It's a book by Harold Cruse published in 1967. I see it cited every now and then, and I picked it up last week. Cruse makes some claims I agree with: black Americans need to be understood as an ethnicity, rather than a race, and "America, which idealizes the rights of the individual above everything else, is in reality, a nation dominated by the social power of groups, classes, in-groups and cliques...the individual Negro has, proportionately, very few rights indeed because this ethnic group(whether or not he actually identifies with it) has very little political, economic or social power (beyond moral grounds) to wield. Thus it can be seen that those Negroes, and there are very many of them, who have accepted the full essence of the Great American Ideal of individualism are in serious trouble trying to function in America."
He makes some claims I don't fully agree with, but I appreciate that he articulates: "each individual in America is a member of a group. The white Anglo-Saxon Protestants, the white Catholics, and the white Jews are the three main power groups in America, under the political and economic leadership of the WASPs...although the three main power groups neither want nor need to become integrated with each other...the only substantial exception to this picture of ethnic separation is the compartment marked intellectuals and artists.... the creative arts, and mutual professional concerns, we find the classic sociological enemy of ethnic parochialism...in the detached social world of the intellectuals, a considerable amount of racial integration and ethnic intermingling does take place on a social level."
He also goes on to say that every worthwhile uniquely American artistic genre-- that is not just a tired imitation of European standards-- is influenced by black Americans. He talks about Jazz, but in general, I don't think that's true. For example, the Western is quintessentially American and worthwhile, and those stories could be powerfully told without black people or culture.
Then he makes some claims that stick in my craw. I don't know what to make of them, like Porgy and Bess and Gershwin and Benny Goodman being famous because they had white support at the production level, as opposed to Duke Ellington and the numerous black composers and writers who never made it. I mean, he wrote this book in 1967, but I know that he'd have to devote an entire chapter to the social and cultural factors that conspired to make Kenny G the largest selling instrumentalist in history. How did that happen?
Over all, he argues that until black people start becoming publishers and owners, the creative possibilities of black Americans will never be realized, and that this is bad for America, because black people have a unique capacity, due to social circumstance, for original cultural and political thought.
It's not a new argument. He is an unabashed anti-integrationist, and that's unfashionable. Of course, he'd argue that liberal whites have decided when and how to favor integration, and it's still organized to benefit the WASP majority. He didn't look kindly on the NAACP, but I think that organization is different today than it was 40 years ago. I imagine he'd say that MLK was partially propped up by the Man. And while I don't agree that King is propped up by the Man, I do believe that the Man cherry picks which of MLK's speeches and writings get studied in schools.
I started thinking about "To Kill a Mockingbird," and "Huckleberry Finn," and "The Sound and the Fury," and all of the money that is being made as these stories get recycled through schools through publishing and republishing, in the name of studying the American story, and in general, all of those white authors, like Susan Monk Kidd, who have made a fortune on the stories of the moral incompetence of whites lashed out on the body of blacks, and none of that money is passing through the hands of black people or black publishers, and I can't help but wonder if the propping up of black publishers through giving them exclusive publishing rights to these American stories can't be a form of reparations I can get behind.
[ March 26, 2007, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote: I can't help but wonder if the propping up of black publishers through giving the exclusive publishing rights to these American stories can't be a form of reparations I can get behind.
It's not one I could get behind. Unless there was a cliff in front of it...
What would be the goal of doing such a thing? From your statement, it seems like the goal is to get money into the hands of black people or black publishers. Which is a decidedly un-Irami type of thing to imply.
There's nothing stopping black voices from being put on the scene today-- for heaven's sake, the strongest voice in influencing literary sales is a black woman. Best sellers are made by the 'Oprah Winfrey Bookclub' logo, regardless of how well written the book is.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:From your statement, it seems like the goal is to get money into the hands of black people or black publishers. Which is a decidedly un-Irami type of thing to imply.
There's nothing stopping black voices from being put on the scene today
There is nothing really helping them, either.
My goal is to get good books written by blacks and chosen by blacks published in wide circulation, for the good of the national discourse. This is a highly competitive field, and I'm looking at an enormous book of WASP and Jewish agents and publishers, and there is something deeply unsettling about a room full of white and Jewish publishers deciding which black authors see the light of day.
