In response to my previous Posts
Of the posts I have posted, and those that I have yet to post (which are on my computer and I need to post them), I have to say my favorite are about Helga, Roxy, and Ms. Ellen Craft. I very much liked talking to, and through the black women of these stories. I think each of these characters were special and dynamic because in a lot of ways, the story, the tale, the history was happening to them, and they were the subject of what was occurring. Even for Helga, though she was making the choices, can calling the shots, I believe that she was the subject of Larsen’s world. I believe Helga was in the same positionality as Roxy and Ms. Craft; all three were in a world where they were the double minority.
I believe, of these three responses, my favorite was the one I wrote to by Ms. Craft to Higginbotham. It was my first, and yet very organic, and felt right. I think I love that one so much, because I was playing a strong woman who felt and knew what Ms. Higginbotham was writing in her work. In a lot of ways, I enjoy speaking from a praxis point of view—where the theory and ideas come into play in the flesh, in reality, in the experiences of the people for which the theory describes. I very much enjoyed that piece, and it was a very nice exercise.
Of all the post, I think I enjoyed and entertained the theme of the, discovery. The discovery of power—of white power, and what that really meant to the other races, and how it formed their identity. But also, the discovery that this power can be faked, redone, and misguided—the idea that that it does not actually exist for anyone… I think I very much enjoyed writing this, in these themes.
As for what questions remain...I am not really sure. I think my final research paper on Minstrel Shows and Blackface will cover the gaps in identity and performance that I have been missing so much. I am really interested in what happens after passing. What happens when one performs his or her own identity as a trope, to reveal its contractedness, and how it can come to be and be performed… I think Playing Indian did the most to fill this gap, but I always want more…how does and Asian act more Asian? How is it represented in our imaginations, in our media? And how do these ideas in our imagination affect how we treat people in reality….how does it form policy? We have done some reading and work into this, but I believe there is so much more… It could be a whole course…. But this is a more general course, describing the identity and imagination complex over US history…. And of that, I think we have done a good job.
One last question, for us an everyone: How do the readings give you a sense about how the US imagination play a role in our perception and treatment of people and diversity?
----Temoc
Monday, May 31, 2010
Reflection
This class has enlightened me on the pervasive issues of race and racial identity in America, topics that I now find so interesting. We have come so far in this class, and I have learned so much that I don’t really know where to start.
It was difficult for me to choose any one post, because the readings have all been amazing and brought up issues that were really thought-provoking. My posts from weeks three, four, and six on Sally Hemings, Roxy from Pudd’nhead Wilson, and Helga Crane respectively have been my favorites because they focus on women and the issues they face in slavery and as a free individual. These posts also raise the questions of why these women acted the way they did and made the decisions they made and the psychology behind one’s behavior and character have always interested me. Why did Hemings choose to stay with Jefferson instead of leading a life of her own? What does that say about her character and ability to be self-sufficient? How would a real-life person in Roxy’s position at the end of Twain’s novel feel about the choices she made? Would she believe in a pre-ordained destiny for her children or would things have fared better if she hadn’t made the switch? What explains the ambiguity behind Helga’s death? How does the decision of whether or not to “pass” affect the black woman and their lives?
I always want to better understand the lives of the individuals that we read about and how their surrounding environment influences them. I believe I have gained a better awareness of the issues that black and white women faced during the 19th and 20th centuries, especially in relation to their male counterparts and immigrants to America during that period. I have found from these readings that I am very interested in the plight of women in America during a period of drastic change due to immigration and a rising industry of commerce and trade. This is a topic that I wish to explore further and hope to be able to in other classes that I take at Stanford.
I now want to learn more about the immigrant women of America and how their status affected their behavior and relations with others. How do the Indian, Mexican, and Asian woman live their lives in a nation that discriminates not only against their race, but also their gender? How do they deal with the patriarchal nature of society in America and within their own households? We have studied race relations (among other topics) between a variety of races but I wonder about the gender issues that underlie these race relations and tensions. I am now also more interested in America’s identity and the question of what constitutes American identity versus an Other, which is so important in the study of America as a nation that is historically known as the melting-pot.
By taking this class, I feel more informed and aware of the roots of racial tensions that continue to present day. I didn’t realize how pervasive the issue of race was before taking this class. In addition, this class complements my other two classes in Art History and English that also cover the 19th and 20th centuries, which helped build a holistic framework of the period in my mind and made each of my classes all the more enjoyable. Thank you so much for offering such a wonderful class organized in a small setting that encourages discussion! I only hope to have more classes like this one where not only do I learn so much, but leave the class feeling enlightened and knowing I can have better relations and conversations with others because I better understand the history behind America’s race relations.
It was difficult for me to choose any one post, because the readings have all been amazing and brought up issues that were really thought-provoking. My posts from weeks three, four, and six on Sally Hemings, Roxy from Pudd’nhead Wilson, and Helga Crane respectively have been my favorites because they focus on women and the issues they face in slavery and as a free individual. These posts also raise the questions of why these women acted the way they did and made the decisions they made and the psychology behind one’s behavior and character have always interested me. Why did Hemings choose to stay with Jefferson instead of leading a life of her own? What does that say about her character and ability to be self-sufficient? How would a real-life person in Roxy’s position at the end of Twain’s novel feel about the choices she made? Would she believe in a pre-ordained destiny for her children or would things have fared better if she hadn’t made the switch? What explains the ambiguity behind Helga’s death? How does the decision of whether or not to “pass” affect the black woman and their lives?
I always want to better understand the lives of the individuals that we read about and how their surrounding environment influences them. I believe I have gained a better awareness of the issues that black and white women faced during the 19th and 20th centuries, especially in relation to their male counterparts and immigrants to America during that period. I have found from these readings that I am very interested in the plight of women in America during a period of drastic change due to immigration and a rising industry of commerce and trade. This is a topic that I wish to explore further and hope to be able to in other classes that I take at Stanford.
I now want to learn more about the immigrant women of America and how their status affected their behavior and relations with others. How do the Indian, Mexican, and Asian woman live their lives in a nation that discriminates not only against their race, but also their gender? How do they deal with the patriarchal nature of society in America and within their own households? We have studied race relations (among other topics) between a variety of races but I wonder about the gender issues that underlie these race relations and tensions. I am now also more interested in America’s identity and the question of what constitutes American identity versus an Other, which is so important in the study of America as a nation that is historically known as the melting-pot.
By taking this class, I feel more informed and aware of the roots of racial tensions that continue to present day. I didn’t realize how pervasive the issue of race was before taking this class. In addition, this class complements my other two classes in Art History and English that also cover the 19th and 20th centuries, which helped build a holistic framework of the period in my mind and made each of my classes all the more enjoyable. Thank you so much for offering such a wonderful class organized in a small setting that encourages discussion! I only hope to have more classes like this one where not only do I learn so much, but leave the class feeling enlightened and knowing I can have better relations and conversations with others because I better understand the history behind America’s race relations.
Final Reflection
I've enjoyed this unusual format for reflection -- placing myself in the shoes of a person we've read about. At first I found it difficult to reflect as anyone other than myself, but it has been particularly useful and interesting for me to embody points of view that are not my own, especially those that I take issue with.
Two of my blog posts took this tack, last week's letter from Talcott Parsons to Daniel Patrick Moynihan and the previous week's letter from Lewis Henry Morgan to the Tammamy society. I do note, in these reflections, a lack of depth from my inability to read beyond the texts. While I do think I gained insights from the new perspectives, I don't know if I was able to think as deeply, since I was constrained by my disagreement.
I found another theme in my posts, the question of the effect of time and histories judgment. This was most apparent in my letter from Sally Hemmings to Callander, the man who wrote about her relationship with Jefferson and my letter to Thomas Holt from Money Vose, a seaman with great stories. Here, I seemed really interested in the struggle to control the narrative of the times, especially contrasted with our understanding today. I wanted to give Hemmings a voice to respond to Callander like she couldn't in real life, but I also wanted to explore the irony that I still find fascinating, that his pieces are one of the reasons we know about her story, allowing her to have a sort of upper-hand in history's perception.
This question of history's interpretation (and possible distortion) of the past is one that I wish we had discussed in class more. This was my first History class on campus and I enjoyed it immensely, getting a different perspective on issues of race and ethnicity. As a "beginner" I could have used more time looking critically at history's lenses and the act of putting together the past.
Two of my blog posts took this tack, last week's letter from Talcott Parsons to Daniel Patrick Moynihan and the previous week's letter from Lewis Henry Morgan to the Tammamy society. I do note, in these reflections, a lack of depth from my inability to read beyond the texts. While I do think I gained insights from the new perspectives, I don't know if I was able to think as deeply, since I was constrained by my disagreement.
I found another theme in my posts, the question of the effect of time and histories judgment. This was most apparent in my letter from Sally Hemmings to Callander, the man who wrote about her relationship with Jefferson and my letter to Thomas Holt from Money Vose, a seaman with great stories. Here, I seemed really interested in the struggle to control the narrative of the times, especially contrasted with our understanding today. I wanted to give Hemmings a voice to respond to Callander like she couldn't in real life, but I also wanted to explore the irony that I still find fascinating, that his pieces are one of the reasons we know about her story, allowing her to have a sort of upper-hand in history's perception.
This question of history's interpretation (and possible distortion) of the past is one that I wish we had discussed in class more. This was my first History class on campus and I enjoyed it immensely, getting a different perspective on issues of race and ethnicity. As a "beginner" I could have used more time looking critically at history's lenses and the act of putting together the past.
Reflection
I'm not really sure where to begin with this reflection. At times during this quarter I was moved, perplexed, confused, and all sorts of other emotions too. Sometimes I wasn't sure where we were going, but looking back we have come quite a long way. We have covered so many different themes and this class has really made me think. As a white guy so many of the issues we have discussed are things I had never thought much about before, but are now things that will remain salient in my mind indefinitely.
In terms of my favorite blog post, I would probably say it was my first -- a letter from William Craft -- though it was hard to see them all. I liked it because I was able to pick up on something very subtle in the reading -- the issue of what makes a slave a slave. Clearly it was more than simply being African-American and was derived from economic and political motives.
Going off of that, the origins of slavery and how it prevailed with those with mixed race identities later on was a theme I was particularly interested. Another theme that interested me is the complexity of the intersectionality of race. There are so many variables that make it hard to categorize someone under any single identity or race, and the ways different aspect of a person interact in order to shape them and how they are viewed by others is fascinating.
At the end of this course I'm left conflicted over the progress made towards the equality of the races throughout the is country's history juxtaposed against the injustices that are still prevalent today. How are we, as a young generation charged with being a vehicle for change, supposed to combat it?
Final Reflection
Looking back, it was difficult for me to decide on a single favorite blog post, so I’m going to reflect on the two posts I wrote during weeks 3 and 4—the first, a letter from a black sailor to his wife, and the second, a letter from James Hemings to his mother.
Not only did these two letters speak to each other, but I felt that they captured a lot of the themes and ideas that really fascinate me. In both blog posts (particularly in the questions), I try to engage with more transnational perspectives in thinking about racial identity in America. These two separate cases—the black sailors and the Hemings siblings—really challenge the traditional ways that we tend to think about African American identity and history as something that emerged and existed solely within the bounds of the U.S. nation-state. As their experiences make clear, African American history was also shaped by global processes, forces, and most importantly, actors.
As a (post)colonial historian, I was especially interested in the emergence of Black nationalism within this diasporic network. The pairing of these different readings during those two weeks really allowed me to see that contemporary nationalist thought had its own antecedents in these interactions that I had known very little about, as well as consolidating for me the linkages between global colonialism and local American life. Furthermore, it just goes to prove that “globalization”—despite the newness of the term—was not something strictly limited to our modern era.
The other themes that emerged in these two posts were those of gender and sexuality, which I’ve always been heavily invested in studying alongside questions of race and colonialism. In my posts, I was only able to raise questions, since our readings (and most scholarship) did not tackle directly these ideas. In particular, I wondered about the absence of sexuality (especially homosexuality) in the scholarship. (Side-note: it was hilarious in an ironic kind of way to learn in class that Gordon-Reed believes so strongly in James’ homosexuality after I had compared him to the black sailors, especially in light of the iconic status of the sailor within gay circles.) Secondly, I was also interested in the gendered dimensions of the diaspora, which often conferred mobility only to male bodies. While I’m familiar with the theoretical underpinnings of these ideas, I still have questions about the particularities of lived experiences as they relate to these larger forces.
Finally, I really appreciated that the class looked at issues of identity across all the different racialized groups in America, though I felt there was not as much emphasis on inter-group relations. If there is, it’s usually framed against the dominant White group, while the specificities of inter-minority relations are rarely mentioned. I think the ideas we’ve already discussed would benefit from a comparative approach as well, especially since different ethnic and racial groups have always lived in proximity with each other, and certain interracial conflicts cannot be solely understood under a white/non-white lens.
