I wasn’t going to blog too much tonight. Hey, I did my five for the month so I could have saved this for next month and been one ahead of my goal. But when you have something to say, you have to say it. OK, so I cheated and waited until after midnight so it shows up in March.
I read a rather pithy article in the Washington Post about how insensitive Saturday Night Live was to have a white man play the part of Barack Obama in one of its shows. The writer said it was reminiscent of putting on the black shoe polish. Give me a break!
First of all, cast member Fred Armisen auditioned for the role and was chosen from five others and I thought did a pretty good imitation of the Senator. Second, and this is really getting to grate on me, Obama’s background is only half black. Does this mean Armisen only needed half the black shoe polish?
As noted in a recent post, Obama was born to a white woman and a Kenyan man. He was raised by an Indonesian step-father. His roots are not exactly out of an Alex Haley novel. Since he was raised in a home mixed with American and Asian cultures, he has more in common with Armisen than he does with any other black actor since Armisen is half white and half Asian.
When Halle Berry won an Oscar, she was usually mentioned as the first African American to win the Best Actress award. Putting it this way is a bit disingenuous and not exactly accurate. Berry was born to a white British mother and an African American father. The father divorced her mother when she was four years old and was subsequently raised by her mother. Her father had little to do with her.
The media places a lot of pressure on Tiger Woods to be a racial icon when I think he’d rather just be a golfing icon, thank you. It makes no more difference that he is Thai and African American than it does if he is just African American, but it seems it does to various writers of race-related politics. Tiger’s father certainly helped him be the man and the golfer he has become and his death deeply affected Tiger’s life. Does it really matter that his father was black? He is just Tiger’s father and let it go at that.
This isn’t to say all of these people's African American heritage means nothing or Obama's, Berry’s and Wood’s father’s genetic code means nothing. It’s just that it always seems we’re so ready to label that we forget that our entire American culture is hyphenated. One of my friends is Sicilian-American, another is Irish-American. They consider themselves American and these friends are first generation Americans.
Let’s hope if Obama become president we can get past the racial descriptions and just have someone representing all of America. I would never vote for or against anyone because of their heritage and can’t understand why anyone else would. I don’t know where these prejudicial thoughts come from. Personally, I think the French started it.
6 comments:
The French start a lot of things,but finish nothing.....
I think that Obama actually IS right out of an A. Huxley/Roots book. No, his roots may not include the African slave trade but, as happened to some in Huxley's book, children did result from a slave owner/slave relationship. So even the people in the book are not 'purely' bla...er, African-American.
Because I have a relative on my father's side that came over on the Mayflower, and because a lot of my family originated in Great Britain, does that mean I should be considered British-American? Some of my mother's side of the family is Danish, I think. So how does that affect my hyphen? I'm worried that at some point I may get Alzheimer's or Multiple Schlerosis like my father. If I do, and since there is a genetic component to those diseases, will that make me Alzheimer's-American or MS-American?
All obsurdity aside, I used to think that race was a non-issue and wonder why it was constantly being brought up. We grew up in the 60's and 70's when great strides were made in our country. We have gotten past the race thing. I know I have. But then I experienced life outside the suburbs and outside of California. It's different than I expected. With that said, I still agree that far too much is made of race and sometimes it seems to be the ONLY issue, and it should have nothing to do with things.
Okay, back to Obama. I'll admit it: I will NOT vote for Obama. But it's got nothing to do with Hilary's 'kitchen sink' campaign strategy. And it's got nothing to do with his blackness, or his whiteness, or his whatever!
Regarding the Washing post comment regarding the white man playing obama,would they also have complained if a white guy played Michael Jackson?
I agree that the SNL comment reeks of desperation on the part of the author to make something out of nothing. (I seem to remember Billy Crystal doing an excellent Sammy Davis Jr. impression and that did not seem to cause a problem.) But your larger point seems to circulate around the complexities of race, especially as they pertain to our increasingly multi-racial country. Your point regarding bi-racial backgrounds is well taken, that we should respect and celebrate all parts of us and not just those that give us some form of advantage - whether that is political, social, or economic. With that said, it needs to be stated that from a cultural standpoint certain ethnicities carry more weight to some individuals because of the collective history and experience of that group. You mention your sicilian and irish american friends and their ability to embrace the american portion of their hyphenated identity. But whether you think this way or not, Barack, Halle's,and Tiger's African heritage will always seperate and distignuish them from their american coutnerparts. Sicilian and Irish, who no doubt saw discrimintation, were never enslaved and considered property in this country. Had they been however, subsequent generations could have easliy passed as another form of European and they would not have carried with them the social stigma of being from "an inferior racial background". But the color of Barack's skin has always dictated - whether he wanted it to or not - that he would be viewed as a black man in this country. It is often difficult for people like us - and by us I mean open-minded and rational people - to understand that to have the appearance of Barack in this country still carries with it a considerable amount of hardship. Whether you do or not, I would imagine that the average American, if they were tasked with identifying Obama on the street, would do so as a black man. In fact the three people you mentioned all have discussed being discriminated against due to the color of their skin at some point in their lives. The net result of this is a basic human reaction. When society at large discriminates there is a natural reaction to embrace the part of society that will not. So while I agree that it is important for each individual to have pride and respect for all of their ethinic backgrounds, I can understand why certain groups place an emphasis on one more than another. When individuals with African heritage achieve a first I don't believe that the celebration is centered around proof that they are in fact equal. I thnk we can all agree that they are. The celebration is that the individual overcame hardships that are unique to that group. There is no secret that golf is an old white man's game with strong ties to the south. So when a young man of Black and Malaysian descent wins the most storied tournament in Golf in the epicenter of insitutionalized racism against blacks, I can understand why black people would embrace him as one of their own. To my knowledge, Malaysian/white relations in the south have not been much of an issue. Politics, especially on the national scale, have long been dominated by Americans of European descent. Your average candidate has not been discriminated against because the color of their skin. This is what makes Obama unique and this is what causes one half of his heritage to be exalted over another. While I am not saying this is right, I am sinply trying to point out that to me this is a natural reaction and I think that for all of the disadvantages Obama has experienced because of his skin color he deserves some advantages. In a perfect world his background would not matter. Most intelligent people I know will not vote for or against him based on the color of his skin but I know that this is not the case throughout the rest of the country. But at a minimum, I hope that the discussions that follow can be done respectfully and not in the context of a sketch comedy show that is simply here to entertain. Damn that Fred Armisen.