Oprah is one woman, and depending on her endorsement makes as much sense as betting one will make it as a professional athlete. Oprah can't do it alone. She shouldn't have to try, and I wouldn't want her to because she is only one POV.
The publishing industry as a whole is run like a business, with agents and the publishers looking to sell the most books, based on previous performance, and hedge their bets appropriately. I'm not sure that enough books, written by blacks but are casually and deeply suspicious of white Americans and white American values(because we are and for good reason) make it to print in the absence of black publishers. It's probably easier to sell an outright polemic or frilly entertainment or books like Cosby's, who points the finger squarely in our own chest.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I am always rather disturbed by taking skin color into account for the purposes of deciding anything, ever. It just goes against my entire upbringing and outlook...
Sorry, nothing to contribute to the thread, just all squicked out now.
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
quote:It's probably easier to sell an outright polemic or frilly entertainment or books like Cosby's, who points the finger squarely in our own chest.
Because it's easier to digest. That's all I have to say on the subject.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote:I'm not sure that enough books, written by blacks but are casually and deeply suspicious of white Americans and white American values(because we are and for good reason) make it to print in the absence of black publishers.
I don't agree with your premise. It seems to me that books about racial identity and struggle are extremely popular in the literary community. I'm also curious if you have numbers to back up your assertion that there is an absence of black publishers. I honestly have no clue what the percentage of black publishers is, but I think your argument would be improved by citing something instead of asserting it as a given.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:There is nothing really helping them, either.
I don't think you've taken the time to look, Irami. There's a tremendous movement in the publishing world to acquire minority voices (African and Latino voices, specifically). It's even reached into the speculative fiction world (that bastion of lilly-whitedom) with the highly acclaimed Dark Matter anthologies.
What's lacking isn't will by the publishers-- but will by the public.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Also, the idea that someone is racist merely because they aren't a minority is offensive, and I wish you'd find another song to sing.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:There's a tremendous movement in the publishing world to acquire minority voices (African and Latino voices, specifically).
There is also a tremendous movement in the Republican party to acquire minority members, provided that they sound like darker versions of white Republicans. ________________________________________________
Scott, this really shouldn't be that hard for you to wrap your head around. Let's say you have a story about an LDS family in the middle of a protestant enclave in North Carolina. You could write the story a few ways. You can make the family LDS, but don't ever mention it, or you make them nominally LDS, but have them have the sensibilities of Protestants, then drop the issue. I can't see this as being too realistic or compelling, if their religion is deeply felt. I actually see those options as degrading the entire religion. Or you can make a more powerful story where the family is LDS and it's important to them and actually deals with being LDS in a Protestant enclave, on top of whatever plot is also driving the story.
I think the latter would be a better story. I also think it'll have a better chance of seeing the inside of a bookstore if there are LDS agents, LDS publishers, or LDS working in at the top of bigger publishing houses. Whether it's the will of the public, the agents and publishers are going to feel more comfortable with material with which they personally connect.
[ March 26, 2007, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
A publisher or agent isn't going to stay in business long if they push material that they personally feel comfortable with, but for which there is no market.
I have a feeling that there are more powers at play here than a publishing industry holding back minority authors. It's a business, and while that certainly doesn't preclude prejudice, market forces drive it more than individual preferences.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:this really shouldn't be that hard for you to wrap your head around.
It isn't. You're just utterly wrong.
quote:Whether it's the will of the public, the agents and publishers are going to feel more comfortable with material that they personally feel comfortable with.
Publishers and agents are trained to recognize saleable material that they personally object to, or have no sympathy for.
Dude, it's what they do. All day long. They are as professional and as capable in their business as any climatologist, etymologist, or physicist.
quote:There is also a tremendous movement in the Republican party to acquire minority members, provided that they sound like darker versions of white Republicans.
:blink:
Terry McMillan will want to have some words with you 'bout that.
Are you seriously contending that the black authors that are popular today are Uncle Toms, Irami?
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
Here are some people that became successful working with producers and publishers that were not dominated by African-Americans: Oprah, Will Smith, Eddy Murphy, Michael Jackson I think, Octavia Butler I think. What Cruse wrote must have seemed reasonable at the time but it is no longer true. Black America has a tremendous influence on our culture, out of proportion to the numbers I think.