With all that said, I thoroughly enjoyed the class, and I genuinely feel like my understandings of race in America (as well as identity in general) have greatly improved. Not only that, I was able to learn more about certain periods of American history (especially from 1776 to 1860) that I wasn’t as knowledgeable about before.
Trac
Not only did these two letters speak to each other, but I felt that they captured a lot of the themes and ideas that really fascinate me. In both blog posts (particularly in the questions), I try to engage with more transnational perspectives in thinking about racial identity in America. These two separate cases—the black sailors and the Hemings siblings—really challenge the traditional ways that we tend to think about African American identity and history as something that emerged and existed solely within the bounds of the U.S. nation-state. As their experiences make clear, African American history was also shaped by global processes, forces, and most importantly, actors.
As a (post)colonial historian, I was especially interested in the emergence of Black nationalism within this diasporic network. The pairing of these different readings during those two weeks really allowed me to see that contemporary nationalist thought had its own antecedents in these interactions that I had known very little about, as well as consolidating for me the linkages between global colonialism and local American life. Furthermore, it just goes to prove that “globalization”—despite the newness of the term—was not something strictly limited to our modern era.
The other themes that emerged in these two posts were those of gender and sexuality, which I’ve always been heavily invested in studying alongside questions of race and colonialism. In my posts, I was only able to raise questions, since our readings (and most scholarship) did not tackle directly these ideas. In particular, I wondered about the absence of sexuality (especially homosexuality) in the scholarship. (Side-note: it was hilarious in an ironic kind of way to learn in class that Gordon-Reed believes so strongly in James’ homosexuality after I had compared him to the black sailors, especially in light of the iconic status of the sailor within gay circles.) Secondly, I was also interested in the gendered dimensions of the diaspora, which often conferred mobility only to male bodies. While I’m familiar with the theoretical underpinnings of these ideas, I still have questions about the particularities of lived experiences as they relate to these larger forces.
Finally, I really appreciated that the class looked at issues of identity across all the different racialized groups in America, though I felt there was not as much emphasis on inter-group relations. If there is, it’s usually framed against the dominant White group, while the specificities of inter-minority relations are rarely mentioned. I think the ideas we’ve already discussed would benefit from a comparative approach as well, especially since different ethnic and racial groups have always lived in proximity with each other, and certain interracial conflicts cannot be solely understood under a white/non-white lens.
With all that said, I thoroughly enjoyed the class, and I genuinely feel like my understandings of race in America (as well as identity in general) have greatly improved. Not only that, I was able to learn more about certain periods of American history (especially from 1776 to 1860) that I wasn’t as knowledgeable about before.
Trac
Reflection
My most memorable post was in response to Nella Larsen's Passing. In this post, I constructed a love letter from Clare to Irene, in which the former explained that she willingly jumped out the window in order to avoid the drama of passing as white and passing as heterosexual. This was the most memorable post for me because this was my second time reading Larsen's novel, and the metaphor of passing with regards to sexual orientation is very intriguing to me.
The notion of invisible identities and whether or not they should be claimed interests me. It's hard to hide/change visible identities, yet it's quite possible to avoid disclosure with certain invisible identities, like sexual orientation. I wonder often about the intersectionality of visible and invisible identities, as well as the idea of a primary identity. Can identities other than race be 'metalanguages' as well?
I've learned a lot about the history of various identities in this class, which has been an interesting approach for me. I'm used to discussing identities as socially constructed, instable, identities that have little attachment to a collective history, since I've always felt like history gives identity more stability and thus more power to essentialize and exclude. However, it's been so great to look at identity through literature, film, and primary sources in order to see how the construction of various identities has changed over time.
I recently read an article by queer theorist Lisa Duggan in which she defined identity as a narrative. Considering identity in this way seems valid, and helps change history from classical music into jazz, and allows intersectionality and various historical sources/forces to engage each other in constructive and performative dialogue. I guess the one big question I still have, however, is one that has been the underlying theme of our course: who am I? If my identity is fluid and constantly in the process of construction, how can I know what part of my identity is real and what part of it is merely transitory and meaningless? I'm glad I've been able to start asking these questions sooner rather than later.
A Letter from Ben Franklin to Thomas Jefferson
Dearest Thomas:
Send an emissary to Philadelphia at once; our beloved colonies are in peril. Between the bumbling Negroes, the savage Indians and these pesky immigrants – especially the Germans – everything – all that we dreamed and fought for -- is at grave risk of undoing.
These Germans, Thomas, are utterly impossible. Any attempts to Anglify them are absolutely futile. Were you aware that we must now use translators in Parliament? These Germans clamor for German street signs and some even suggested making German the official language of the colonies. One is left to wonder what will become of us if we surrender to these bold moves to Germanize our gallant colonies. And on our own land Thomas! On our own shore, they dare to menace and intimidate us! Woe to our white brethren!
Let me be clear -- everything is at stake Thomas. I implore you to heed my message and come at once.
Immigration will tear the colonies at the seams and they are much too fragile for such needless strife. There will be no unification, no camaraderie, no common understanding, no UNION as long as we are relentlessly besieged by outsiders. Miraculously, the colonies have managed to cope with the distressing numbers of Indians and slaves, but there is no ready solution to these willful outsiders. Homogeneity is best for our community. These outsiders threaten to ruin our fledgling nation and all that is pure and white and good.
I know that you worry about these matters as do I. You must return to Philadelphia at once.
Yours in citizenship,
Benjamin Franklin
Questions:
What narrative describes the origin of the word “Celtic” to describe Boston’s NBA franchise? What about the Notre Dame Irish? Is this objectification as troubling and inappropriate as the use of Native American images?
The parallels between Whiteness and citizenship are fascinating and brazenly persist today. Are there any other heterogeneous nations that manage cultural and ethnic variance better than the US? Or is our historical legacy of racial conflict too crippling to ever effectively overcome?
Send an emissary to Philadelphia at once; our beloved colonies are in peril. Between the bumbling Negroes, the savage Indians and these pesky immigrants – especially the Germans – everything – all that we dreamed and fought for -- is at grave risk of undoing.
These Germans, Thomas, are utterly impossible. Any attempts to Anglify them are absolutely futile. Were you aware that we must now use translators in Parliament? These Germans clamor for German street signs and some even suggested making German the official language of the colonies. One is left to wonder what will become of us if we surrender to these bold moves to Germanize our gallant colonies. And on our own land Thomas! On our own shore, they dare to menace and intimidate us! Woe to our white brethren!
Let me be clear -- everything is at stake Thomas. I implore you to heed my message and come at once.
Immigration will tear the colonies at the seams and they are much too fragile for such needless strife. There will be no unification, no camaraderie, no common understanding, no UNION as long as we are relentlessly besieged by outsiders. Miraculously, the colonies have managed to cope with the distressing numbers of Indians and slaves, but there is no ready solution to these willful outsiders. Homogeneity is best for our community. These outsiders threaten to ruin our fledgling nation and all that is pure and white and good.
I know that you worry about these matters as do I. You must return to Philadelphia at once.
Yours in citizenship,
Benjamin Franklin
Questions:
What narrative describes the origin of the word “Celtic” to describe Boston’s NBA franchise? What about the Notre Dame Irish? Is this objectification as troubling and inappropriate as the use of Native American images?
The parallels between Whiteness and citizenship are fascinating and brazenly persist today. Are there any other heterogeneous nations that manage cultural and ethnic variance better than the US? Or is our historical legacy of racial conflict too crippling to ever effectively overcome?
Reflection
Looking back over all my older posts, I can see my understanding of the complexity of race and identity deepening. One idea or theme that I see appear in many of my blog entries is the question of how one the way one defines themselves can conflict with the way that society defines them. It this aspect of identity that makes it such an ambiguous and undefinable term.
With that in mind, one blog post that stands out to me is the letter that I wrote from James to his sister, Sally. Through the letter, I was able to explore some of the more complex issues surrounding the relationship not only between sally Hemmings and Thomas Jefferson, but how James may have felt about as well. As a confidant and personal servant to such a powerful man, James lived a life that few people in his position would ever dream of, evening securing his freedom by working for himself. However, his life ended so tragically, which is why I used the letter to probe his feelings towards the affair between his sister and Jefferson, and the guilt he may have felt for allowing it to happen (even though he had no control over it to stop it). The letter was a great place to look at how the subjectivity of race, particularly when one travels abroad, can have lasting effects on people.
Another blog post that I consider one of my favorites is the letter written from Stavros to "the Negroes of America." I find this one particularly interesting because it was a different perspective on a subject that we had been reading so much about. Writing from the point of view of Stavros, a greek immigrant, I was able to think about how people like Stavros viewed African Americans and what they would say to each other if they had the chance to talk. In the letter, I was able to convey the gratitude european immigrants should have felt towards African Americans since without them, they could never have been able to be called "white." Also, I used to letter to show how definitions of white are only relevant in contrast to definitions of black (white is everything black is not), making these racial categorizations irrelevant when looked at from a critical perspective. Regardless, how one is perceived, especially in terms of their whiteness, remains critical in all facets of life.
These blog posts have been a great venue to delve deeper into the readings and bring up questions or topics that I find interesting. Although it could be intimidating to figure out where to start considering the sheer amount of options, it was nice to be able to write about the aspects of the reading that were most striking. My only remaining question would be is there anyway to define someone's identity or is a question not worth answering because of its fluidity?
Camira
With that in mind, one blog post that stands out to me is the letter that I wrote from James to his sister, Sally. Through the letter, I was able to explore some of the more complex issues surrounding the relationship not only between sally Hemmings and Thomas Jefferson, but how James may have felt about as well. As a confidant and personal servant to such a powerful man, James lived a life that few people in his position would ever dream of, evening securing his freedom by working for himself. However, his life ended so tragically, which is why I used the letter to probe his feelings towards the affair between his sister and Jefferson, and the guilt he may have felt for allowing it to happen (even though he had no control over it to stop it). The letter was a great place to look at how the subjectivity of race, particularly when one travels abroad, can have lasting effects on people.
Another blog post that I consider one of my favorites is the letter written from Stavros to "the Negroes of America." I find this one particularly interesting because it was a different perspective on a subject that we had been reading so much about. Writing from the point of view of Stavros, a greek immigrant, I was able to think about how people like Stavros viewed African Americans and what they would say to each other if they had the chance to talk. In the letter, I was able to convey the gratitude european immigrants should have felt towards African Americans since without them, they could never have been able to be called "white." Also, I used to letter to show how definitions of white are only relevant in contrast to definitions of black (white is everything black is not), making these racial categorizations irrelevant when looked at from a critical perspective. Regardless, how one is perceived, especially in terms of their whiteness, remains critical in all facets of life.
These blog posts have been a great venue to delve deeper into the readings and bring up questions or topics that I find interesting. Although it could be intimidating to figure out where to start considering the sheer amount of options, it was nice to be able to write about the aspects of the reading that were most striking. My only remaining question would be is there anyway to define someone's identity or is a question not worth answering because of its fluidity?
Camira
Final Reflection
Looking over my previous posts made me realize how much I have learned about racial/ethnic identity in the U.S. over the past nine weeks. Although I enjoyed writing all of the posts, my two favorites are “Letter addressed to Thomas Jefferson from Annette Gordon-Reed” and “Letter to Stavros from Young Black Man from America.” For me, these posts represent the fact that the formation of racial and ethnic identity has been a complex process throughout history that it is often difficult to understand. In addition, my letter between Stavros and Young Black Man struck me because it shows that everyday Americans—not just scholars—are well entrenched in the language of race.
Writing a letter between Annette Gordon-Reed and Thomas Jefferson was an interesting exercise because people who study history often spend a great deal of time investigating complex individuals and events, making it difficult to make well-supported claims. From Gordon-Reed’s book, it is clear that she has invested a significant amount of time to trying to better understand Jefferson’s position on race and his relationship with Sally Hemings. My letter was premised on the assumption that sometimes, conducting historical research would be easier if historians could conduct interviews with their deceased subjects. In my letter between Gordon-Reed and Jefferson I wanted to explore the questions she would pose and how she would react to Jefferson’s complicated, and often contradictory, stance on race.
In reviewing my past postings, I also enjoyed writing the letter between Young Black Man from America and Stavros, which Toni Morrison describes in “On the Backs of Blacks.” Looking back over the letter reminded me that everyday Americans, immigrants, and people outside of political and educational institutions are well versed in the language of race. Granted Stavros and Young Black Man are characters in the film America, they still represent the fact that race-making happens on the social level and that people can locate examples of racialization in their everyday lives even though they may not read works of Critical Race, Whiteness, and Ethnic studies.
While I have learned a great deal over the course of the quarter, one aspect of racial identity that I am still interested in learning more about is how racialization functions in multiethnic settings. For example, although The Jazz Singer, Whiteness of a Different Color, and Gentleman’s Agreement focused on race during an era when European immigration was significant to American racialist thinking, I am curious in learning more about how the black/white binary is shaped or impacted by more recent immigration history, which includes people from Asia, Caribbean, and Latin America.
