|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Is this music video racist?
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
The point about making fun of people is interesting in relation to comedy, as there are black comedians who make fun of white people, (and also black people), (Reginald D. Hunter being a prime example), as there are Iranian comedians who make fun of Iranians, (and of English people), (Omid Djalili), and so on.
What is trickier is a white comedian making fun of black people or Iranians, and so on. Well, some people think that Ali G (Baron Cohen), while mocking a white suburban kid who wanted to be black, was also mocking black street culture. Possibly.
I expect this will develop, if only because some comedians are really hoping to offend.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
The point about making fun of people is interesting in relation to comedy, as there are black comedians who make fun of white people, (and also black people), (Reginald D. Hunter being a prime example),
I am not sure Hunter is making fun of white people as much as he is making comments on culture.
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
White people who are entertainers shouldn't wear makeup that makes them look like black people. There is no problem with black people who are entertainers wearing makeup that makes them look like black people.
But is there a problem with black entertainers (Eddie Murphy, say) wearing makeup that makes them look like white people? That's the real comparison.
No problem I'm aware of. Because there isn't a hundred plus year history of popular and highly racist stageshows that revolved round whiteface in the same way the Minstrel Show did round blackface. Context matters.
(Yes, you can object to whiteface clowns in the circus - and I'm not going to disagree with you there. But that's not the same thing at all.)
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
To take one obvious example:
White people who are entertainers shouldn't wear makeup that makes them look like black people.
I'm not convinced that this is "obvious".
You use 'blackface' as an example - to me, 'blackface' doesn't just mean wearing make-up to look like a different race, but refers to a particular style that caricatures and stereotypes black people. I will agree that that is wrong. Motive is important.
I'll also agree that in a racially unequal society, there are pragmatic reasons for not allowing black entertainers to be pushed out of roles representing black characters by white impersonators.
I don't think it's obvious at all that representing a fictional persona of a different race is inherently wrong. Indeed, I'd rather live in a world where that was unproblematic. It may be, unfortunately, that historical racism makes it inadvisable, but I certainly wouldn't assume that a white person playing a black character is themselves doing anything racist or wrong.
(I'm a LARPer - I'd wear make up to play a character of a different race without a qualm, and can't see that it makes much of a difference whether that 'different race' is "black" or "orc". Of course, I'm not a professional, so if I play a different race, I'm not doing real-life people of that race out of their livelihood, which makes a difference compared to professional entertainers blacking up. But in principle, its about pretending to be someone else, and there's no reason to put unnecessary racial barriers around the human imagination.)
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
(I'm a LARPer - I'd wear make up to play a character of a different race without a qualm, and can't see that it makes much of a difference whether that 'different race' is "black" or "orc". Of course, I'm not a professional, so if I play a different race, I'm not doing real-life people of that race out of their livelihood, which makes a difference compared to professional entertainers blacking up. But in principle, its about pretending to be someone else, and there's no reason to put unnecessary racial barriers around the human imagination.)
But there is the whole history of "blacking up" both by professionals and just for "fun" which colours anyone doing it now no matter their motive.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
Do people have a problem with Kayvan Novak (a Brit of Iranian descent)? In Facejacker he both blacks up and whites up. His characters involve strong accents and culture-based humour.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
Do people have a problem with Kayvan Novak (a Brit of Iranian descent)? In Facejacker he both blacks up and whites up. His characters involve strong accents and culture-based humour.
I've only seen a little of his show, but his target is not the character he assumes, but to fool the people he interacts with. IME.
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Robet Downey Junior in the movie Tropic Thunder plays an Australian actor who has had "pigmentation alteration" surgery to make his skin darker so he can play a black character.
I don't recall a great deal of outrage about this. Maybe I missed it. Maybe it was seen as okay because it's portrayed as a thoroughly ludicrous thing to do.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
I remember at the time the Daily Mail ran a piece saying that Tropic Thunder had been condemned as racist. When you actually read beyond the headline, though, it turned out that someone on an internet board had made the comment and that was the only justification for the story.
I don't think the website was shipoffools.com...
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
lilbuddha: quote:
But there is the whole history of "blacking up" both by professionals and just for "fun" which colours anyone doing it now no matter their motive.
*sigh* Maybe in your mind and the mind of anyone affected by American cultural imperialism. These days, that would be most people.