I can see publishers or others being blinded by personal sentiment and in fact I think they often or even usually make bad calls. Consider how many times Harry Potter got rejected! But they're obviously willing to carry black culture.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
From what I can tell, the idea that black people who succeed are "trying to be white" is a big part of the problem, Irami. All people should strive to excel and not let "the man" or even their PEERS hold them down.
I'm really disappointed to hear the uncle tom card from you Irami.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:I'm really disappointed to hear the uncle tom card from you Irami.
Why? He's played that card before.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Rakeesh: Then I haven't been paying enough attention =/
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
quote:There is also a tremendous movement in the Republican party to acquire minority members, provided that they sound like darker versions of white Republicans.
I think it's unfair to both black and white Republicans to say this. It implies that black Republicans don't understand or don't care that they're being pandered to and that white Republicans have no interest in black members other than as beards to disguise innate racism. I really disagree with this. I think that a large number of black communities are more conservative than white communitites and that there will be more and more black Republicans as time goes on. As it happens, my pediatrician (who is black) is a very prominent member of the local Republican party and I can assure you that he very much believes in their principles.
I don't think that many publishers have racial or ethnic agendas - I think they publish what they think will make the most money. Publishing is a for-profit business and I don't think many publishers would quash a potential best-selling book by a black author about black issues. The color they most care about is green.
Your point about the lack of black perspectives on black issues is well taken. I don't know what the solution is, but I do think it will improve over time. I personally think that Gloria Naylor is one of the great American authors and I am baffled as to why she isn't more popular. Thomas Sowell always seems to get overlooked, too.
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: I started thinking about "To Kill a Mockingbird," and "Huckleberry Finn," and "The Sound and the Fury," and all of the money that is being made as these stories get recycled through schools through publishing and republishing, in the name of studying the American story
We read Zora Neale Hurston, Langston Hughes, Toni Morrison and Alice Walker as well.
For an ethnic group that represents 12% of the US population, I think my literary education was disproportionately influenced by African-American voices. I certainly read more literature by black authors than Latino authors, despite them having rather similar national demographics.
BTW, what is the difference (according to Cruse) between race and ethnicity? Is it the inclusion of cultural accoutrements (e.g. shared history, dialect, etc.) If so, can it be accurately applied to all black Americans, including recent immigrants from Nigeria and Ghana? If not, are there semantics you would recommend to distinguish the groups?
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote:For an ethnic group that represents 12% of the US population, I think my literary education was disproportionately influenced by African-American voices.
This was true of my literary education as well.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:BTW, what is the difference (according to Cruse) between race and ethnicity? Is it the inclusion of cultural accoutrements (e.g. shared history, dialect, etc.) If so, can it be accurately applied to all black Americans, including recent immigrants from Nigeria and Ghana? If not, are there semantics you would recommend to distinguish the groups?
IIRC, race generally refers to little other than the color of your skin, whereas ethnicity implies culture.
With regard to your second question, I think there was a thread on that before -- while most people are aware that black Americans and black Africans represent two different cultural groups, no one could quite come up with a way to distinguish the cultures of black African immigrants in this country from larger black American culture.
--j_k, edited to clarify.
[ March 26, 2007, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: James Tiberius Kirk ]
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Kirk is correct. At a point in the book, Cruse makes a distinction between the West Indies blacks and the American blacks in New York, saying that one of the startling differences between the groups was that the West Indies blacks, while definitely black, culturally didn't carry the sense of being a minority in this majority-ruled American democracy. It accounts for a different set of virtues and vices. _________________
In high school, I read a lot more Southern white authors than black authors on race in America. And the black authors I read weren't the ones I would have picked if I'd chosen.
__________________
quote:I don't think that many publishers have racial or ethnic agendas - I think they publish what they think will make the most money. Publishing is a for-profit business and I don't think many publishers would quash a potential best-selling book by a black author about black issues. The color they most care about is green.
Publishers are going to publish what they believe will make money, and err to the conservative side, and every agent has his or her niche they feel more comfortable shilling for, and have a marketing plan to back up the success they purportedly have on their hands.
I do admit to speaking out of my depth and working from intuition, but I think you all are too. It's a given that publishers are working for the bottom line. What is not known by anyone who has posted on this thread is how they get there, and who gets forgotten or raised in the process.