Moreover, I am also interested in learning more about how gender shapes the racialization processes. For example, in Pinky and Showboat the African American women characters were often juxtaposed against the white women characters through differences in physical appearance, their relationship to the domestic tasks, and mothering skills. I am curious about how white women—and perhaps other groups—have gained access to mainstream society by not only defining themselves in opposition to blacks, but also through stereotypes and popular conceptions of black womanhood.
Reflection
Upon starting this class, I was a bit hesitant about writing blog entries from the perspectives of the different people we meet in the readings. However, throughout the quarter, I came to enjoy and understand the usefulness of this exercise for it challenged me to look through the perspectives of these figures in the readings and make sense of everything I read for the week.
Of all my blog entries, I think that my favorite one is the letter from Helga Crane of Quicksand to Hazel V. Carby. I tried to convey Helga’s ambivalence with her identity as a migrant mixed raced, black-identifying woman and a middle class woman of color, how the conflict of identity might relate to Carby’s article about migrant black woman and their divergent image from middle class black women. Also, I enjoyed writing this blog entry because of all the literary readings, I enjoyed Quicksand the most, particularly because of the way Nella Larson navigates through that ambivalence of Helga’s identity by retelling her physical and emotional journeys. However, I would have liked some more closure on Nella Larson’s Quicksand. I think that even though we discussed at length what the endings of each of her stories might mean, I still feel as though I do not have much of a grasp of what to take away from these stories. I still don’t quite know what Larson is trying to say by ending the story with Helga in Alabama and I would like to better understand how this might have been reflective of Larson’s own life.
Overall, the theme that interested me the most in this class and what I wish we had more time to discuss was Mexican immigration and the formation of Mexican American identity. I felt that we spent quite a bit talking about the formation of white identity, but Mexican American identity was placed on the back burner. I would have liked to see more discussion on the differences between Mexican immigration and Irish immigration, and the current “fears” of Mexican immigration along the border. For me, this topic is especially interesting when situated in today’s context with the advocacy for the DREAM Act and Comprehensive Immigration Reform, as well as the backlash against Arizona’s various anti-immigrant laws, particularly SB 1070.
In addition, I think that one theme I would have liked to explored is Stanford’s own history with racialized policies and ideals. Studying the history of racial identity in America, in general, is very necessary, but bringing it home, per se, to Stanford would have generated interesting, poignant discussion. I would have wanted to learn more about Leland Stanford’s exploitation of Chinese railroad workers in more detail, David Starr Jordan’s (the first President of Stanford) eugenicist ideals, Stanford’s “playing Indian” with the mascot and what that says about our university’s priorities, and even discussion on Stanford’s institutionalization of ethnic theme dorms.
As I look back on the first few weeks, I am glad that I have been able to be in this class because it painted a fuller picture of my understanding of race. It introduced topics like passing that I had previously been unable to explore. In addition, while I knew about racial performance, I had been unable to explore this topic in an academic setting. The topics we had been able to cover in this class truly provided me with a comprehensive race framework through which to analyze history as well as contemporary issues.
Of all my blog entries, I think that my favorite one is the letter from Helga Crane of Quicksand to Hazel V. Carby. I tried to convey Helga’s ambivalence with her identity as a migrant mixed raced, black-identifying woman and a middle class woman of color, how the conflict of identity might relate to Carby’s article about migrant black woman and their divergent image from middle class black women. Also, I enjoyed writing this blog entry because of all the literary readings, I enjoyed Quicksand the most, particularly because of the way Nella Larson navigates through that ambivalence of Helga’s identity by retelling her physical and emotional journeys. However, I would have liked some more closure on Nella Larson’s Quicksand. I think that even though we discussed at length what the endings of each of her stories might mean, I still feel as though I do not have much of a grasp of what to take away from these stories. I still don’t quite know what Larson is trying to say by ending the story with Helga in Alabama and I would like to better understand how this might have been reflective of Larson’s own life.
Overall, the theme that interested me the most in this class and what I wish we had more time to discuss was Mexican immigration and the formation of Mexican American identity. I felt that we spent quite a bit talking about the formation of white identity, but Mexican American identity was placed on the back burner. I would have liked to see more discussion on the differences between Mexican immigration and Irish immigration, and the current “fears” of Mexican immigration along the border. For me, this topic is especially interesting when situated in today’s context with the advocacy for the DREAM Act and Comprehensive Immigration Reform, as well as the backlash against Arizona’s various anti-immigrant laws, particularly SB 1070.
In addition, I think that one theme I would have liked to explored is Stanford’s own history with racialized policies and ideals. Studying the history of racial identity in America, in general, is very necessary, but bringing it home, per se, to Stanford would have generated interesting, poignant discussion. I would have wanted to learn more about Leland Stanford’s exploitation of Chinese railroad workers in more detail, David Starr Jordan’s (the first President of Stanford) eugenicist ideals, Stanford’s “playing Indian” with the mascot and what that says about our university’s priorities, and even discussion on Stanford’s institutionalization of ethnic theme dorms.
As I look back on the first few weeks, I am glad that I have been able to be in this class because it painted a fuller picture of my understanding of race. It introduced topics like passing that I had previously been unable to explore. In addition, while I knew about racial performance, I had been unable to explore this topic in an academic setting. The topics we had been able to cover in this class truly provided me with a comprehensive race framework through which to analyze history as well as contemporary issues.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Final Reflection (April Gregory)
After looking back over my posts from this quarter, my favorite posts -- it was a tie -- are the letter from Thomas Jefferson to his "protege" William and the letter from a modern Mexican immigrant to his predecessors. In the first letter, I really enjoyed taking on (my interpretation of) Jefferson's persona and exploring the idea of a loving relationship tainted by racism between Sally Hemings and Jefferson. I also enjoyed pondering the idea that correspondences about Sally Hemings may have existed, but were destroyed, as is the case with my blog entry, or otherwise lost.
My other favorite entry allowed me to place ideas and events I have myself witnessed into a broader historical context. I've lived in the greater Los Angeles area my entire life, and my town has a large Hispanic population. In addition, my grandfather (and his entire extended family) was of Mexican descent, so I feel a definite connection with the Chicano community. Therefore, while reading Sanchez's book, I found myself constantly comparing his descriptions to my own modern experiences, and found many commonalities as well as inconsistencies, a few of which are the subject of my blog entry. Sanchez's book also made immigration reform in the LA area and the United States in general seem even more necessary and pressing to me.
As my favorite picks suggest, two of my favorite themes from my blogs and the class in general are interracial relationships and the role of the Mexican immigrant in Southern California. Other themes that I found especially interesting include the intersection of race and sexual orientation as well as race in performance.
Remaining questions:
I am still curious as to when -- if ever -- the practice of racial passing faded out. Out of that question comes the question of whether or not people still practice passing in America today, and if so, for what purpose.
Also, I'm sure quite a few of us have already seen this, but I just thought Glenn Beck's most recent exhibition of mental instability touches on some interesting themes regarding race in American and racial identity. Here's a blog from the Huffington Post on the topic: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-green/glenn-beck-attacks-11-yea_b_594533.html
My other favorite entry allowed me to place ideas and events I have myself witnessed into a broader historical context. I've lived in the greater Los Angeles area my entire life, and my town has a large Hispanic population. In addition, my grandfather (and his entire extended family) was of Mexican descent, so I feel a definite connection with the Chicano community. Therefore, while reading Sanchez's book, I found myself constantly comparing his descriptions to my own modern experiences, and found many commonalities as well as inconsistencies, a few of which are the subject of my blog entry. Sanchez's book also made immigration reform in the LA area and the United States in general seem even more necessary and pressing to me.
As my favorite picks suggest, two of my favorite themes from my blogs and the class in general are interracial relationships and the role of the Mexican immigrant in Southern California. Other themes that I found especially interesting include the intersection of race and sexual orientation as well as race in performance.
Remaining questions:
I am still curious as to when -- if ever -- the practice of racial passing faded out. Out of that question comes the question of whether or not people still practice passing in America today, and if so, for what purpose.
Also, I'm sure quite a few of us have already seen this, but I just thought Glenn Beck's most recent exhibition of mental instability touches on some interesting themes regarding race in American and racial identity. Here's a blog from the Huffington Post on the topic: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-green/glenn-beck-attacks-11-yea_b_594533.html
A Letter from Robert G. Lee to the Estate of A.H. Sarsfield Ward (Sax Rohmer)
To Whom It May Concern:
It is with deep ire and regret that I write.
It is my hope that this brief missive is regarded and accepted as a plaintive grievance against Mr. Ward’s crippling literary legacy to Asian-Americans and our great nation at large. Mr. Ward’s characterization of Dr. Fu Manchu is one of the most egregiously offensive racial depictions in our nation’s short history. His attempts to dismissively cast Dr. Fu Manchu as some sort of super-villain that just happens to be of Asian descent is insulting and short-sighted, as Fu Manchu was firmly embedded in the racial animosity and hatred memorialized by the bigoted paradigm of Yellow Peril. Historical context and antiquated attitudes neither absolve nor amend Mr. Ward’s horrific deeds.
I hope that you are horrified by the impermeable legacy of fear and loathing that Mr. Ward’s works have substantiated and fueled. Nearly a century after the publishing of the first Fu Manchu tale, Asian Americans continue to grapple with the same insidious stereotypes that Mr. Ward suggested, detailed and underscored. Fu Manchu was no mere fictional criminal – he singularly embodied the evil threat of Yellow Peril, substantiated unfounded fears, catalyzed the lowest common seeds of nationalism, propelled inaccurate and misguided notions of Asian masculinity, and mischaracterized an entire race and several nationalities.
In light of this sordid 100 year anniversary, I urge you to issue an immediate and resonant denouncement of these writings and the characterizations they portray. Further, pledge a substantive commitment of any and all financial proceeds from these works to organizations that labor stridently to ameliorate the injustices borne by Asian-Americans.
Robert G. Lee
Associate Professor, Brown University
Questions:
Have the characterizations of Asian-Americans evolved much since the early literary and film depictions of Fu Manchu?
Which historical institutions, practices and laws contribute to the persistent ‘otherness’ of Asian-Americans?
It is with deep ire and regret that I write.
It is my hope that this brief missive is regarded and accepted as a plaintive grievance against Mr. Ward’s crippling literary legacy to Asian-Americans and our great nation at large. Mr. Ward’s characterization of Dr. Fu Manchu is one of the most egregiously offensive racial depictions in our nation’s short history. His attempts to dismissively cast Dr. Fu Manchu as some sort of super-villain that just happens to be of Asian descent is insulting and short-sighted, as Fu Manchu was firmly embedded in the racial animosity and hatred memorialized by the bigoted paradigm of Yellow Peril. Historical context and antiquated attitudes neither absolve nor amend Mr. Ward’s horrific deeds.
I hope that you are horrified by the impermeable legacy of fear and loathing that Mr. Ward’s works have substantiated and fueled. Nearly a century after the publishing of the first Fu Manchu tale, Asian Americans continue to grapple with the same insidious stereotypes that Mr. Ward suggested, detailed and underscored. Fu Manchu was no mere fictional criminal – he singularly embodied the evil threat of Yellow Peril, substantiated unfounded fears, catalyzed the lowest common seeds of nationalism, propelled inaccurate and misguided notions of Asian masculinity, and mischaracterized an entire race and several nationalities.
In light of this sordid 100 year anniversary, I urge you to issue an immediate and resonant denouncement of these writings and the characterizations they portray. Further, pledge a substantive commitment of any and all financial proceeds from these works to organizations that labor stridently to ameliorate the injustices borne by Asian-Americans.
Robert G. Lee
Associate Professor, Brown University
Questions:
Have the characterizations of Asian-Americans evolved much since the early literary and film depictions of Fu Manchu?
Which historical institutions, practices and laws contribute to the persistent ‘otherness’ of Asian-Americans?
A Letter from Hattie McDaniel to Paul Robeson
Dearest Mr. Robeson:
It was such a surprise and honor to learn that you had contracted with Universal Pictures to the film adaptation of Showboat and the Broadway role you had so marvelously fashioned. Please be assured that knowledge of your contract ultimately sealed the deal for me; your participation in this project means the very world. A man of your learning and background lends a certain erudition to an undertaking of this sort and I am happy to be aligned with a production to which you are seemingly so dedicated.
I pray that the legacy of this film is greater than the oft-noted trope of singing and dancing coloreds. It is my hope that Queenie and Joe can offer a brief, but sympathetic glimpse of the plight of Negroes in America and that both races will arrive at similar understandings --- that our mutual fates are intertwined.