But this ignores the blackface Morris tradition of northern England, which seems to be older than the 19th-century American minstrel shows. I've heard several theories about it; the most plausible, to my mind, is that blacking your face is a very effective disguise for a white person (and cheap: everyone had access to soot and black boot-polish). Maybe one day, makeup will just be makeup again.
If twerking had been invented independently by a group of white people, would it still be racist for white people to do it? Cars were invented simultaneously by several different people - was it OK for Henry Ford to pinch ideas from other people as long as the people he was stealing ideas from were all privileged white guys?
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
*sigh* Maybe in your mind and the mind of anyone affected by American cultural imperialism. These days, that would be most people.
Well if it is 'most people' then that rather proves lilbuddha's point.
There may well be a completely independent and innocent creation of the habit of wearing pointy white hats, a white robe and holding a burning cross (perhaps in the mind of a naive evangelist - the symbols of purity and the power of the gospel), however in most people's minds those symbols would be subject to only one interpretation.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Well, that's why I was agreeing with her assertion that it's now impossible for blackface Morris teams to perform without being accused of racism. Sorry if that didn't come across.
But I'd also like to know what happens if two different groups invent the same style of dancing simultaneously. Does one have to abandon it because it's associated with the other? Or can they just say 'what an amazing coincidence' and get on with dancing together?
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Is somebody saying that for white people to twerk is racist? Gulp. They were all doing it on 'Strictly' for weeks.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Is somebody saying that for white people to twerk is racist?
No.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
First, country and western's typical accent is regional and rural, not tied to colour.
Come off it. How is that any different to saying that rap's typical accent is regional and urban, rather than tied to colour?
quote:
However, linguist David Crystal posits that a musical style can shape the "accent" with which it is sung. The melody cancels out intonation and the beat cancels out the rhythm of speech, thus enforcing an accent which sounds "American". For pop and rock this seems evident.
I think the same argument could be made for country.
This is not the case for rap. Given the examples of Eminem, The Beastie Boys, House of Pain, Macklemore, Aesop Rock. etc. who do not sound like knockoffs of 50 Cent, Ice Cube or Dr Dre. yet still sound authentic.
Anyone who suggests that there isn't a melody or beat in rap music is listening to the wrong artists. And given that there are such things in rap, I fail to see why they wouldn't have the same effect on intonation and rhythm as they do in any other musical form.
It never ceases to amaze me the lengths to which people will go to to show that nothing white people do can ever be said to be linked to their skin colour, while the things black people do are linked to their skin colour. So much effort expended in the cause of perpetuating a double standard.
quote:
One, Murphy is not taking roles from white people by doing so,
I fail to see how a white person playing a black character is taking the role away from a black actor, but a black actor playing a white character isn't taking the role away from a white actor.
quote:
he is not making fun of white culture when he does this
The hell he isn't.
quote:
and, even if that was his intent, the power differential does make a difference.
Translation - they can take the piss out of us all they want, but we're not allowed to take the piss back. And this furthers the cause of equality for reasons.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Quetzalcoatl: quote:
Is somebody saying that for white people to twerk is racist?
Yes.
For example: quote:
Swift's video is swaggerjacking; I think it's offensive as well as lame.
[originally posted by Hilda of Whitby]
And Justinian said:
quote:
The majority of people are not going to twerk, period - this is indeed the point I was making. Highlighting that they are white people actually is relevant because one reason people dance the way they do is the surrounding culture...
although he did qualify this statement later on: quote:
What I am asserting is that white people should be extremely cautious about doing something when the majority of white people who do it behave in a manner which has strong racist overtones.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
The trouble is, if you say that white people should not twerk, you create a closed loop, don't you? I think this ignores the fact that pop culture, esp. music and dance, is completely omnivorous. Everything eats everything else, which makes it fun and kind of crazy and 'fusion'. That's why the dancers on 'Strictly' were twerking.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
But there is the whole history of "blacking up" both by professionals and just for "fun" which colours anyone doing it now no matter their motive.
Yes, there have been a lot of racist portrayals of black people in the past, but in relation to every last one of them, I'm going to appropriate a piece of black culture and say "It wasn't me".
Because it really wasn't. That was someone else. Not me. Someone else with my approximate melanin level. Still not me.