It took me working in a college Admissions Office and then in a Senator's office to understand how these systems we assume are clear and reasonably fair, are not so much just as much as they are stable and predictable. I'm curious as to what OSC says are the virtues and vices of niche publishers versus large houses. He has published copiously through both, from writing stage plays at BYU through Tor and now runs his own house.
[ March 26, 2007, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I wouldn't wait around for OSC's response.
quote:What is not known by anyone who has posted on this thread is how they get there,
How they got where?
It's true that there is a dearth of African Americans in the publishing business; but can you show me where they are being discriminated against when they attempt to enter it?
quote:and who gets forgotten or raised in the process.
You can't prove this type of thing ever, ever. And so you seem to be assuming that competantly composed works by African Americans are being rejected because the WASPS and Jews can't handle the negro intellectual underdog pissing on their sacred tree.
I call baloney.
If anything, they're not buying the books because the reading public, black, white, brown or red, has not cared about what intellectuals think since 1987. It's a fact that African American literature starved throughout the 70's and 80's, and was reborn when Terry McMillan surfaced and gained both popular and literary acclaim.
It's not that black voices aren't being heard.
It's not that those voices aren't genuine.
It's that YOU, Irami, don't accept them as fulfilling..
Ethnic literature is surging in importance and a dialogue is being held. Publishers are seeking out ethnic/cultural stories and publishing them at an unprecedented rate. Never before in history has the minority voice held such importance in the American literary landscape.
The change is Good. I'm all for working more voices into the market. But let's stop with the baloney that publishers are racist; publishers are eager to find the book that will make them money.
You know what torks me about this? Irami's complaints sound like young writers' whining-- 'Publishers are old and staid.' 'Publishers only want to publish cliche.' 'Editors don't want creativity, they want saleability.'
It's crap. I hope, Irami, that you do not use the racism excuse to justify why your novel should be sold.
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: Kirk is correct. At a point in the book, Cruse makes a distinction between the West Indies blacks and the American blacks in New York, saying that one of the startling differences between the groups was that the West Indies blacks, while definitely black, culturally didn't carry the sense of being a minority in a this majority-ruled American democracy. It accounts for a different set of virtues and vices.
I was confused by your characterization of the ethnic group as "black americans." I would have thought (semantically) that term referred to all americans who were racially black rather than ethnically...whatever semantics could be used to represent the group you have in mind.
quote:In high school, I read a lot more Southern white authors than black authors on race in America. And the black authors I read weren't the ones I would have picked if I'd chosen.
What black authors did you read and why wouldn't you have chosen them?
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
quote:Ethnic literature is surging in importance and a dialogue is being held. Publishers are seeking out ethnic/cultural stories and publishing them at an unprecedented rate. Never before in history has the minority voice held such importance in the American literary landscape.
I totally agree. But the problem is that this is happening while huge changes are taking place in the publishing market(s) as well as the broader media/cultural landscape.
I have no idea what the solution is. But I don't think we can count on the publishing industry at all.
Granted, it all depends on who you want to reach, but I think that ethnic intellectuals (be they African-American or Mormo-American or Armenian-American) are going to need to use the tools of populism, free content, viral marketing and social interaction if they want to have any chance of being heard. Luckily, I'm content to speak to a very small audience so don't need to spend the time and cultural capital to figure it all out.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:Originally posted by Amanecer:
quote:For an ethnic group that represents 12% of the US population, I think my literary education was disproportionately influenced by African-American voices.
This was true of my literary education as well.
As a student in a University English program right now, I can also agree with this. Not only are African-Americans heavily represented in the required American lit survey courses, but my school requires a semester of African-American literature for graduation. There is no such requirement for literature written by any other ethnic group, nor is there a requirement to take a class on literature written exclusively by women.
In fact, I'm finishing up my second semester of American Lit surveys and I don't think I've yet read a piece of literature written by a Hispanic American, Asian American or Native American.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:I hope, Irami, that you do not use the racism excuse to justify why your novel should be sold.
I actually don't have to worry about this. I have enough white friends from college, working in the publishing industry, that I can call in a solid if I don't get published through the traditional means. In this situation, I'm part of the right group. I'm just not going to pretend that it's a good system.
Senojretep,
A handful of Maya Angelou poems and maybe a Toni Morrison novel? In addition to "To Kill a Mockingbird," and Huckleberry Finn. A significant amount of time was spent on the latter two. I wish I would have read, "Sport of the Gods," by Paul Dunbar instead of the Toni Morrison.