Poverty, passing, prejudice, interracial union, the legacy of slavery – this is heady stuff Mr. Robeson. And our little film fearlessly confronts each confounding subplot without abandon. Is a solitary film – a musical – capable of such an ambitious order? I would offer a resounding, “Yes!” Sometimes the ‘seeing’ underscores the ‘imagining’ which fuels the ‘doing’. Wouldn’t you agree? If this film is nearly as successful as its Broadway run … well, I can only grin at the thought!
What enduring legacy will our characters impart? Perhaps a bit actress shouldn’t be concerned with such worldly matters – social commentary and justice may lie beyond the scope of my minute task – but I wonder about these matters indeed. I suspect that accepting any role whatsoever on the big screen may offer just the miniscule window that some inspired colored observer requires to conceiving another, more revered representation – another way of being. I don’t have your degrees and accolades, so this may be the only opportunity I have to communicate those possibilities to our own. But if a plain, middle-aged colored woman can acquire a contract with a Hollywood studio, acclaim on the silver screen and share a moment in time with Paul Robeson -- then certainly anything lies within the realm of likelihood.
I enthusiastically look forward to working with you and being privy to the exceptional mastery, reverence and legitimacy you bring to our craft.
So grateful for your acquaintance,
Ms. Hattie McDaniel
Questions:
Did Hattie McDaniel and Paul Robeson mutually enjoy the camaraderie that this film production facilitated or was Hattie’s participation dually subjugated by her gender and background in addition to their race?
Was the early 20th century entertainment industry particularly perceptive and sympathetic to the difficulties of race relations or did this industry simply mirror prominent American themes that were mirrored and of note societally?
It was such a surprise and honor to learn that you had contracted with Universal Pictures to the film adaptation of Showboat and the Broadway role you had so marvelously fashioned. Please be assured that knowledge of your contract ultimately sealed the deal for me; your participation in this project means the very world. A man of your learning and background lends a certain erudition to an undertaking of this sort and I am happy to be aligned with a production to which you are seemingly so dedicated.
I pray that the legacy of this film is greater than the oft-noted trope of singing and dancing coloreds. It is my hope that Queenie and Joe can offer a brief, but sympathetic glimpse of the plight of Negroes in America and that both races will arrive at similar understandings --- that our mutual fates are intertwined.
Poverty, passing, prejudice, interracial union, the legacy of slavery – this is heady stuff Mr. Robeson. And our little film fearlessly confronts each confounding subplot without abandon. Is a solitary film – a musical – capable of such an ambitious order? I would offer a resounding, “Yes!” Sometimes the ‘seeing’ underscores the ‘imagining’ which fuels the ‘doing’. Wouldn’t you agree? If this film is nearly as successful as its Broadway run … well, I can only grin at the thought!
What enduring legacy will our characters impart? Perhaps a bit actress shouldn’t be concerned with such worldly matters – social commentary and justice may lie beyond the scope of my minute task – but I wonder about these matters indeed. I suspect that accepting any role whatsoever on the big screen may offer just the miniscule window that some inspired colored observer requires to conceiving another, more revered representation – another way of being. I don’t have your degrees and accolades, so this may be the only opportunity I have to communicate those possibilities to our own. But if a plain, middle-aged colored woman can acquire a contract with a Hollywood studio, acclaim on the silver screen and share a moment in time with Paul Robeson -- then certainly anything lies within the realm of likelihood.
I enthusiastically look forward to working with you and being privy to the exceptional mastery, reverence and legitimacy you bring to our craft.
So grateful for your acquaintance,
Ms. Hattie McDaniel
Questions:
Did Hattie McDaniel and Paul Robeson mutually enjoy the camaraderie that this film production facilitated or was Hattie’s participation dually subjugated by her gender and background in addition to their race?
Was the early 20th century entertainment industry particularly perceptive and sympathetic to the difficulties of race relations or did this industry simply mirror prominent American themes that were mirrored and of note societally?
A Letter from W.E.B. DuBois to Charles Chesnutt
To My Dear Colleague Charles Chesnutt:
We have dutifully worked together for years and although I should certainly know your heart and intention -- I am a bit surprised and disturbed by the thrust of your recent article "What is a White Man?"
You speak so eloquently and knowingly of the 'citizen who values his birthright' but so disaffectedly and distally of the 'genuine Negro'. Despite our complicated and multi-colored personal racial histories aren't we ‘genuinely Negro’ as well? Colored, Negro, formally educated, illiterate, slave or free -- the lot of the Negro in America is virtually the same. Yes, Charles – even you and I are bound by our entangled and entwined sovereignty with our darker brethren.
I appreciate your ability to invigorate the banal absurdity and illogicality of race enumeration and detail the breadth of the Negro experience, but please do not lose sight that this is indeed the subjective experience of all Negroes in America. 1/8 in Mississippi; 1/16 in Georgia; 1/4 in South Carolina ... the place and parcel of the color line is haphazard and meaningless indeed.
You offer that race is a structural problem of sorts that is arbitrarily levied from region to region. However, upon closer inspection your suggestion might almost appear that the Negro has been denied Whiteness -- and that this element of note is the decidedly critical watermark to which we aspire. Negroes in America have been denied their dignity and humanity – and it is this above all else that we desire – not Whiteness. Our aspiration to equality is not a moving towards Whiteness, it is instead progression towards a guarantee that we are privy to as Americans. Please do not hastily conflate the two. Your title itself harkens an affirmation to Whiteness that is unnecessary and undeserved.
As I detail in The Souls of Black Folk -- the place of the Negro in the United States -- our place -- is tragic and unique. The line that separates the races will not be 'obliterated' despite the intermingling of race. In fact, intermingling may only exacerbate the nature of the Negro experience in America
I am confident that you will consider my missive with the best of spirits. Our brethren -- in every hue -- are reliant upon your committed and sustained devotion to racial uplift.
Yours in brotherhood,
W.E.B. DuBois
Questions:
Does Chesnutt subscribe to a (perhaps unintended) pervasive privileging, ennobling and honoring of Whiteness that his conception of Blackness disallows?
Does Chesnutt’s idealistic notion of a singular American birthright, inheritance and nationalism allow for racial pride?
We have dutifully worked together for years and although I should certainly know your heart and intention -- I am a bit surprised and disturbed by the thrust of your recent article "What is a White Man?"
You speak so eloquently and knowingly of the 'citizen who values his birthright' but so disaffectedly and distally of the 'genuine Negro'. Despite our complicated and multi-colored personal racial histories aren't we ‘genuinely Negro’ as well? Colored, Negro, formally educated, illiterate, slave or free -- the lot of the Negro in America is virtually the same. Yes, Charles – even you and I are bound by our entangled and entwined sovereignty with our darker brethren.
I appreciate your ability to invigorate the banal absurdity and illogicality of race enumeration and detail the breadth of the Negro experience, but please do not lose sight that this is indeed the subjective experience of all Negroes in America. 1/8 in Mississippi; 1/16 in Georgia; 1/4 in South Carolina ... the place and parcel of the color line is haphazard and meaningless indeed.
You offer that race is a structural problem of sorts that is arbitrarily levied from region to region. However, upon closer inspection your suggestion might almost appear that the Negro has been denied Whiteness -- and that this element of note is the decidedly critical watermark to which we aspire. Negroes in America have been denied their dignity and humanity – and it is this above all else that we desire – not Whiteness. Our aspiration to equality is not a moving towards Whiteness, it is instead progression towards a guarantee that we are privy to as Americans. Please do not hastily conflate the two. Your title itself harkens an affirmation to Whiteness that is unnecessary and undeserved.
As I detail in The Souls of Black Folk -- the place of the Negro in the United States -- our place -- is tragic and unique. The line that separates the races will not be 'obliterated' despite the intermingling of race. In fact, intermingling may only exacerbate the nature of the Negro experience in America
I am confident that you will consider my missive with the best of spirits. Our brethren -- in every hue -- are reliant upon your committed and sustained devotion to racial uplift.
Yours in brotherhood,
W.E.B. DuBois
Questions:
Does Chesnutt subscribe to a (perhaps unintended) pervasive privileging, ennobling and honoring of Whiteness that his conception of Blackness disallows?
Does Chesnutt’s idealistic notion of a singular American birthright, inheritance and nationalism allow for racial pride?
A Letter from Sally Hemings to Annette Gordon-Reed
Dearest Ms. Gordon-Reed:
If permitted to embrace fantasy and momentarily suspend time I would welcome the opportunity to spend the afternoon with you, nurse a cup of tea and discuss a persistent, but distressing theme in your acclaimed book The Hemingses of Monticello.
You seem to posit and wholeheartedly assert the misleading notion that Mr. Jefferson and I were willfully party to a purely-conceived, tacit love affair that unfortunate social circumstance and context disallowed. Problematically, you suggest that our love was a romance of epic proportion that could not be bound by social convention, law or even time. Aye! How I wish our tangled lives were so naively innocent and benign.
Please know that I am flattered and humbled by your determined interest in my earthly days. I found your painstaking research incredibly meticulous and remarkably accurate. However, please allow me to interject a wee but significant bit of truth to your thesis.
Love is such a curious matter -- a 21st century pre-occupation at best. And love was certainly not a fancy that any well-intentioned slave woman entertained. As instructed by my mother, Elizabeth, I reserved any cursory consideration of love for my beloved children – and my children alone. My primary preoccupation and concern was maintaining the wellbeing I had grown accustomed to and securing those comforts for my offspring. As Mr. Jefferson’s highly regarded and special companion I was spared the unsolicited advances of other men, maintained my familial residence at Monticello, lived comfortably amongst my children without the fear that they would be sold and jettisoned from their birthplace and, of course, secured freedom for them all.
You suggest that I returned to the States when I could have remained free in France, but neglect to address that I was tethered to him – Mr. Jefferson secured my living arrangements, obtained my immunizations, purchased my clothes, maintained my social engagements and taught me French. Please do not knowingly impart 21st century notions of agency on a 19th century slave woman. I could not fathom that staying in France would have been liberating – literally and figuratively. Quite simply I was sixteen years old, pregnant and afraid. And I wanted to return to my mother … surely you understand. Of course, Mr. Jefferson wanted me to return with him … I was familiar, young, unquestioning, adoring, reverent.
Certainly you are familiar with Mr. Jefferson’s Notes on the State of Virginia. Mr. Jefferson did not have to pen such a scathing, unsolicited treatise, but he did. And, most notably, Thomas wrote it because he earnestly believed those assertions to be true. Although I was only a child when it was written, my relationship with Mr. Jefferson never altered those opinions. Mr. Jefferson founded a university, brokered the largest acquisition of land in American history, penned the Declaration of Independence and repeatedly, publicly denigrated my ancestry and the ancestry of our children; he repeatedly, publicly (but not convincingly) denied our relationship. At best, Thomas was disconcerted, torn and uncruel … but loving? No Ms. Gordon-Reed, this was not a relationship predicated upon love.
And ultimately, this unnecessary “love query” is meaningless. Ah! Perhaps a white man ‘loved’ a colored girl – but this topic does not flatter or enlarge me – it is of much greater importance to Mr. Jefferson’s legacy than mine. This query absolves Thomas, humanizes slavery, allows a more benevolent opinion of Colored/White relations, and champions an institution rife with maltreatment, torture and everything tragic and inhuman.
If Mr. Jefferson truly loved me – why wasn’t I freed upon his death? Instead I was left to scavenge for his glasses and shoe buckles – paternal trinkets to pass on to our children. Monticello would have been the only suitable testament of an unbridled love that spanned decades -- not mere trinkets.
If Mr. Jefferson had really loved me, perhaps I could have penned this note myself – and been taught to properly read and write. Maybe our children would not have been forced to leave their estate and birthright to seek subterfuge in another state. Perhaps the direct descendants of an American president would not have had to choose between passing as White or living as admonished Coloreds.
I was enslaved by my own father and enslaved by the father of my children. I knew Mr. Jefferson well -- perhaps better than most -- but our bond should never be cast under the pronouncement of love or anything noble and sacred.
Sincerely,
Sally Hemings
Questions:
What does Ms. Gordon-Reed’s book tell us about animosity and social tensions between White women and women of color? Does this legacy have any bearing on contemporary quarrels suggesting that White women are ‘taking’ eligible men of color?
Why is the Sally Hemings story significant? Does it offer a broad commentary on a uniquely American experience? Does it demonstrate the chasm in the legitimacy and acceptance of oral histories for American Whites vs. Peoples of Color? Is it that an American president sustained a substantive relationship with an African-American woman?
If permitted to embrace fantasy and momentarily suspend time I would welcome the opportunity to spend the afternoon with you, nurse a cup of tea and discuss a persistent, but distressing theme in your acclaimed book The Hemingses of Monticello.
You seem to posit and wholeheartedly assert the misleading notion that Mr. Jefferson and I were willfully party to a purely-conceived, tacit love affair that unfortunate social circumstance and context disallowed. Problematically, you suggest that our love was a romance of epic proportion that could not be bound by social convention, law or even time. Aye! How I wish our tangled lives were so naively innocent and benign.