And motive does matter, because what we're discussing is what is racist. Not what is sensitive or insensitive, polite or impolite, advisable or inadvisable. If I'm doing or saying something that isn't racist, previous superficially-similar actions done by racists for racist motives don't make my action racist. At most they raise the possibility of misunderstanding.
I will concede that it is part of basic politeness not to be completely insensitive to the possibility of unwittingly giving offence, but it is ALSO part of basic politeness to have a default assumption of good faith. That means that if a person's artistic/cultural/recreational activities can be seen in two ways, one innocent and one racist,and there's no positive evidence to suggest that this particular person intends the racist one, then it is a moral obligation to assume in her favour that the innocent interpretation is correct unless and until one has a reason to think the contrary.
Whenever we have racism threads on the Ship (and the 'This ManU logo looks a bit like a swastika' one was probably the clearest example) it amazes me how quickly and on how little evidence people are willing to accuse strangers of the most egregious bigotry when there is so obviously a plausible and innocent alternative.
[Fixed my own damned code]
[ 17. October 2014, 12:06: Message edited by: Eliab ]
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
One of the interesting historical points about twerking, is that while it's often taken back to West African styles of dancing by women, some people also see it as having developed in strip-tease, and it's common in contemporary strippers. I think strip-tease can be taken back to ancient Greece and Rome, although who knows if they twerked.
I think Rihanna employs strippers in her videos, although now we're getting into 'sexual objectification of women' territory. 'Pour it up' has twerking on water!
I forgot to say that male strippers also twerk.
[ 17. October 2014, 13:53: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Because it really wasn't. That was someone else. Not me. Someone else with my approximate melanin level. Still not me.
And motive does matter, because what we're discussing is what is racist. Not what is sensitive or insensitive, polite or impolite, advisable or inadvisable. If I'm doing or saying something that isn't racist, previous superficially-similar actions done by racists for racist motives don't make my action racist. At most they raise the possibility of misunderstanding.
Intent isn't magic. People fuck up.
quote:
I will concede that it is part of basic politeness not to be completely insensitive to the possibility of unwittingly giving offence, but it is ALSO part of basic politeness to have a default assumption of good faith. That means that if a person's artistic/cultural/recreational activities can be seen in two ways, one innocent and one racist,and there's no positive evidence to suggest that this particular person intends the racist one, then it is a moral obligation to assume in her favour that the innocent interpretation is correct unless and until one has a reason to think the contrary.
Benefit of the doubt involves assuming that people make mistakes - and that to err is human. It isn't a get out of jail free card that says that "You can pull this out of context so only the message the artist intended will happen".
What goes with that is that there is also the necessity of saying "Don't do that. It doesn't matter what you meant. This is what you are doing. Intent isn't magic." Benefit of the doubt doesn't involve erasing all the connotations and context from what you are doing. It involves assuming that you didn't mean them.
And once you have been informed about the context and the cultural connotations of your actions the situation changes. It ceases to be "I am trying to do this and my intent isn't racist" and becomes "I am trying to do this and I genuinely do not care if I come off as a racist." At which point you are someone who doesn't care if they come off as a racist and can hardly complain when you are taken for one.
Or there are covering arguments you can make.
The first is that you know about the context - and what you are doing is taking account of that context. And you believe you have the skill to do this.
The second is that the context isn't what the other person is claiming and there's a lot they don't know. Be very sure you are right before using this one. (This, incidentally, is where the "Border Morris" defence of Blackface Morris Dancers fits).
The third is "WTF? That's nothing like that". Which is step back time for both sides.
quote:
Whenever we have racism threads on the Ship (and the 'This ManU logo looks a bit like a swastika' one was probably the clearest example) it amazes me how quickly and on how little evidence people are willing to accuse strangers of the most egregious bigotry when there is so obviously a plausible and innocent alternative.
This isn't true. I don't think anyone on that thread was accusing Man U of doing more than making a mistake in graphic design and then not vetting it properly. Everyone makes mistakes from time to time.
Man U made a mistake, they got called on it, they accepted it, they fixed it. Everyone moved on. Man U handled everything outside the creation of the new logo the right way - and there was no moral fault implied there. They got the benefit of the doubt.
What they didn't do was say "We don't care if it looks a bit like a Swastika. It's our logo and it was created perfectly innocently. You must give us the benefit of the doubt for this and we will continue to use it no matter who it offends - or attracts."