Belle, et al, the point at issue isn't the number of black authors being published, but rather, who picks which black authors and why. Maybe I don't want liberal whites or Oprah picking my black authors. Maybe I don't think "Waiting to Exhale," is the most thoughtful and cunning fictional representation of race in America. I personally think Charles Johnson is four times the writer and thinker, and I think that there are black writers writing about black Americans who are four times better than he is.
[ March 26, 2007, 05:29 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I think that the study of african american literature is a good thing. The reason it is overrepresented in American literature has to do with the overall cultural effect that black Americans have had on our wider society.
Additionally, blacks have spoken English for longer than any other minority group in America; they've had a longer time to integrate into society than other races. There's much more written by African Americans than by any other minority group (although I think Latino writers are starting to catch up).
Blacks kind of paved the way for racial integration in the US. There's a legitimate reason why their literature is important, as far as history is concerned, because so much of it concerns that struggle for equality. Stylistically, their stories are important because the conventions that were used by Toni Morrison, Zora Neale Hurston, etc, are standards today. (One could make a good argument that magical realism was birthed from Morrison, Hurston, Ellison and other African American writers with a penchant for fantastical imagery and rhythmic prose).
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I can't see Charles Johnson making it on to high school (and even undergraduate) syllabi. He is too difficult to pigeon-hole.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
In theory, the black intelligentsia should be weighing in on which black writers are deeply insightful and worthy, but for complicated historical reasons and poor matriculation, there isn't much of a black intelligentsia to speak of. We have Oprah and a few middling wits and preachers, and we outsource some of the heavy lifting to liberal whites, but liberal whites don't want to give air to the virtues of segregation and conservative whites are too busy taking care of themselves to worry. There are times I appreciate the way Baldwin called white liberals "our affliction." There is Charles Johnson, Danielle Allen, Julian Bond, and others, but in a powerful way, we need independent black publishers deciding on black writers with an eye towards cultivating a black intelligentsia. It's good for America because it's distinctly possible that somewhere in the non-existent black intelligentsia is the last piece of the puzzle of how to justly live in a diverse liberal capitalist democracy.
[ March 26, 2007, 10:52 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I want to be a writer, but i'm interested in taking it to the next level. I'm frustrated by aspects of feminism, of aspects of what you are talking about, Irami and really think we should take it up a notch. Somewhere beyond dualities because it's just making me absolutely insane and angry.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: There's nothing stopping black voices from being put on the scene today-- for heaven's sake, the strongest voice in influencing literary sales is a black woman. Best sellers are made by the 'Oprah Winfrey Bookclub' logo, regardless of how well written the book is.
There's nothing stopping the rich black people from being put on the scene today. There's too big a gap between the rich black population and the poor one to consider a broad statement like that true. However, the fact that both the rich and the poor are labeled by the same stereotype doesn't help the situation either.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
Well, I haven't read the book, but he's got a point about Benny Goodman and Gershwin, etc. Benny Goodman was known as the 'king of swing', when there were black bands that could (and did, Chick Webb's band, for example) swing them right off the stage. Gershwin came out of Paul Whiteman's band, which was a self-proclaimed attempt to 'civilise' jazz by taking the 'Negro' influence out of it. Whiteman was known as 'The King of Jazz' by the white music world which enabled him to get all the exposure. Non-Black America's only exposure to the music in the 20s and 30s was through white bands like these. Whiteman's was mostly rubbish, but he was still the King of Jazz to a majority of the population.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Cashew,
The book was written 40 years ago, but I imagine that Harold Cruse rolling in his grave at the dominance of Kenny G.
Synesthesia,
The black feminist movement is a complicated and terribly intriguing muddle because black women have had to deal with black men, and black men have been so damaged and cast from the mainstream economic, political, and educational spheres that you have people like me, who don't care about some man's law, or get people like the guy portrayed in this article.
quote: After he saw us talking to white people just any kind of way, he'd tell us stories about how white mobs used to maul and lynch young black men even if they only raised their hands to strike back in self-defense. He talked about men he'd known when he was growing up in rural Georgia who had been lynched, and he'd tell us he knew his "place" and that we had to learn "our place." This wasn't our experience, so we thought that he was just plain scared of white people. He could not convince us to show deference to white people just because they were white. They didn't have to be honest or morally respectable. No, they just had to be white and they were due our respect. Racial respect.