Please know that I am flattered and humbled by your determined interest in my earthly days. I found your painstaking research incredibly meticulous and remarkably accurate. However, please allow me to interject a wee but significant bit of truth to your thesis.
Love is such a curious matter -- a 21st century pre-occupation at best. And love was certainly not a fancy that any well-intentioned slave woman entertained. As instructed by my mother, Elizabeth, I reserved any cursory consideration of love for my beloved children – and my children alone. My primary preoccupation and concern was maintaining the wellbeing I had grown accustomed to and securing those comforts for my offspring. As Mr. Jefferson’s highly regarded and special companion I was spared the unsolicited advances of other men, maintained my familial residence at Monticello, lived comfortably amongst my children without the fear that they would be sold and jettisoned from their birthplace and, of course, secured freedom for them all.
You suggest that I returned to the States when I could have remained free in France, but neglect to address that I was tethered to him – Mr. Jefferson secured my living arrangements, obtained my immunizations, purchased my clothes, maintained my social engagements and taught me French. Please do not knowingly impart 21st century notions of agency on a 19th century slave woman. I could not fathom that staying in France would have been liberating – literally and figuratively. Quite simply I was sixteen years old, pregnant and afraid. And I wanted to return to my mother … surely you understand. Of course, Mr. Jefferson wanted me to return with him … I was familiar, young, unquestioning, adoring, reverent.
Certainly you are familiar with Mr. Jefferson’s Notes on the State of Virginia. Mr. Jefferson did not have to pen such a scathing, unsolicited treatise, but he did. And, most notably, Thomas wrote it because he earnestly believed those assertions to be true. Although I was only a child when it was written, my relationship with Mr. Jefferson never altered those opinions. Mr. Jefferson founded a university, brokered the largest acquisition of land in American history, penned the Declaration of Independence and repeatedly, publicly denigrated my ancestry and the ancestry of our children; he repeatedly, publicly (but not convincingly) denied our relationship. At best, Thomas was disconcerted, torn and uncruel … but loving? No Ms. Gordon-Reed, this was not a relationship predicated upon love.
And ultimately, this unnecessary “love query” is meaningless. Ah! Perhaps a white man ‘loved’ a colored girl – but this topic does not flatter or enlarge me – it is of much greater importance to Mr. Jefferson’s legacy than mine. This query absolves Thomas, humanizes slavery, allows a more benevolent opinion of Colored/White relations, and champions an institution rife with maltreatment, torture and everything tragic and inhuman.
If Mr. Jefferson truly loved me – why wasn’t I freed upon his death? Instead I was left to scavenge for his glasses and shoe buckles – paternal trinkets to pass on to our children. Monticello would have been the only suitable testament of an unbridled love that spanned decades -- not mere trinkets.
If Mr. Jefferson had really loved me, perhaps I could have penned this note myself – and been taught to properly read and write. Maybe our children would not have been forced to leave their estate and birthright to seek subterfuge in another state. Perhaps the direct descendants of an American president would not have had to choose between passing as White or living as admonished Coloreds.
I was enslaved by my own father and enslaved by the father of my children. I knew Mr. Jefferson well -- perhaps better than most -- but our bond should never be cast under the pronouncement of love or anything noble and sacred.
Sincerely,
Sally Hemings
Questions:
What does Ms. Gordon-Reed’s book tell us about animosity and social tensions between White women and women of color? Does this legacy have any bearing on contemporary quarrels suggesting that White women are ‘taking’ eligible men of color?
Why is the Sally Hemings story significant? Does it offer a broad commentary on a uniquely American experience? Does it demonstrate the chasm in the legitimacy and acceptance of oral histories for American Whites vs. Peoples of Color? Is it that an American president sustained a substantive relationship with an African-American woman?
Monday, May 24, 2010
Ah Toy Suicide Note
I was immediately smitten with Fanny the moment I was hired to be her servant. I immediately felt that we shared so much in common. I worked by hardest to keep the family house neat and in order. She was happy. I was happy. Everything seemed perfect, until suddenly Captain Ward entered our lives. I have to admit that I was jealous. He started stealing the love and time that Fanny used to give to me. I was hurt and horrified when Fanny officially became engaged. How could she? How?
Our personalities and emotions are aligned so closely, much moreso than the civil and restrained captain. I am in love with Fanny and I KNOW that she feels the same way. I can feel it. The way she looks at me, the way she compliments my handiwork around the house, the excuses she makes to work with me...I know.
To my greatest dismay Fanny and I were not born of the same ethnicity. With Fanny's marriage coming soon, I finally have realized that the different between our races appears to large a hurdle to overcome. I feel this terrible knowledge that despite the endless possibilities between us, our situation will forever remain unresolvable.
I cannot live like this. I cannot bear to be apart form Miss Fanny. I cannot be with her in this lifetime, so I must move onto the next one. I desire to be buried on the farm so as to be with her forever.
-Ah Toy
Questions:
1) Ah Toy is described in emotion terms as much more closely aligned to Fanny. As the head servant he certainly took on a role that used to be primarily given to women. Why was he ascribed with "feminine" qualities? How did the Asian man get these stereotypes? Why?
2) Slightly different from the last question, but still similar...the presence of the Chinese male disrupts the fragile blances between sexes within the houshold, both in the realm of sexuality and in the realm of labor. On the one hand, the Oriental domestic could be made the site of homoerotic and multiracial alternatives to the very traditional Victorian American culture. At the same time, the employment of the male Chinese servant to do "woman's work" destabilized the gendered nature of labor. Which explanation best explains these circumstances?
Dear Robert G. Lee
Dear Robert G. Lee,
I am a first generation American, of Korean parentage. I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your book, delineating the evolution of the "Oriental" in Western eyes. However, I would like to address some of the concerns I have about the status of the Asian in America today. You traced the development of the model minority status of the Asian immigrant, but I do believe that it has changed significantly since your book has been published. As an American of Asian descent, I feel like there is an undercurrent of stereotyping of Asians that pervades American society. Why is it that it is so widely socially acceptable to make fun of Asians? For example, pop culture icon Miley Cyrus poses with a group of her friends and all of them are stretching the outer corners of their eyes. It is seemingly "validated" by the presence of an Asian in her posse. There was notable backlash against the photo, but no outrage. Why is it that the adjective "chinky" still in general American lexicon, used by stoners when they are high and also by rappers, such as Snoop Dogg in the song "Holiday Inn" when he says "My eyes chinky/I'm with Chingy at the Holiday Inn"? Why is it that "yellow fever" is an acceptable term to describe a non-East Asian male's infatuation with Asian females? Continuing on, why is it that Asian women are still objectified, albeit in a veiled sense, as "geisha girls" and "China dolls"?
Sincerely,
Mona Hadidi
(1) Discuss the similarities between yellowface and blackface.
(2) Why haven't Japanese internment camps been discussed more widely in History schoolbooks?
I am a first generation American, of Korean parentage. I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your book, delineating the evolution of the "Oriental" in Western eyes. However, I would like to address some of the concerns I have about the status of the Asian in America today. You traced the development of the model minority status of the Asian immigrant, but I do believe that it has changed significantly since your book has been published. As an American of Asian descent, I feel like there is an undercurrent of stereotyping of Asians that pervades American society. Why is it that it is so widely socially acceptable to make fun of Asians? For example, pop culture icon Miley Cyrus poses with a group of her friends and all of them are stretching the outer corners of their eyes. It is seemingly "validated" by the presence of an Asian in her posse. There was notable backlash against the photo, but no outrage. Why is it that the adjective "chinky" still in general American lexicon, used by stoners when they are high and also by rappers, such as Snoop Dogg in the song "Holiday Inn" when he says "My eyes chinky/I'm with Chingy at the Holiday Inn"? Why is it that "yellow fever" is an acceptable term to describe a non-East Asian male's infatuation with Asian females? Continuing on, why is it that Asian women are still objectified, albeit in a veiled sense, as "geisha girls" and "China dolls"?
Sincerely,
Mona Hadidi
(1) Discuss the similarities between yellowface and blackface.
(2) Why haven't Japanese internment camps been discussed more widely in History schoolbooks?
Letter from Lee to Crosland
Dear Mr. Crosland,
What was the purpose of the blackfacing of Jakie in “The Jazz Singer”? Was it to hide him from his family who eventually ended up finding out it was him all along? Or did you think it was a more realistic conduit for a white man to express his soulful, lively, and hip-induced moves while belting notes? If it is the latter, you cannot perform race and expect to be anywhere near the authentic, which is much more ambivalent and nuanced. I watched the film “The Jazz Singer” and when the main character Jakie was in blackface, I could not help but think about the yellow-faced Clinton family in a 1990s political cartoon, demonizing their acceptance of Asian contributors. When America could not stand the idea of a wealthy Asian or influential minority coming into the political sphere, they infused the worst possible stereotypes about Asian Americans: buck-toothed, overbite, mustard yellow skin, slit eyes, ballooned faced. It was as if Jakie could not bear to be himself and donned the popularly accepted black-faced Jazz singer as the appropriate scapegoat for his social discomfort with being a Jewish jazz artist. I deeply disagree with this and I am glad that no other films will make this mistake.
Sincerely,
Robert G. Lee
Questions:
1.What do YOU think was the reason Jakie turned to blackface in The Jazz Singer? How does it affect the message of the movie?
2.Relate Jazz Singer's ending with Jakie finally deciding to be a cantor to the final message in Pinky: are certain identities predetermined by society? Is it nature or nurture?
What was the purpose of the blackfacing of Jakie in “The Jazz Singer”? Was it to hide him from his family who eventually ended up finding out it was him all along? Or did you think it was a more realistic conduit for a white man to express his soulful, lively, and hip-induced moves while belting notes? If it is the latter, you cannot perform race and expect to be anywhere near the authentic, which is much more ambivalent and nuanced. I watched the film “The Jazz Singer” and when the main character Jakie was in blackface, I could not help but think about the yellow-faced Clinton family in a 1990s political cartoon, demonizing their acceptance of Asian contributors. When America could not stand the idea of a wealthy Asian or influential minority coming into the political sphere, they infused the worst possible stereotypes about Asian Americans: buck-toothed, overbite, mustard yellow skin, slit eyes, ballooned faced. It was as if Jakie could not bear to be himself and donned the popularly accepted black-faced Jazz singer as the appropriate scapegoat for his social discomfort with being a Jewish jazz artist. I deeply disagree with this and I am glad that no other films will make this mistake.
Sincerely,
Robert G. Lee
Questions:
1.What do YOU think was the reason Jakie turned to blackface in The Jazz Singer? How does it affect the message of the movie?
2.Relate Jazz Singer's ending with Jakie finally deciding to be a cantor to the final message in Pinky: are certain identities predetermined by society? Is it nature or nurture?
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Letter from Fanny to Ah Toy
My dear Ah Toy,
Oh, how your actions and your words have made me so confused and agitated! Though you are gone now, I feel that I must write to you anyway, and hope that somehow my words reach you wherever you are.
You were a wonderful servant. As time went on, I grew to care for you, like my mother grew to care for her servant, and that is why I took care of you when you fell ill, and why I allowed you to join our circle when my brother-in-law was away on business. But in this world, there are lines and boundaries, and you had crossed yours. I felt obligated to dismiss you because it is not allowed for a woman like me to be with a servant and a man like you. I may have loved you, I don’t know, but even if I did, I didn’t love you like that. There is much tension in the world right now with Chinese immigrants and even Irish immigrants and I must follow the ways of the world.
Yet I felt so guilty when I heard what you had done, that you had ended your life, after I had dismissed you! I was devastated and it was my fault that you had to meet such an end when you had so many years before you! How I wished you didn’t cross the line and had not done what you did! We could have still been some sort of a family. But your words and actions have made me really think about America’s relationship with its immigrant population and right now, I can’t really understand why it is like this. You were a good person and a good servant.
I want to let you know that I’m sorry that I was not more conscious of my actions and my own words. I feel responsible for your death. I will not forget you and what you’ve done to help my family.
May you rest in peace,
Fanny
Question 1) How does the idea of the third sex during the late 1800s compare with a similar idea today? Is there such a thing as a third sex in the United States in the 21st century? Although men and women may have some gender differences, does the idea of a man in a job that is/was considered women’s work still looked down today? How does it affect class and gender relations as well as race relations?
Question 2) Immigration has been a problem for America from the very beginning, and thus race has been an issue as well. How does America’s initial choice to allow for immigration only to restrict it later affect its relations with other countries? How does it affect race relations between individuals in America? Is the idea of racial equality ever going to be realized in America? If so, how and when?
Oh, how your actions and your words have made me so confused and agitated! Though you are gone now, I feel that I must write to you anyway, and hope that somehow my words reach you wherever you are.