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
Intent isn't magic[/i]. People fuck up.
Of course it's "magic". This entire conversation has been dominated by discussions about how what people intend is what determines whether doing something is okay or not okay. Your own discussion of Taylor Swift versus Miley Cyrus is driven by statements of intention.
Only in the universe of moral outrage at every opportunity do we punish people for things other than their intent. But the universe of moral outrage is alive and well at this point in history, mostly because it helps fill the pages of a media that is scrambling for enough stories to justify its own miserable existence.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
And the list of people who don't know things includes those who insist on being outraged - about videos they haven't even viewed.
And, as I've discussed at length before, it includes Americans who insisted on viewing an Australian/West Indian KFC ad through their own lens and who screamed down any attempt at explaining to them that the culture actually depicted was not their own, was not like their own and did not have a racist connotation for fried chicken.
If you want to say that intent doesn't matter, then you are saying that it's okay for black Americans to become outraged about an ad that has no black Americans in it and was never aired in America. You are saying that it's okay for a bunch of people who clearly have zero knowledge about cricket matches, about Australian cricket fans or West Indian fans, about the sponsorship of the West Indian team by KFC, or about the ongoing theme of an entire series of ads to place their own completely different interpretation on a scene and twist it into an example of racism.
Which is something I just find unacceptable. That is putting far too much power in the hands of the hysterical and ill-informed.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Well, it seems to me that, in at least a few scenes, she is dressed in a manner that is meant to evoke a style commonly associated with African-Americans. Not just that she's copying African-American music or dancing, but that she wants us to look at her image and think "Hmm, she looks kinda black there".
Which I suppose some might view as an updated version of blackface(albeit of a supposedly complimentary variety, not quite as openly degrading as Al Jolson). I'm kind of undecided about these things myself, hut you asked what I saw, so there it is.
Then you would have to say the same about almost every white rapper in existence. As a 31 year old white man who have listened to rap since his early teens, I can assure you that the 'black hip hop style' in this video is not. It is simply a 'hip hop style.'
Is Vanilla Ice just an updated Al Jolson?
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
First, country and western's typical accent is regional and rural, not tied to colour.
Come off it. How is that any different to saying that rap's typical accent is regional and urban, rather than tied to colour?
In Britain, a black person's accent will be tied to the region in which they live and how close to original immigration they are. So there is more variation.
In America, there is a general commonality because of segregation and the, relatively, recent migration patterns.
So it is not really tied to color except that colour is tied to segregation. If you force people to live as a group in isolation from everyone else, they will sound more like each other and less like you.
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Anyone who suggests that there isn't a melody or beat in rap music is listening to the wrong artists. And given that there are such things in rap, I fail to see why they wouldn't have the same effect on intonation and rhythm as they do in any other musical form.
Rap is spoken word. Spoken word will allow one's one accent to show through more. Listen to the spoken portion of pop songs and this becomes evident. Or listen to Tinie Tempah, he did not feel it necessary to completely dump his accent.
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
It never ceases to amaze me the lengths to which people will go to to show that nothing white people do can ever be said to be linked to their skin colour, while the things black people do are linked to their skin colour. So much effort expended in the cause of perpetuating a double standard.
It is white people who have constantly linked behaviours to darker skin.
This is about a group of people who have been forcefully liked together trying to celebrate their commonality and having that stolen from without.
Once again, it is not that sharing is wrong or bad, but that it should be from an equal standing.
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
One, Murphy is not taking roles from white people by doing so,
I fail to see how a white person playing a black character is taking the role away from a black actor, but a black actor playing a white character isn't taking the role away from a white actor.
IN Saturday Night Live, Murphy played a part he wrote for himself. It would not have worked if a white guy played a black guy playing a white guy.
In Coming to America Murphy played a part he wrote for himself. If he hadn't wanted to play the part, it would not have existed.
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
he is not making fun of white culture when he does this
The hell he isn't.
In SNL, he is parodying white privilege, not making fun of any particular culture. In CtA, I did not think he played the white person any more for laughs than he did any of the other 4 characters he portrays in the same scene.
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Translation - they can take the piss out of us all they want, but we're not allowed to take the piss back. And this furthers the cause of equality for reasons.
Again, this is about power differential.
Note: I have not suggested that everything should flow in one direction. ISTM, your arguments are making this much more polarised than necessary.