We lived in a Polish ghetto in Detroit, Michigan. We couldn't fathom this "our place" stuff. Virtually all of our schoolmates were white. And for a long time, all of our neighbors were white. We were not going to concede honor and rank to any white peers just because they were white.
"That don't make any sense to me," I'd say. "You da one who ain't got no sense," he'd say.
My Daddy lived before Martin Luther King was known, so My Daddy was the first advocate of nonviolence and passive resistance I knew. Martin Luther King could not compare to him; My Daddy was the ultimate pacifist in the face of white people. I was not proud of My Daddy for either his philosophy or his behavior.
My Daddy said, "Yes Suh" and "No Suh" to all white males, old and young. They could call him "nigger" or "darky," but he would just tip his hat and say, "Yes Suh."
Getting angry and insane doesn't help anybody. Hold it together and read some books.
SoaPiNuReYe,
There is a difference between moneyed blacks and a real intelligentsia. I mean, C.J. Walker was rich, but I don't know if anyone should hold the world's first hairess as a model on how to cultivate the Talented Tenth.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: In theory, the black intelligentsia should be weighing in on which black writers are deeply insightful and worthy
<snip>
Right, because no one else is qualified to talk about this. Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I don't want anyone to think that I dislike studying Black authors - some of my favorite works, particularly some of my favorite poets are African American. I just wanted to point out that there is no shortage of works by African Americans being studied in today's literature programs. In fact, we've gotten so far away from the "dead white guy" literature classes I honestly think we are neglecting to study some pretty darn good dead white guys. For example, I have a survey class that doesn't include Keats.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Right, because no one else is qualified to talk about this.
No, but there is a reason the Da Vinci Code didn't win the Pulitzer or get rushed into classrooms, and that reason is not a matter of money or popularity, but rather, the white intelligentsia. I see this as a good thing. _____
I don't have strong feelings about Oprah, but from what I hear, that school she built in Africa is an extraordinary example of a person putting her money where her mouth is.
[ March 26, 2007, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I am reading some books. That's one reason why I'm so mad. It seems like not one side has it right, they are all so incomplete and need to get it together. You know you're annoyed with the world with all sides are just making me want to run screaming into the night.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
I guess the Vast White Conspiracy isn't too bad if it shut down the Da Vinci express.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:There's nothing stopping the rich black people from being put on the scene today. There's too big a gap between the rich black population and the poor one to consider a broad statement like that true.
Are you saying that only rich black writers have the chance to be published? If so, where do you come by this conclusion?
Again: I don't see any undue prejudice in the publishing industry. The prejudice against Irami's type of literature is in the public.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
I'm saying that poor black people don't get the chance that the rich blacks do when it comes to publishing. It isn't the publishing industry, it's the whole experience of being poor that holds them back. There's so many things that can prevent poor people from getting far in life in terms of almost any field, black or white.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
When you say 'publishing,' do you mean the actual publishing industry (in which case, I may agree with you), or do you mean the act of being published (in which case, I do not)?
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:I'm not sure that enough books, written by blacks but are casually and deeply suspicious of white Americans and white American values(because we are and for good reason) make it to print in the absence of black publishers.
I would think that this distrust is part of the problem.
--j_k
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
SoaPiNuReYe,
This isn't so much of a class issue as an ethnic issue, or better put, it is both a class and an ethnic issue. If you take a look at the high school and college graduation rates, broken down by ethnicity, the disparity between races is enormous.
Sure, if you adjust for parents income, the numbers start making a little more sense, but there is still a gap, and that gap is cultural. White people don't like talking about this, so I'll put it in a way they can't pretend not to understand.
If you look at the gap in graduation rates between high school women and men, women are graduating at a higher rate. It's not a matter of economics. Here is an article, if you want one. These are people born in the same family, where the daughter goes to college and the son drops out of high school, gets a job or goes to the military or goes to jail.
Why is that the case? I believe, in general, the cultural demands and orientation of girls is different than the expectations and demands of boys. This phenomenon is exacerbated by ethnic differences. Furthermore, the shape of our educational institutions, on some levels, is better fit for women. Just as, at some levels, the shape of our business executive culture is a better fit for men. Maybe it's part biology, maybe it's part sociology, who knows? We can't even get to this discussion because by now people start seeing red and blathering.