You were a wonderful servant. As time went on, I grew to care for you, like my mother grew to care for her servant, and that is why I took care of you when you fell ill, and why I allowed you to join our circle when my brother-in-law was away on business. But in this world, there are lines and boundaries, and you had crossed yours. I felt obligated to dismiss you because it is not allowed for a woman like me to be with a servant and a man like you. I may have loved you, I don’t know, but even if I did, I didn’t love you like that. There is much tension in the world right now with Chinese immigrants and even Irish immigrants and I must follow the ways of the world.
Yet I felt so guilty when I heard what you had done, that you had ended your life, after I had dismissed you! I was devastated and it was my fault that you had to meet such an end when you had so many years before you! How I wished you didn’t cross the line and had not done what you did! We could have still been some sort of a family. But your words and actions have made me really think about America’s relationship with its immigrant population and right now, I can’t really understand why it is like this. You were a good person and a good servant.
I want to let you know that I’m sorry that I was not more conscious of my actions and my own words. I feel responsible for your death. I will not forget you and what you’ve done to help my family.
May you rest in peace,
Fanny
Question 1) How does the idea of the third sex during the late 1800s compare with a similar idea today? Is there such a thing as a third sex in the United States in the 21st century? Although men and women may have some gender differences, does the idea of a man in a job that is/was considered women’s work still looked down today? How does it affect class and gender relations as well as race relations?
Question 2) Immigration has been a problem for America from the very beginning, and thus race has been an issue as well. How does America’s initial choice to allow for immigration only to restrict it later affect its relations with other countries? How does it affect race relations between individuals in America? Is the idea of racial equality ever going to be realized in America? If so, how and when?
Letter To Robert G. Lee
Mr. Lee,
I'm very interested in your debunking of the notion of the Chinese American being a pseudo-privileged minority. I've found in my own life, as a white American, Chinese Americans, as well as other Asian Americans are subjected to intolerance from various groups. Even if the intolerance manifests itself in different ways doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Living in California for the past four years, I've found it fascinating to witness the ways in which Asian-Americans are perceived on the West Coast. Many people don't see them as minorities at all because they are prevalent and tend to be fairly well off -- or at least more so than other minority groups such as African Americans. That raises an interesting dilemma: In order to be a "minority" in this country must you somehow be poor or have been disenfranchised? Or is that at least how some Americans see it?
Think about how that complicates issues of identity. I've heard people say Asians are just like whites because they have succeeded. But what about the underlying issue of where they come from, how they look and how they identify themselves? Clearly all of that is breezed over by those that feel Asians aren't real minorities. It essentially deletes a person's history to make such a claim.
I hope that all makes sense to you.
Sincerely,
Dan Bohm
Questions: I embedded them within the post so see above.
Dear Supreme Court,
On behalf of Asian Americans all over this nation, I am writing to say that I believe your ruling in both my case and that of Takao Ozawa brings to light the fundamental fallacies of our society. How can it be that Ozawa, a man with skin paler than moat Europeans, or even myself, man with Aryan blood pulsing through his veins, not be considered white according to your undefinable standards?
What is it about Asians that you find so alien and alienating? We have been here for generations, yet we are treated with little no respect. We live in racial limbo, neither negroid enough to termed "colored" yet still not able to be considered white despite our coloration and ancestry. By referring to us as a mere color, yellow, you are stripping us of our humanity and placing us a racial category that permanently labels us "the other." Is it because we refuse to leave that you find us so frightening, giving you the need to treat us as you do?
Even if we did return "home", know that these problems would continue to exist, they would just come in a new form. If race is only defined by a common understanding, then I am writing to tell you that I, and those like me, do not understand who we are according to your simplistic definitions of race.
Sincerely,
Bhagat Singh Thind
Questions:
!) What commonalities do yellowface and blackface share? What are some of the differences?
2) How do media portrayals of Asians Americans help contribute (or take away from) the stereotypes associated their race?
What is it about Asians that you find so alien and alienating? We have been here for generations, yet we are treated with little no respect. We live in racial limbo, neither negroid enough to termed "colored" yet still not able to be considered white despite our coloration and ancestry. By referring to us as a mere color, yellow, you are stripping us of our humanity and placing us a racial category that permanently labels us "the other." Is it because we refuse to leave that you find us so frightening, giving you the need to treat us as you do?
Even if we did return "home", know that these problems would continue to exist, they would just come in a new form. If race is only defined by a common understanding, then I am writing to tell you that I, and those like me, do not understand who we are according to your simplistic definitions of race.
Sincerely,
Bhagat Singh Thind
Questions:
!) What commonalities do yellowface and blackface share? What are some of the differences?
2) How do media portrayals of Asians Americans help contribute (or take away from) the stereotypes associated their race?
Dear Daniel Patrick Moynihan,
I sympathize with your conviction of a black culture of poverty, a "tangle of pathology". You identified the family structure of black American culture as the root of their problems. Their female-headed households are will not allow them to succeed or integrate as they should.
I agree that the family unit is crucial and natural. Homosexuality perverts this. It weakens our moral fiber and, in case of nuclear war or similar disaster, destroys our economic and political success.
The Asian ethnic minority in the United States shows a sympathy with our beliefs, demonstrating a strong family unit and, therefore, economic success and moral strength. We need other groups, such as the homosexuals and blacks, to step into line with nature and American values. Our success as a country relies on it.
Sincerely,
Talcott Parsons
Questions:
1) Recently I've attended two a capella shows that made open Asian jokes, starring the complicit Asian members of their group. Why are these seen as acceptable by our peers on campus? I don't think that either group would have felt comfortable making fun of other minorities (although there was an ongoing cross-dressing gag in one of the shows) Is there a difference? Why?
2) I found Lee's discussion of the Life spread on how to differentiate between Chinese and Japanese people fascinating, especially contrasted with the homogenizing stereotypes and portrayals of Asians throughout much of the other history of the "Oriental." How are Asian groups divided and homogenized through portrayals?
I agree that the family unit is crucial and natural. Homosexuality perverts this. It weakens our moral fiber and, in case of nuclear war or similar disaster, destroys our economic and political success.
The Asian ethnic minority in the United States shows a sympathy with our beliefs, demonstrating a strong family unit and, therefore, economic success and moral strength. We need other groups, such as the homosexuals and blacks, to step into line with nature and American values. Our success as a country relies on it.
Sincerely,
Talcott Parsons
Questions:
1) Recently I've attended two a capella shows that made open Asian jokes, starring the complicit Asian members of their group. Why are these seen as acceptable by our peers on campus? I don't think that either group would have felt comfortable making fun of other minorities (although there was an ongoing cross-dressing gag in one of the shows) Is there a difference? Why?
2) I found Lee's discussion of the Life spread on how to differentiate between Chinese and Japanese people fascinating, especially contrasted with the homogenizing stereotypes and portrayals of Asians throughout much of the other history of the "Oriental." How are Asian groups divided and homogenized through portrayals?
letter from myself to Robert Lee
Dear Robert G. Lee-
I’m very interested in the notion of Asian immigrants as pollutants in America, and I have an idea as to where this notion of difference and discrimination might come from – standardized tests. When I was in elementary and middle school, I frequently took tests on which there would be a section about choosing the word that didn’t belong. I’m sure the testmakers were looking for some sort of heightened reasoning skills and advanced vocabulary, but really, they were just training a bunch of kids to identify pollutants. We were taught to make quick judgments about who belonged and who didn’t based on the superficial associations we had with the words in question. By selecting an option, we were telling that noun that it either had to assimilate or get out, and that we couldn’t let it exist until it changed its ways. Sure, this is might be overthinking the situation a bit, but I feel like so much of the way we interact with Others is based on superficial judgments and ultimatums to either assimilate or leave, and it seems like this must be rooted somewhere deep in our collective American psyche…Maybe standardized tests are to blame for society’s problem with perceived pollutants.
What do you think?
Sincerely,
Holly Fetter
Questions:
1) Though race is socially constructed, how does one escape what s/he looks like? People are mocked and ostracized if they appear to perform a race other than the one that matches their physical appearance… How does someone escape the color of their skin or the shape of their features?
2)Who are the real Americans?
A Letter to Paramount Pictures,
We, the Japanese Association of Southern California, hereby declare our united opposition to the portrayal of "Hisuru Tori" as Japanese in your upcoming film, The Cheat. We view Tori as not only an inaccurate representation of Japanese-Americans, but also as an offensive insult our heritage and culture. In characterizing him as an evil, predatory, greedy villain, you also characterize all Japanese men in this way, since Tori is both the only antagonist and the only non-white person in the film. Moreover, we find your depiction of Tori as sexually licentious to be exceptionally improper. Our men are, by custom, courteous and respectful toward all women, and your film completely denigrates this crucial aspect of Japanese culture. In short, your portrayal of Tori is ignorant and disrespectful of Japanese-Americans, and we are deeply against the perpetuation of such a portrayal.
Therefore, we demand that Paramount Pictures remove and erase all association between the Japanese ethnicity and the character of Hisuru Tori. If our demand is not met, we will actively and unceasingly hold protests on your grounds until our goal has been accomplished.
Signed,
The Japanese Association of Southern California
Questions:
1. How does the condition of Asian women in urban cities during the nineteenth/eighteenth century compare to the condition of African American women in urban cities after the Great Migration? Did the two groups ever interact?
2. According to Robert G. Lee, Hinton Helper once remarked that "one Chinaman looks almost exactly like another, but very unlike any body else." What is the significance of the white majority's tendency to label non-white groups, specifically Asians, blacks, and Latinos, as all looking "the same" within their respective groups? Were whites perceived as somehow looking different within their group?
Therefore, we demand that Paramount Pictures remove and erase all association between the Japanese ethnicity and the character of Hisuru Tori. If our demand is not met, we will actively and unceasingly hold protests on your grounds until our goal has been accomplished.
Signed,
The Japanese Association of Southern California
Questions:
1. How does the condition of Asian women in urban cities during the nineteenth/eighteenth century compare to the condition of African American women in urban cities after the Great Migration? Did the two groups ever interact?
2. According to Robert G. Lee, Hinton Helper once remarked that "one Chinaman looks almost exactly like another, but very unlike any body else." What is the significance of the white majority's tendency to label non-white groups, specifically Asians, blacks, and Latinos, as all looking "the same" within their respective groups? Were whites perceived as somehow looking different within their group?
Dear Robert G. Lee,
Your exploration of the “Chinaman” as a “third gender” interests me as it seems to relate to the even larger picture you paint as Chinese and Asian Americans as outside the sphere of other non-white Americans and immigrants. You place this third gender next to the practice of Chinese men in America being treated like children, and this in particular seems to be a compelling if somewhat confusing piece of evidence for the place that Asian Americans assumed and were part of since their arrival in America. How were Chinese immigrants both feared and belittled in the 19th century? It seems contradictory that they were treated as children, that the men were emasculated and considered to be good for women's work, but that they were also feared as competition for white women, and that their relationships with white women were so despised. This seems to indicate that not everyone – at the very least, not all white women – viewed Chinese as a “third gender” or as feminine, because some women were marrying them. I'm curious about these particular Chinese and their relationships – you discuss how they were reacted to, and how some accounts were told, but I'm left wondering about the lived reality of those particular men and women.
1)Why did no other minority ever compete with Asian Americans as the “model” minority?
2) Why were interracial relationships between Chinese men and white women in the West particularly disapproved of? How did the “Chinaman” or the “coolie” presence in the West in particular relate to how these interracial relationships were viewed and judged?
Your exploration of the “Chinaman” as a “third gender” interests me as it seems to relate to the even larger picture you paint as Chinese and Asian Americans as outside the sphere of other non-white Americans and immigrants. You place this third gender next to the practice of Chinese men in America being treated like children, and this in particular seems to be a compelling if somewhat confusing piece of evidence for the place that Asian Americans assumed and were part of since their arrival in America. How were Chinese immigrants both feared and belittled in the 19th century? It seems contradictory that they were treated as children, that the men were emasculated and considered to be good for women's work, but that they were also feared as competition for white women, and that their relationships with white women were so despised. This seems to indicate that not everyone – at the very least, not all white women – viewed Chinese as a “third gender” or as feminine, because some women were marrying them. I'm curious about these particular Chinese and their relationships – you discuss how they were reacted to, and how some accounts were told, but I'm left wondering about the lived reality of those particular men and women.
1)Why did no other minority ever compete with Asian Americans as the “model” minority?
2) Why were interracial relationships between Chinese men and white women in the West particularly disapproved of? How did the “Chinaman” or the “coolie” presence in the West in particular relate to how these interracial relationships were viewed and judged?
Letter from Robert G. Lee to Al Jolston
Dear Mr. Jolston,
I recently viewed your film, The Jazz Singer, because I have been conducting research about the role that popular culture has played in constructing American racial identities throughout history. I have to tell you Mr. Jolston, your character, Jackie Rabinowitz/Jack Robin, was very powerful because he revealed the role that generational differences play in shaping racial identities, challenges the black/white binary, and looks closely at the relationship between race and class. Within the film, viewers witness a young boy—and eventually man—who is grappling with notions of “whiteness,” “Jewishness,” and “blackness” as he struggles to understand his own racial identity. Jackie/Jack reminds readers that during this period, Jews were not quite white or black, but attempting to carve out a space for themselves among the U.S. racial/ethnic groups.