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Yes, there have been a lot of racist portrayals of black people in the past, but in relation to every last one of them, I'm going to appropriate a piece of black culture and say "It wasn't me".
Because it really wasn't. That was someone else. Not me. Someone else with my approximate melanin level. Still not me.
But you belong to the group which has benefited from putting black people under the thumb. And that is the difference. White society has done, as a group, poorly towards black people.
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
And motive does matter, because what we're discussing is what is racist.
This is an argument I have a problem with.
Racism is aligning attributes with race. It needn't be negative. Many definitions will add a secondary definition or qualifier that it is usually negative, but the core of the definition does not require this.
As Justinian points out, ignorance only goes so far.
There is another thing to consider: It is the performer's burden to effectively communicate much more than it is the listener/viewer's responsibility to interpret.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Did I feel uneasy about what they were doing? Most definitely yes. Flaunting the spirituality and the culture of another people like this, claiming some sort of religious status, without their consent or approval, is a case of cultural appropriation as far as I'm concerned.
So why are you a Christian, then?
BTW I would probably feel uneasy about this too, but not for reasons of 'borrowed spirituality or religion' (since spirituality and religion, if true, should be shared), but because they seemed to pretend to be Native Americans, or trick people into believing they were.
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
White people who are entertainers shouldn't wear makeup that makes them look like black people. There is no problem with black people who are entertainers wearing makeup that makes them look like black people.
But is there a problem with black entertainers (Eddie Murphy, say) wearing makeup that makes them look like white people? That's the real comparison.
Or perhaps the Wayans Brothers…
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
And once you have been informed about the context and the cultural connotations of your actions the situation changes. It ceases to be "I am trying to do this and my intent isn't racist" and becomes "I am trying to do this and I genuinely do not care if I come off as a racist." At which point you are someone who doesn't care if they come off as a racist and can hardly complain when you are taken for one.
[...]
The third is "WTF? That's nothing like that". Which is step back time for both sides.
The whole cultural appropriation thing is "WTF time" for me. Once a style has entered the cultural mainstream, it seems absurd to me to claim it as the property of only one ethnicity.
But really, it's more fundamental than that for me. I don't see different ethnicities as competing interest groups at all. I think that's an idiotic and inhumane way to see things. When I read comments like "you belong to a ethnic group which has..." my gut reaction is to reply "Oh do fuck off", because I'm more than a fucking skin colour. I refuse to self-identify with nineteenth century racists just because they are next to me on a goddamned colour chart. That's a stupid way to look at the world. I don't do it. I refuse to do it.
quote:
This isn't true. I don't think anyone on that thread was accusing Man U of doing more than making a mistake in graphic design and then not vetting it properly.
You remember a different thread to me, then. My entire contribution to that argument was essentially "Come on, what's more likely - ManU's been infiltrated by actual Nazis, or the person who designed that logo, like loads of people on this thread, didn't think it looked anything like a swastika". The other side were insisting that professional graphic designers should have known, must have known, and should be taken as having intended, that the letters MUFC, in a blocky pattern, would resemble a fascist symbol. It would have been funny had they not been so obviously sincere in thinking that.
Anyway, I've just got home from a LARP event in which one scene involved swing dancing - a style of dance obviously African-American in origin. Of the 30 or so dancers, I reckon 20+ were white British, 10 or so were other white Europeans, Chinese and Asian. I think 1 was black British, and 1 was white American. Cultural appropriation? Immoral? Offensive? And if it was, who was the more culpable - the white American or the black Brit?
The other notable part of the event as far as this thread is concerned was that one key character (a 1940s Eurydice) was portrayed at various times by a white player and a black player, not to make any racial point, but simply because the two players had different skill sets which were both required by the event. And the other players accepted the switch without any difficulty whatsoever. The character didn't need to be black or white. Race was irrelevant.
Sometimes, I accept with regret, we can't always ignore race. But sometimes we can. And when we can, we should. There are cultural expressions about which we can be genuinely colour-blind. So why not do that?
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Anyway, I've just got home from a LARP event in which one scene involved swing dancing - a style of dance obviously African-American in origin. Of the 30 or so dancers, I reckon 20+ were white British, 10 or so were other white Europeans, Chinese and Asian. I think 1 was black British, and 1 was white American. Cultural appropriation? Immoral? Offensive? And if it was, who was the more culpable - the white American or the black Brit?