Why are women doing better in school? It's possible that the shape of the curriculum, and the entire institution, better reflects the transparent cultural demands and expectations of white, Asian, and Jewish women.
I actually think that men have, for too long, given up on making the elementary and high school curriculum relevant. The President and the First Lady are a paradigmatic example of these priorities. She is a school librarian, and he can't talk about literature without setting his tongue squarely inside of his cheek.
For black men, the schools were never tailored to deal with the unique position of being black in America, and required us to ignore those special responsibilities, burdens and blessings, if we were to succeed. The curriculum was not set by black men, administered by black men for black men, largely because there has never been a fully staffed and articulate black intelligentsia-- financially independent from a white political majority-- to discuss what the shape of what such an education would look like. Never. Not now, and in the history of this nation. That debate has never happened. Even if we get the numbers, the quality and depth of the intellects in the room isn't high enough to pull such a coup off, without cribbing-- without due analysis-- the latest wisdom drummed up by liberal whites. The result has been that white professors and politicians, liberal and conservative, have inadequately designed the American standards and practices, with goodness in their hearts. Here is the news flash: "To Kill a Mockingbird" is not written for black men, nor is Huckleberry Finn.
These are the reasons why you can adjust for economic factors and still have those disparities. _____
Why are immigrants doing so well? They moved here to win. They have that hungry, morally ambiguous ethos that says, whether it's learning English or learning golf, cast off that history, dignity, and native sense of propriety, and become a predatory WASP, man. They take to this land with a robust sense of, "When in Rome..."
[ March 27, 2007, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:They have that hungry, morally ambiguous ethos that says, whether it's learning English or learning golf, cast off their history, dignity, and native sense of propriety, and become a predatory WASP, man.
Ahh, yes. Now this, this is vintage Irami. Far-reaching telepathy into the motives of entire races or categories of people, coupled with a morally critical judgement from on high.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Why are immigrants doing so well? They moved here to win. They have that hungry, morally ambiguous ethos that says, whether it's learning English or learning golf, cast off their history, dignity, and native sense of propriety, and become American, man. They take to this land with a robust sense of, "When in Rome..."
...
Prove you're serious about calling immigrants morally ambiguous and cultural deserters.
Elaborate. With facts.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
It's like proving the existence of God. My father is an immigrant. I have a personal relationship with immigrants. My quality of knowledge doesn't submit to your standard of proof. Like a good Protestant, I feel it in my heart.
quote:Ahh, yes. Now this, this is vintage Irami. Far-reaching telepathy into the motives of entire races or categories of people, coupled with a morally critical judgement from on high.
No charge.
[ March 27, 2007, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:No charge.
You do get what you pay for!
Edit:
quote:It's like proving the existence of God. My father is an immigrant. I have a personal relationship with immigrants. My quality of knowledge doesn't submit to your standard of proof. I feel it in my heart.
Well, that's to be expected.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:It's like proving the existence of God. My father is an immigrant. I have a personal relationship with immigrants. My quality of knowledge doesn't submit to your standard of proof.
That's an interesting response.
Are you presuming to be representative of black intelligentsia?
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
No. I'll cast myself as John the Baptist in this play.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:I'll cast myself as John the Baptist in this play.
I'm Whitey.
I'm the Director.
You don't cast yourself. You go where I tell you, say what I tell you to say.
And you, boy, you're Soldier #2. The one complaining about his wages.
Here's your spear. Get out there and make those good people laugh.
Posted by Altáriël of Dorthonion (Member # 6473) on :
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Scott,
I wasn't right to write, "I'll cast myself." Historical circumstances have conspired for me to play John the Baptist. I have decided to accept the nomination.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Why John the Baptist?
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
This thread isn't about me crying in the wilderness. The point at issue is the need for black economic control of cultural institutions which are supposed to serve blacks. ______
With regard to the disconnect between black Americans and formal education, there is another LDS analogy to be had: Seminary. Why is it the case that the LDS church has morning seminary for high schoolers? I imagine that this is even more important in areas where LDS are in the minority. I pressume, but this is a pure guess, that high school morning seminary addresses personal and community related issues unique to LDS, and are not duly dealt with at school. It's a form of steam control, and without it, formal schooling- eight to three schooling with a curriculum and priorities conceived by non-LDS-- would seem increasingly irrelevant.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: SoaPiNuReYe,
There is a difference between moneyed blacks and a real intelligentsia. I mean, C.J. Walker was rich, but I don't know if anyone should hold the world's first hairess as a model on how to cultivate the Talented Tenth.