Still, while Jackie’s/Jack’s interest in Jewish traditions, jazz, ragtime, and upward mobility provided him with the potential to develop a unique American identity that incorporated notions of “whiteness,” “Jewishness,” and “blackness,” he privileged the two former. Although Jackie/Jack performed as himself early on, he gained mobility as a jazz singer by performing in blackface. As a result, his upward mobility and ability to interact with mainstream society was contingent upon his decision to contribute to the racialization of African Americans through minstrelsy. Furthermore, Jack was able to maintain a degree of “whiteness” and “Jewishness” by hiding behind blackface, which further distanced him from African Americans. In this way, Jack contributed to further marginalizing blacks as he moved forward on the socio-economic ladder and into the mainstream.
Mr. Jolston, although scholars of race/ethnic identity and construction are greatly indebted to your film, your performance has also helped shape problematic popular notions of race in the U.S. I hope that through my research and the work of my colleagues, we can begin to encourage popular figures to think more critically about the roles they accept because these images enter the mainstream and play a profound role in shaping race relations.
Sincerely,
Robert G. Lee
Questions:
1) In The Jazz Singer, Jackie/Jack finds himself grappling with notions of “whiteness”, “blackness”, and “Jewishness”. Which racial identity does he choose in the end? How does his “Jewishness” challenge the black/white binary in American racial history?
2) In Robert G. Lee’s book, he focuses specifically on the role that the white American working classes have played in reifying racial identities through their engagement with popular culture images. Does Lee place too much “blame” on the white working classes for the racialization of Asian Americans? How does both The Jazz Singer and Orientals encourage us to think differently about the role that class plays in the construction of American racial identities?
Letter to the Editor
Dear National Review,
I recently saw your cover illustration depicting the Clintons and Al Gore in yellow face. To be honest, when I first saw your cover illustration it made me stop and pick up your magazine. The cover caught my attention because I was horrified at the blatant way your magazine used yellow face, and the racist and xenophobic attitudes it conveys. As an Asian American I am very disappointed that your editors would approve such disrespectful caricatures that are so deeply rooted in American prejudice.
Your cover illustration suggests that the Asian American face is still a pollutant to American society. For centuries, my people were denied the right of full American citizenship and although today those policies have changed, I fear that the white American mindset has not. I can only guess that the purpose of placing the President, First Lady, and Vice President in yellowface was to invoke the fear that Asians and Asian Americans are manipulating American government leaders. But instead of reflecting the ethical violations your article discussed, you instead chose to emphasize racial differences among the parties involved. I am disappointed to say the least, and I hope that your future cover illustration choices will be more thoughtful and respectful of all Americans.
Anonymous
QUESTIONS:
1. What are the differences and similarities between blackface and yellowface? Do they serve different purposes or are they merely variations of the same sentiment?
2. What are the true origins of the model minority myth? Did the academic and economic success of Asian Americans create the myth or was it a self fulfilling prophecy?
I recently saw your cover illustration depicting the Clintons and Al Gore in yellow face. To be honest, when I first saw your cover illustration it made me stop and pick up your magazine. The cover caught my attention because I was horrified at the blatant way your magazine used yellow face, and the racist and xenophobic attitudes it conveys. As an Asian American I am very disappointed that your editors would approve such disrespectful caricatures that are so deeply rooted in American prejudice.
Your cover illustration suggests that the Asian American face is still a pollutant to American society. For centuries, my people were denied the right of full American citizenship and although today those policies have changed, I fear that the white American mindset has not. I can only guess that the purpose of placing the President, First Lady, and Vice President in yellowface was to invoke the fear that Asians and Asian Americans are manipulating American government leaders. But instead of reflecting the ethical violations your article discussed, you instead chose to emphasize racial differences among the parties involved. I am disappointed to say the least, and I hope that your future cover illustration choices will be more thoughtful and respectful of all Americans.
Anonymous
QUESTIONS:
1. What are the differences and similarities between blackface and yellowface? Do they serve different purposes or are they merely variations of the same sentiment?
2. What are the true origins of the model minority myth? Did the academic and economic success of Asian Americans create the myth or was it a self fulfilling prophecy?
Thomas' Response
Dear Robert G. Lee,
You make an impressive case for how in many ways the plights of Chinese Americans mirrors that of Black Americans. While many have argued that Chinese people are "model minorities" and not subject to the same discrimination as other minority races in America, you offer clear and convincing evidence that this is simply not the case--that Chinese Americans have had to suffer at the hands of discrimination and racism by the institutions of America as well as the individuals. By showing how Irish people discriminated against the Chinese and the Blacks similarly, you show how even early on--among ethnic Whites--there was a notion of whiteness that Asians and Blacks did not fit into. Always, even when ethnic, white immigrants were discriminated against, they were always considered better than non-white races, and that's important in understanding the history of the United States.
In many ways, I find your ideas similar to mine. I argue how in the Jazz Singer, the main character becomes white by subjugating Blacks through the art of black face. While I would argue that some groups have been so marginalized that their struggles mirror that of Blacks and Asians--a point with which you disagree--I think we can both agree that apart of being white or becoming white in a historical context is the active subjugation of othered groups. You show this in how Irish factory workers marginalized Blacks and Chinese people, and I show it in how Jaky decides to do black face.
I look forward to a scholarly debate on the issues.
Sincerely,
Michael Rogin.
1. Was the otherization of European immigrants equal or similar to the same otherization of Blacks and Chinese people. If so, is it simply a matter of time before Blacks and Asians are absorbed into the larger category of Whiteness? If not, is it only color that differentiates European immigrants, Blacks, and Chinese immigrants? If the Irish and other white ethnics were considered just as bad and foreign as Blacks and Chinese, then why did they eventually become absorbed into the larger category of whiteness and minority races didn't?
2. Do race relations in America boil down to White vs. non-White. Is it all white people vs all people of color in a historical context? What, then, of inter-ethnic violence--where Whites are not involved at all in the conflict?
Dear Matthew Frye Jacobson,
Your research in whiteness studies serves some function; it allows us to examine how whiteness has changed and been created over time. Through your analysis we are able to see how whiteness is everything that is not the Other, yet still firmly determined by the color of one's skin.
However, I fear that in looking at whiteness studies instead of examining how the catergory of the Other has developed and changed, we are losing the focus on the plight of the "Other." We are equating the plight of European immigrants with those of African or Chinese or Mexican immigrants. But, taking the example of Chinese immigrants, I do not think these two narratives are comparable. The ways in which the "Chinese male disruption" of the heterosexual household of the Cult of Domesticity in the mid-19th century was addressed is inexcusable. Even the writing of Ambrose Bierce pointed at the injustice in the way in which Chinese "race" was used as a way to imprint ideas of sexuality and sexual desire. Justice Holmes ruling that Chinese men were truly not meant to work in laundry services because this was a "women's job" (particularly a white woman's job) is further proof of the way that Chinese identity was formed at this time.
I urge you to reconsider the role that Whiteness studies serves in our field.
Sincerely,
Robert G. Lee
Questions
1) Is there a difference in the plight of the "colored" immigrant and the "white immigrant"? Is it based on the color of one's skin, for the most part, or is there something deeper or more inherent?
2) What is unique about the racism that Chinese immigrants faced? For instance, was this "third sex" phenomenon seen in other races that immigrated to the United States?
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Dear D.W. Griffiths,
I hope that this letter finds you well. As a scholar of critical race theory and Asian American Studies, I am writing to you on behalf of your audience, particularly your non-white audience. I am not writing out of hostility, but rather curiosity, considering I have some pressing concerns and questions that I need answers to.
I wonder if you yourself realize the impact of your films on the American narrative, especially in the twentieth century. You revolutionized filmmaking with The Birth of a Nation, and I commend you on your accomplishment. In fact, film as a medium witnessed its greatest influence in the social and political atmosphere of the United States during the early half of the twentieth century, which I am sure you are aware of. With the racist tones of Birth of a Nation, your film set the national rhetoric on American identity—one that embraced and applauded the white patriotic clansman while vilifying and degrading the African American. That certainly put hefty weight on your shoulders.
Thus, given the critical responses to Birth of a Nation, you released Broken Blossoms several years later. The film starkly contrasts with your first film, not simply because it centers around a Chinese immigrant and a teenage white girl, but because of the way you present the Chinese immigrant to your audience. Indeed, the portrayal of the Asian Cheng Huang is antithetical to the portrayal of the white Battling Burrows. However, while you attempt to exonerate yourself of the bold statements you made in Birth through this film, the racist overtones are still pervasive in Broken Blossoms. You make Cheng Huang sympathetic, as someone with whom the girl can seek refuge. However, in his sympathy, Cheng Huang is meek, sensitive, feminine, and foreign. You perpetuate his foreigner status, unable to fully assimilate, and also sexually deviant, for he lives in the dubious dens of Chinatown and takes in the girl to metaphorically turn her into a prostitute. Thus, while Cheng is much more sympathetic than Battling Burrows, his character is still doubtful because of his perpetually foreign nature.
And for me, this is more troubling than than the harsh, dangerous treatment of Battling Burrows because there is no question that we are supposed to look at Battling Burrows in disgust. And even though his brutal character is immoral and corrupt, he does not serve as a representative of the white race. But for Cheng, as a minority Asian character, when viewers empathize with his character, they also fall for the trap that this is what the Chinese are like--they are homogeneous, feminine, and foreign. Thus, the danger in your film is that it perpetuates racialized ideas that are deleterious in the progression of society.
I think that in the art we produce, we must always be aware of the consequences of the statements we make--both on ourselves and on society. I hope you consider these thoughts and get back to me soon.
Sincerely,
Robert G. Lee
Questions:
1) In Orientals, Robert G. Lee discusses the origins and consequences of the model minority myth, which is a pervasive, supposedly positive stereotype placed on Asian Americans. In what ways is the model minority image imposed upon Asian Americans today? What are the implications of this? Why is this dangerous?
2) Robert G. Lee explores the racialized space of Los Angeles, especially during the Los Angeles Civil Unrest of 1992. He explores the political and economic changes that had been occurring in that area, which altered the racial and social dynamics of that space. How do you think the identity of a space correlates with the identities of the groups who occupy that space?
I wonder if you yourself realize the impact of your films on the American narrative, especially in the twentieth century. You revolutionized filmmaking with The Birth of a Nation, and I commend you on your accomplishment. In fact, film as a medium witnessed its greatest influence in the social and political atmosphere of the United States during the early half of the twentieth century, which I am sure you are aware of. With the racist tones of Birth of a Nation, your film set the national rhetoric on American identity—one that embraced and applauded the white patriotic clansman while vilifying and degrading the African American. That certainly put hefty weight on your shoulders.
Thus, given the critical responses to Birth of a Nation, you released Broken Blossoms several years later. The film starkly contrasts with your first film, not simply because it centers around a Chinese immigrant and a teenage white girl, but because of the way you present the Chinese immigrant to your audience. Indeed, the portrayal of the Asian Cheng Huang is antithetical to the portrayal of the white Battling Burrows. However, while you attempt to exonerate yourself of the bold statements you made in Birth through this film, the racist overtones are still pervasive in Broken Blossoms. You make Cheng Huang sympathetic, as someone with whom the girl can seek refuge. However, in his sympathy, Cheng Huang is meek, sensitive, feminine, and foreign. You perpetuate his foreigner status, unable to fully assimilate, and also sexually deviant, for he lives in the dubious dens of Chinatown and takes in the girl to metaphorically turn her into a prostitute. Thus, while Cheng is much more sympathetic than Battling Burrows, his character is still doubtful because of his perpetually foreign nature.
And for me, this is more troubling than than the harsh, dangerous treatment of Battling Burrows because there is no question that we are supposed to look at Battling Burrows in disgust. And even though his brutal character is immoral and corrupt, he does not serve as a representative of the white race. But for Cheng, as a minority Asian character, when viewers empathize with his character, they also fall for the trap that this is what the Chinese are like--they are homogeneous, feminine, and foreign. Thus, the danger in your film is that it perpetuates racialized ideas that are deleterious in the progression of society.
I think that in the art we produce, we must always be aware of the consequences of the statements we make--both on ourselves and on society. I hope you consider these thoughts and get back to me soon.
Sincerely,
Robert G. Lee
Questions:
1) In Orientals, Robert G. Lee discusses the origins and consequences of the model minority myth, which is a pervasive, supposedly positive stereotype placed on Asian Americans. In what ways is the model minority image imposed upon Asian Americans today? What are the implications of this? Why is this dangerous?