Swing was a black innovation, but the dancing and the music were integrated from early on. White kids would go to Harlem to dance and white musicians would go to participate.
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Sometimes, I accept with regret, we can't always ignore race. But sometimes we can. And when we can, we should. There are cultural expressions about which we can be genuinely colour-blind. So why not do that?
It is not that I do not agree with your statement, because I do, but it is not a simple, smooth or perfect process. Nor are the what and how and when going to be universally agreed upon.
Though sometimes misplaced, outrage will happen.
Here is a simple question: If you cannot understand the outrage, how do you hope to progress beyond it?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
The only way a dance style gets integrated is if people don't jump up and down when people of a different colour to the originators of the dance style start performing the same dance style. Someone let those white kids go to Harlem. So let the white kids twerk.
There seems to be an impossible Catch-22 developing here. We've got notions that it's whites that set up racial differentials, combined with claims of racial ownership of certain culture such that it's a problem if a white person breaks down the racial differential. How does that work? How is it possible to say to white people "it's your fault that some things inherently belong to one race or another" while simultaneously insisting on black ownership?
Either we want to remove the barriers or we don't. If we don't want to remove them, then I'm sorry, but it ceases to be legitimate for black people to see what white people have and say "I want that". Saying "this is black people's stuff" is positively inviting white people to say "well, okay then, so this is white people's stuff". It's legitimising every white racist who argued that the races should be kept separate.
If there's a power imbalance, you don't solve it by playing tit for tat. You solve it by saying "yes, you can share in this so long as I can share in that".
[ 18. October 2014, 10:49: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
I could not agree more, orfeo.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
These discussions always make me tired, angry, frustrated and sad. Mostly sad.
I don't see anyone here saying white people cannot use black things. (History shows this to be an unsuccessful tactic, regardless) But sharing should be about more than the toys, the fun things.
You want to share? Share opportunity. Share equal treatment.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
You want to share? Share opportunity. Share equal treatment.
The problem is that most of the white people who want to borrow black dancing and music styles have no control over the opportunities that are or are not offered to blacks.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
You want to share? Share opportunity. Share equal treatment.
The problem is that most of the white people who want to borrow black dancing and music styles
They do have a choice about how they comport themselves though.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
These discussions always make me tired, angry, frustrated and sad. Mostly sad.
I don't see anyone here saying white people cannot use black things. (History shows this to be an unsuccessful tactic, regardless).
Actually, I think the issue here is that it IS a successful tactic-- for white performers. See above discussion re Elvis, the Beatles, etc. who found their adaptations of traditional African American music QUITE successful-- to the chagrin of the struggling artists they were borrowing from.
At the same time, it's a bit of a mixed bag. Certainly it would seem heartbreaking to be that African American who is unable to gain an audience for his/her work, only to see a white performer find enormous success in adapting that work. It's hard to not imagine that racism plays a part in that, or has in the past. otoh, those white adaptations exposed white audiences to styles of music/dance they weren't previously exposed to, opening the door for those African American artists to find a new market. So, again, a mixed bag.
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
TBut sharing should be about more than the toys, the fun things.
You want to share? Share opportunity. Share equal treatment.
This.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Happily.
But can we all please remember that THESE DAYS there are massively successful black musicians (and also plenty of struggling ones of any colour). Elvis died when I was a child. Why are we picking examples of injustice from 50 years ago? I'm not saying there IS no injustice now, but if the best examples we've got from the music industry occurred in the 1950s and 1960s, maybe the music industry is doing okay now.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
k-mann: So why are you a Christian, then?
I think it's very important to realize that we have a 'borrowed' religion.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
I think people doing different cultural things is awesome, and having those things spread is also awesome.
I also think that everyone should share opportunities and not push people down from sharing them.
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
k-mann: So why are you a Christian, then?
I think it's very important to realize that we have a 'borrowed' religion.
What do you mean "we"? ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
... quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
k-mann: So why are you a Christian, then?
I think it's very important to realize that we have a 'borrowed' religion.
What do you mean "we"?