Many good points and observations. One must point out that Sicilians, if not enslaved, should have been and the Irish are enslaved by the slog. Of course both groups have evolved to be underrated thieves, but that's another story.
What I would like to see when we're discussing race is the elimination of the double standard. Like Sladed mentioned, there has been a lot of progress in the way people of color have been viewed since the Civil Rights Act. It's evolved to the degree that black Americans have become the Secretary of State (twice), Supreme Court Justices, Senators, Best Actress Oscar winner (not deserved), Best Actor Oscar winner (well-deserved), the greatest athletes in all professional sports except NASCAR (is that a sport?) and hockey (only because Willie O'Ree was ahead of his time), and the likely nominee for president and likely president. Did you ever believe when you were younger that you'd see any person of color in this position who is being accepted by all races, religions and ethnic origins?
The disconnect comes when journalists and other dangerous people with a computer feel the need to categorize. I know Obama cannot hide the share of him that is of African descent, but do we really need to separate him from all Americans and tread with a lighter foot around him? I thought the writer, while trying to say SNL was racist, was actually being racist herself. Yet I bet she is feeling pretty good about herself for pointing out this indignation.
At the beginning of this election cycle, I thought the media and political opponents would have difficulty being harder on Hillary because she is a woman. She even got to win a state by crying, something apparently only accepted in men when they win a world title or are contestants on American Idol or Project Runway. But what I found interesting is that race trumped gender in the way people went about campaigning against Obama; and that included Hillary until recently. When the Hillary campaign actually hit a few raw nerves with Obama, he proved to have something of a glass jaw and it cost him three states. Even the major media piled on with significantly more negative stories the past two weeks.
In this rambling response to my rambling post, I was only hoping to point out that if you want to embrace a certain heritage of a person and make broad generalizations that fit what White America knows of that heritage, it would be more proper and respectful to recognize all the culture and heritage that makes up a person. I know Obama can't be any less black than he is and I don't want him to try to be. I also don't want snooty reporters for the New York Times believing they are progressive thinkers because they can point out the obvious and still miss the broader point.
Hope this makes sense because I am basically through with politics for a while. It really disgusts me these days -- for reasons that are obvious to many.
I appreciate and to a certain extent agree with all of your points. I would never have thought that I would see a black president this early in my life and it does appear that there stands a very good shot of that happening in the future. I do look around and see the fact that "that black Americans have become the Secretary of State (twice), Supreme Court Justices, Senators, Best Actress Oscar winner (not deserved), Best Actor Oscar winner (well-deserved), the greatest athletes in all professional sports". And while these are great improvements that the country should feel good about, they are in fact just improvements and cannot trick us into thinking that the racial problem in this country is solved. If people of all ethnicities are created equal, which I know we all believe, then aren't the aforementioned accomplishments to be expected? In a way it is just a matter of odds (besides the athlete thing which is a matter of science)that people of different ethnicities would eventually rise to the top.
As a supporter of Obama - and I am based on the fact that I believe his message and political platform to be the closest to my own beliefs - I do wish that the element of race would be left out entirely. But our media is petty, cheap, and need to sell newspapers and will take the approach that interests the most people as possible. Race is a funny issue in this country largely because it is not discussed in traditinal settings the way it is in other countries and cultures. I point this out because I appreciated your discussion of it, and see it as something outside of politics, because to me discussion is what leads to progress.
I think that unfortunately for a lot of white people their support of Obama relieves some weird form of guilt which makes them feel like a better or more enlightened person. There is a huge market for that in the world right now (hybrids, organic foods, the Red campaign, etc.) and Obama may have come at the perfect time for himself. Personally, I think this does cheapen the political discourse but I guess it is a reflection of the national mood at the moment so it can't all be bad. That is democracy. Besides the last President elected was actually in response to guys kissing so there is precedent to outside issues determining elections. I believe as a supporter of Obama that the media needs to go after him because the voters need to see his resolve. I think we all know McCain and Hilary can play politics, but can Barack? The truthful answer is we don't know and I hate to think that his race could allow him to bypass the same hardships that other candidates confront. Anyway, rambling myself now.
So while I do not fully agree with your complaints I do think they are valid and important to any discussion regarding race in this country. The same way that we need to ask ourselves why certain ethnicities are over represented at our lowest socio-economic levels, we need to ask ourselves at what point does the mention of race become counterproductive to the argument at hand? And I know that this is what is bothering you and I do think it is a valid concern. Barack Obama has overcome a lot in his life and I thnk he deserves the opportunity to prove that he can become President of the United States by holding up to the same scrutiny that any other candidate must. And I agree, let's hope this is the last bit of politics discussed by us for a while.
Post a Comment