (and borderline racist) that middle-class white people are still using the word “Ebonics” to describe language that sounds – gasp! – different from their own, but I what I really have hard time understanding is how Alexander does not realize that the broken and “unreadable” English that is used in “Push” is employed for a literary purpose. Perhaps if Alexander’s IQ did not drop 10 points with each page of “Push” (as she claimed that it did) she could have understood that since the character of Precious, who is borderline illiterate (or at least a beginning reader/writer), poor, black, and from the inner-city, is the narrator, the narration is going to be written in broken, misspelled, poorly constructed “Ebonics.” The idea is that this poor, inner-city, uneducated, black youth is telling her story, not long after she learns to read and write – how would you expect the narrative to sound? If Ms. Alexander challenged herself a bit, and continued on with “Push,” she would have had the opportunity to experience an amazinly original, heartfelft, raw, and poignant work of art. Since the Precious character and the “Push” story are entirely Sapphire’s creations, it doesn’t seem that strange (and definitely not “egotistical” or “offensive”) that her name is attached to the movie. If Alexander had not abandoned “Push” so quickly, she would have realized that everything that is great about the film – the frighteningly real depiction of Precious’ struggle and her ability to succeed against all odds – is beautifully depicted in the novel. It is a great injustice to praise the film “Precious,” yet write off Sapphire and her novel. Without Sapphire and “Push,” there would be no “Precious,” regardless of Daniels’ great direction and the wonderful performances of the actors.