I think what LeRoc might be reminding us is that Christianity is originally an offshoot of the Jewish religion, and comes from the Middle East via the eastern Mediterranean. It is not indigenous either to the US or to WASPs
[ 20. October 2014, 17:33: Message edited by: Enoch ]
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I think what LeRoc might be reminding us is that Christianity is originally an offshoot of the Jewish religion
Yes, I know. Hence "What do you mean, 'we'?"
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
ChastMastr: Yes, I know. Hence "What do you mean, 'we'?"
Oh c'mon, you're invited!
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
ChastMastr: Yes, I know. Hence "What do you mean, 'we'?"
Oh c'mon, you're invited!
No, no, LOL, I'm Jewish by blood down the matriarchal line of descent (Austrian and Hungarian Jews, mixed with German Gentile). Wasn't raised in any of the religion (other than guilt and being told to keep it secret when I was a kid so I wouldn't be attacked, because my mother was (1) born in 1928 and (2) paranoid), or indeed in any religion, but have always taken an interest in it, and when I became a Christian, I took even more of an interest in my heritage.
Rather sadly my mother's brother didn't even tell his own kids about his Jewish ancestry till I spilled the beans one day, and I seem to be the only one of that entire branch of the family tree to care about it at all, but I try to at least do something for some of the holidays, and I make very good matzoh ball soup and latkes.
Come over some time, we'll nosh! ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
If there's a power imbalance, you don't solve it by playing tit for tat. You solve it by saying "yes, you can share in this so long as I can share in that".
This isn't about sharing. This is about one group playing a style associated with another group whilst simultaneously acting out a set of negative stereotypes associated with another group (see Iggy Azalea comments upthread).
If there isn't a power imbalance, you also don't solve it by pretending it doesn't exist.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
If there's a power imbalance, you don't solve it by playing tit for tat. You solve it by saying "yes, you can share in this so long as I can share in that".
This isn't about sharing.
Most of the thread contributors have been talking about it as if it's EXACTLY about that.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
You want to share? Share opportunity. Share equal treatment.
You’re shifting the goalposts a fair bit there.
Can we not take it as a given that this is a discussion between non-racists, that we would all like to see a truly equal society (even if we differ about how to get there from here), and in our personal and professional lives try to treat people fairly?
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
This is about one group playing a style associated with another group whilst simultaneously acting out a set of negative stereotypes associated with another group (see Iggy Azalea comments upthread).
Can you unpack that a bit? What do you mean by “one group” doing something “whilst simultaneously” portraying negative stereotypes? Is the “one group” white people in general, or do you have a specific set of musicians in mind?
I don’t think anyone has made any sort of convincing case that Iggy Azalea (about whom I know nothing) is acting out negative stereotypes. But even if she is, I really don’t see how that has any bearing on how Taylor Swift ought to dance. No one denies that there are white racists. What we’re arguing about is (1) whether a white artist ought to allow their style to be influenced by black artists; and (2) whether they are de facto racist if they do.
I’m slightly disappointed that no one answered my question about how has the most right to enjoy African-American dancing – a black Briton or a white American? I asked it as a direct consequence of a real life event, not as a trap question, but it seems to me that it’s a dilemma for your side.
What I mean is, that absent any racial connotations, it is obvious that there’s no serious objection to Brits and Americans drawing on one another’s culture. It would be impossible to disentangle the extremely fruitful cultural sharing between those two countries. It would be absurd to suggest that a (black) Londoner can’t dance to the same tune as a (black) New Yorker.
The anti-‘appropriation’ side therefore seems to me to be committed to the view that culturally, a black American has more in common with a sub-set of foreigners than they do with most of their fellow Americans. That seems to me to be rather unlikely, and it would not surprise me if many Americans of all colours found it offensive. It would be saying in effect that black culture, though ostensibly produced by Americans, isn’t, and can’t be, truly American culture. Black Europeans might be appropriate consumers of it, but white Americans (that is, most Americans) are not. That, surely, cannot be tolerable.
None of that is to argue against sensitivity, respect, commercial fairness, artistic integrity and racial equality. None of us want to see cultural influences being used to excuse racial stereotyping or abuse. But the solution cannot be to tell people who aren’t racists, and whom we have no fair reason to think are racists, that certain cultural expressions are unavailable to them because of their race.
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
ChastMastr: No, no, LOL, I'm Jewish by blood down the matriarchal line of descent
D'oh! Sorry, I didn't take this possibility into account.
quote:
ChastMastr: Come over some time, we'll nosh!