2) Robert G. Lee explores the racialized space of Los Angeles, especially during the Los Angeles Civil Unrest of 1992. He explores the political and economic changes that had been occurring in that area, which altered the racial and social dynamics of that space. How do you think the identity of a space correlates with the identities of the groups who occupy that space?
Monday, May 17, 2010
Michael Rogin to Al Jolson
Al Jolson,
I believe that your efforts to portray an play about Jewish identity is far more damaging to blacks than beneficial to Jews. In depicting an immigrant Jew as a Broadway star working within the blackface minstrel tradition, you obscure your own Jewish pedigree in order to proclaim your white identity. The message is abundantly clear, that Jewish immigrants deserve the same rights and privileges associated with whiteness that has already been accorded to earlier generations of European immigrants. In the common difference to blackness, whites and Jews are one people. You have absolutely trashed the image of blacks in order to gain acceptance for Jews. In addition, I believe that your film actually avoids honestly dealing with the tension in Jews assimilation into the American mainstream. Without dealing with the conflicts and issues between Jewish identity and American identity head on, undoubtedly one day when the blackface wears away Jews will be faced with the same difficulties that they are facing today.
Michael Rogin
Should Jewish Americans identify more with the experiences of the African-Americans or the white majority? Certainly our readings from the past couple weeks have made the argument that Jews entered the white "mainstream." But, the prejudice that blacks and Jews faced in the early 20th century has some similarities.
I believe that your efforts to portray an play about Jewish identity is far more damaging to blacks than beneficial to Jews. In depicting an immigrant Jew as a Broadway star working within the blackface minstrel tradition, you obscure your own Jewish pedigree in order to proclaim your white identity. The message is abundantly clear, that Jewish immigrants deserve the same rights and privileges associated with whiteness that has already been accorded to earlier generations of European immigrants. In the common difference to blackness, whites and Jews are one people. You have absolutely trashed the image of blacks in order to gain acceptance for Jews. In addition, I believe that your film actually avoids honestly dealing with the tension in Jews assimilation into the American mainstream. Without dealing with the conflicts and issues between Jewish identity and American identity head on, undoubtedly one day when the blackface wears away Jews will be faced with the same difficulties that they are facing today.
Michael Rogin
Should Jewish Americans identify more with the experiences of the African-Americans or the white majority? Certainly our readings from the past couple weeks have made the argument that Jews entered the white "mainstream." But, the prejudice that blacks and Jews faced in the early 20th century has some similarities.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Letter from Rogin to Deloria
Dear Philip J. Deloria,
I appreciate your work on the co-opting of the Native American culture in “Playing Indian.” It is quite iconic for the American dominant culture to borrow from Native Americans in its time of freefall from one historic period to the next, with revolution rhetoric flowing from the mouths of disguised rebels. I believe that the “white male hero of our classic literature” has historically been behind the ventriloquizing of the Blacks AND Indians of America. We see in The Jazz Singer that Blacks were the mouths of urban entertainment, but were not allowed to express it themselves in a way that truly reflected the prerogative of the race being imitated. Like I said in my paper, the blackface in Jazz Singer has done no favor to blacks and is equally as disingenuous as Birth of a Nation. We can both appreciate the fact that our nation has grown to a point where the minority subjects of this intense desire to define American identity can be steered in a desirable direction.
In Scholarship,
Michael Rogin
How did the “ventriloquized” races gain agency to Deloria in “Playing Indian”? Does Rogin offer some insight into how African-Americans did it?
I appreciate your work on the co-opting of the Native American culture in “Playing Indian.” It is quite iconic for the American dominant culture to borrow from Native Americans in its time of freefall from one historic period to the next, with revolution rhetoric flowing from the mouths of disguised rebels. I believe that the “white male hero of our classic literature” has historically been behind the ventriloquizing of the Blacks AND Indians of America. We see in The Jazz Singer that Blacks were the mouths of urban entertainment, but were not allowed to express it themselves in a way that truly reflected the prerogative of the race being imitated. Like I said in my paper, the blackface in Jazz Singer has done no favor to blacks and is equally as disingenuous as Birth of a Nation. We can both appreciate the fact that our nation has grown to a point where the minority subjects of this intense desire to define American identity can be steered in a desirable direction.
In Scholarship,
Michael Rogin
How did the “ventriloquized” races gain agency to Deloria in “Playing Indian”? Does Rogin offer some insight into how African-Americans did it?
letter from Al Jolson in blackface to white Al Jolson
Dear Al,
Which one of us is the real Al Jolson? I know that biologically you’re the true Al, but perhaps I’m some hidden part of your identity that you channel through my performance. Perhaps you perform your whiteness in the same way that I perform this blackness. In some ways you blur the line between what is a real identity and what is purely performed.
Yet maybe you have some sadistic desire to control me, posses my blackness. Maybe your power of being able to embody the mysterious virility of a black man through me gives you a rush, a sick pleasure. You “sing through my mouth,” giving me words and music that I do not want to project to the world.
Who are you, Al Jolson? Are you white? Black? Both? Neither?
Sincerely,
Al
Questions:
Why is performing another gender more or less acceptable, while performing another race is not?
2) Race is a metalanguage, but can sexuality be one, too? It seems that sexuality (ex. interracial sex, miscegentation) provides the foundation for white society’s historical fear of black men and the black Other…Why is sexuality so salient/significant (even when it isn’t explicitly discussed)?
Dear Jakie Rabinowitz,
After seeing you in The Jazz Singer, something inside me was stirred. I felt as if I was seeing a kindred soul and the antithesis of everything I am at the same time. For years, I pretended to be something I am not in order to be given a freedom that was denied to me because of my race. But unlike you, I am black and I pretended to be white.
As you and I both know, the life of a negro is not an easy one. Yet, in your black-faced performances, you found a freedom to express yourself that I too long for. Like you, I left my home and assumed another identity in order to fulfill my American Dream, but we both learned that one can never truly leave behind where they come from. No matter how hard we tried to assimilate, our secrets from past always seemed to hunt us. It was not until we learned to look in the mirror and see ourselves for who we truly are that we were able to find peace in our lives.
You and I are like two sides of the same coin, destined for the same fate no matter how different we may be. There is one side of us that will always be hidden in the darkness as the other comes to light. I had to accept the my existence as negro in order to live my life at its best.
I know that what I have written sounds like the ramblings of an insane person, but please know that I understand better then you will ever know.
Sincerely,
Pinky
Questions:
1)In Rogin's piece about Jewish jazz singers, he says, "Just as the white man in classic American literature uses the Indians to establish an American identityagainst the old world; so the jazz singer uses blacks" (217). Considering the Deloria's writings, what does this say about race as a social construct and its uses in defining a person (or country's) identity?
2)In what ways were whites idolizing and/or vilify Native Americans by "playing Indian?"
As you and I both know, the life of a negro is not an easy one. Yet, in your black-faced performances, you found a freedom to express yourself that I too long for. Like you, I left my home and assumed another identity in order to fulfill my American Dream, but we both learned that one can never truly leave behind where they come from. No matter how hard we tried to assimilate, our secrets from past always seemed to hunt us. It was not until we learned to look in the mirror and see ourselves for who we truly are that we were able to find peace in our lives.
You and I are like two sides of the same coin, destined for the same fate no matter how different we may be. There is one side of us that will always be hidden in the darkness as the other comes to light. I had to accept the my existence as negro in order to live my life at its best.
I know that what I have written sounds like the ramblings of an insane person, but please know that I understand better then you will ever know.
Sincerely,
Pinky
Questions:
1)In Rogin's piece about Jewish jazz singers, he says, "Just as the white man in classic American literature uses the Indians to establish an American identityagainst the old world; so the jazz singer uses blacks" (217). Considering the Deloria's writings, what does this say about race as a social construct and its uses in defining a person (or country's) identity?
2)In what ways were whites idolizing and/or vilify Native Americans by "playing Indian?"
Letter to Rogin From Pinky
Mr. Rogin,
My name is Jeanne Crain and I starred in the movie Pinky playing a black character Patricia "Pinky" Johnson. I am actually white in real life. I recently read your essay, The Jewish Jazz Singer, and while I find your assessment of the effects of white actors playing in black face on camera to be powerful, I was wondering your thoughts on white actors playing the roles of black characters. Does that further the subordination of blacks or does it decrease it?
In my role in Pinky I am shown having intimate relations with a white man. Is the mere implication that I am black give a positive spin to interracial relations, or does the fact that I am, in real life white make interracial coupling seem even more degrading? To me it seems as if keeping the real life racial line is maintaining society's aversion to interracial couples.
Conversely, as an actor I think it says a lot for me, as a white woman, to be playing a black character. By me masquerading as black it puts the white and black race on a more level playing field and not necessarily as set binaries.
I would really be interested in getting your expert opinion on this matter.
All the best,
Jeanne Crain
Questions
1. Is there a distinct performative aspect to 'playing' a certain role or race in the entertainment industry?
2. How do we parse real life roles with on screen or on stage roles?
To Whom It May Concern at the Society of Red Men,
You do not feel exactly like an American, and neither do I. I understand that in some ways, the Indian – the “red man” - is a symbol of your Americanness. But I do not understand why you would want to portray yourself as something other than what you are – a Christian white male, enfranchised and part of the American system. You play the role of the Other, the Indian, not quite to mock it but to claim it as an American symbol. We both perform, but you do it secretly and behind closed doors, so your performance apparently doesn't have the same goals – as I perform the Other, I try to convince the audience to accept me as American, as less Other than that which I am performing. You, on the other hand, are using the role of an Indian to show how far you are from England and how America has formed its own Other group. I am curious as to why Indian performance necessarily makes you any more American, and why it is often done in the form of secrecy. Wouldn't it be more effective to portray this Other in the most public sense possible, and thus maintain and expand your sense of Americanness?
Jack Robin
Why does the author of “The Jewish Jazz Singer” draw the conclusion that one of the themes of the Jazz Singer is literally the murder of the Jewish patriarch?
In what ways has the idea of the “Other” translated to other racial performances than blackface and playing Indian?
You do not feel exactly like an American, and neither do I. I understand that in some ways, the Indian – the “red man” - is a symbol of your Americanness. But I do not understand why you would want to portray yourself as something other than what you are – a Christian white male, enfranchised and part of the American system. You play the role of the Other, the Indian, not quite to mock it but to claim it as an American symbol. We both perform, but you do it secretly and behind closed doors, so your performance apparently doesn't have the same goals – as I perform the Other, I try to convince the audience to accept me as American, as less Other than that which I am performing. You, on the other hand, are using the role of an Indian to show how far you are from England and how America has formed its own Other group. I am curious as to why Indian performance necessarily makes you any more American, and why it is often done in the form of secrecy. Wouldn't it be more effective to portray this Other in the most public sense possible, and thus maintain and expand your sense of Americanness?
Jack Robin
Why does the author of “The Jewish Jazz Singer” draw the conclusion that one of the themes of the Jazz Singer is literally the murder of the Jewish patriarch?
In what ways has the idea of the “Other” translated to other racial performances than blackface and playing Indian?
From Pinky to her Granny
Dear Granny,
I am sorry that you feel like I have been denying who I truly am and ultimately rejecting my roots, and you. It is true that I have been living my life in the north as a white woman, not telling anyone where I actually come from. It is my biggest regret ever doing something that would hurt you. You have sacrificed so much for me and I am ashamed that I have kept you a secret, and even more ashamed that I have received a privileged life in return.
I wish there was a way to explain to you the difficulty in looking the way I do in a country so divided. I cannot wholly fit into either group, white or black, for I feel like an outsider around both. White people often mistake me for white, but when they find out I’m a negro it infuriates them. I don’t know if their anger comes from their embarrassment for not being able to tell, or their fear that whiteness and blackness aren’t as far apart as they want it to be. And if my revelation is not met by anger, it is often met with the lust of unsavory white men, who find something exotic in a negro who looks like a lady.
Granny I never meant to hurt you, or forget about you. But when so many people were mistaking me for white, it became easier to play the part. And to be honest Granny, sometimes I really liked being white. No one refused to serve me, to one questioned my morality or my intelligence. I know that it is a horrible sin before God’s eyes but, I really liked being white. I hope that my honest does not cut you even deeper than my actions already have, but I want you to try and see the world through my eyes. You are my only family and nothing could ever change that, I am still your Pinky.
With all my Love,
Pinky
QUESTIONS:
1. In the movie Pinky, the lighter skinned Pinky is much more resentful of Miss Em than her grandmother. In the end, Miss Em wills her estate to Pinky and her clothing to Granny, ultimately making Miss Em a “good” or at least sympathetic character. What is the movie trying to convey with the difference between how Pinky and Granny view Miss Em ? Is it a commentary on generational differences between black people or rather meant to reflect their different levels of privilege?
2. In Playing Indian, Deloria states that, “Americans had an awkward tendency to define themselves by what they were not.” Is this statement still relevant to the shaping of “American” identity today? Do you only become American when you relinquish everything else?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)