That would be great. (Although I have no idea what 'to nosh' means, so I'm a bit worried what I just assented to )
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
I don’t think anyone has made any sort of convincing case that Iggy Azalea (about whom I know nothing) is acting out negative stereotypes.
What would a convincing case look like to you?
quote:
But even if she is, I really don’t see how that has any bearing on how Taylor Swift ought to dance.
I've not been commenting on Taylor Swift - the OP seemed very much along the lines of 'look how terrible this is - don't you all agree'.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
You want to share? Share opportunity. Share equal treatment.
You’re shifting the goalposts a fair bit there.
I don't think so. This is exactly why these things are perceived as a problem.
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Can we not take it as a given that this is a discussion between non-racists, that we would all like to see a truly equal society (even if we differ about how to get there from here), and in our personal and professional lives try to treat people fairly?
I thought this is what we were doing. We are discussing what our perceptions are and making the case for them.
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
What we’re arguing about is (1) whether a white artist ought to allow their style to be influenced by black artists; and (2) whether they are de facto racist if they do.
Yes, we are. But this cannot be separated from the larger issue because the larger issue is why the smaller issues cause ire.
The issue has gone beyond Swift because because pretty much no one here thinks she was being racist.
ISTM, we have, as a group, said yes to 1), with provisions, and no to 2). The discussion has been the provisions to 1).
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
I’m slightly disappointed that no one answered my question about how has the most right to enjoy African-American dancing – a black Briton or a white American? I asked it as a direct consequence of a real life event, not as a trap question, but it seems to me that it’s a dilemma for your side.
Black British musical culture is in large part African-American Music culture. It is more than this, yes, but it is an integral part of. Black Americans tend not to see beyond colour. In America, there is much less a distinction than elsewhere. Black is Black is Black is Black.
IME, most Americans, regardless of colour, would not see a Black Briton as capable of appropriation. To them, it would be their culture.
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
It would be saying in effect that black culture, though ostensibly produced by Americans, isn’t, and can’t be, truly American culture. Black Europeans might be appropriate consumers of it, but white Americans (that is, most Americans) are not.
This is what has been said, both explicitly and covertly. Briton is not free from this either, BTW.
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
That, surely, cannot be tolerable.
It is emphatically not tolerable.
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
None of that is to argue against sensitivity, respect, commercial fairness, artistic integrity and racial equality. None of us want to see cultural influences being used to excuse racial stereotyping or abuse. But the solution cannot be to tell people who aren’t racists, and whom we have no fair reason to think are racists, that certain cultural expressions are unavailable to them because of their race.
I do not think anyone here has said this. Several of us have said that it is contextual.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Black British musical culture is in large part African-American Music culture. It is more than this, yes, but it is an integral part of. Black Americans tend not to see beyond colour. In America, there is much less a distinction than elsewhere. Black is Black is Black is Black.
IME, most Americans, regardless of colour, would not see a Black Briton as capable of appropriation. To them, it would be their culture.
Cough, splutter, cough. I know the British still think that they won the War of 1812, but. No. Just no.
There is not one black culture in America. Black is not Black is not Black is not Black.
Most Americans do see Black Britons as capable of appropriation, particularly if they earn large sums of money doing things that others have earned very little money doing.
Anyone remember the Spice Girls? (I was too old to be in their musical target audience, but I remember laughing my ass off at the movie).
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Black British musical culture is in large part African-American Music culture. It is more than this, yes, but it is an integral part of. Black Americans tend not to see beyond colour. In America, there is much less a distinction than elsewhere. Black is Black is Black is Black.
IME, most Americans, regardless of colour, would not see a Black Briton as capable of appropriation. To them, it would be their culture.
Cough, splutter, cough. I know the British still think that they won the War of 1812, but. No. Just no.
There is not one black culture in America. Black is not Black is not Black is not Black.
I did not say there was one black culture in America, I said there is less distinction. In the UK, most black people know where they came from; West Indies, Africa, Jamaica, etc. and have ties to these cultures. So the potential for diversity within is much greater than it is for America, where most do not know. And the vast majority of internal migration within America is relatively recent, again giving more commonality than difference.
And my personal experience is Americans in general, black people included, project more than strictly warranted.
BTW, Black is Black is Black is Black. No, a song is not a study, but this one demonstrates the POV.
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