Who cares if there's a difference? It doesn't matter who really is intelligent as long as it's a black guy writing the book in the publisher's eyes. The poor black man's story is a story most of America doesn't want to hear. The story is often filled with drugs, gangs, torn down schools, and other items that are mostly found in what Middle America calls 'The Ghetto'. Middle America will never be able to see the soul inside books like these, and that is why they don't sell well. Also, the very things named above often prevent poor black men from even writing the book in the first place. So to makeup for this lack of voice in the literature community, they get the only people that they can find, which is usually the rich black kid. There's too much disparity between the rich and poor black population for there to ever many true black voices in America. You talk about education, and how it is not suited to the black community. There are 5 high schools in my area that are majority black. As far as I can tell the education is tailored to them fine. I go to one of them. The school is fine, it's just that the kids don't have the will to learn, boy or girl. Even the rich kids are like this. Then when you go to places like where I live, you can see why they really don't care about schooling. There's drugs, gangs, violence, and the schools aren't always the best either. You are wrong about the death of the black intellectual however. There have been several powerful and influential black leaders in the past years. Chuck D, Common,and Bill Cosby to name a few. Nobody listens to these people however, that is the real problem.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: SoaPiNuReYe,
There is a difference between moneyed blacks and a real intelligentsia. I mean, C.J. Walker was rich, but I don't know if anyone should hold the world's first hairess as a model on how to cultivate the Talented Tenth. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who cares if there's a difference? It doesn't matter who really is intelligent as long as it's a black guy writing the book in the publisher's eyes. The poor black man's story is a story most of America doesn't want to hear. The story is often filled with drugs, gangs, torn down schools, and other items that are mostly found in what Middle America calls 'The Ghetto'.
The quality of the intellect writing the book does matter because no amount of poverty or degradation can make-up for the keen preception and historical insight that comes with thoughtful study. This is the reason why biographies are often more telling and compelling than auto-biographies. Maybe I can make this clearer, a veteran Marine may have seen all of the horrors that go along with this war, but it's distinctly possible that one keen-witted, clear-sighted private can write it down, in hard, vivid detail after glimpsing only one battle.
quote:You talk about education, and how it is not suited to the black community. There are 5 high schools in my area that are majority black. As far as I can tell the education is tailored to them fine. I go to one of them. The school is fine, it's just that the kids don't have the will to learn, boy or girl. Even the rich kids are like this. Then when you go to places like where I live, you can see why they really don't care about schooling. There's drugs, gangs, violence, and the schools aren't always the best either.
If the neighborhood is rife with drugs, gangs, and violence then the curriculum in school should address thoroughly and consistently, the issues that cultivate a culture of drugs, gangs, and violence. The extent to which the school curriculum ignores this is the extent to which the curriculum is disconnected with the community.
quote:You are wrong about the death of the black intellectual however.
For the record, I don't think that there ever was a vibrant intellectual life. Black people didn't have much in the way of an educational infrastructure until relatively recent times. The entire nation has suffered for it. I'm not waxing nostalgic on some idealized past. A black intelligentsia is only conspicuous in its absence.
I'm talking about an entire class of people, a swarm of state-sponsored thinkers, reading, teaching, writing, trading wisdom, revising and studying, you give me Chuck D, Common, and Bill Cosby: three guys, one last name, and a slang term for vulgar. They are the black equivalent of Michael Moore, maybe. We are in a bad way if this is what it's come to. Thankfully, I don't think that it's this bad. But the scene isn't good, either.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
quote: Seminary. Why is it the case that the LDS church has morning seminary for high schoolers? I imagine that this is even more important in areas where LDS are in the minority. I pressume, but this is a pure guess, that high school morning seminary addresses personal and community related issues unique to LDS, and are not duly dealt with at school. It's a form of steam control, and without it, formal schooling- eight to three schooling with a curriculum and priorities conceived by non-LDS-- would seem increasingly irrelevant. [/QB]
Seminary focuses of study of the scriptures and Church history.
It's held in the early morning so that (theoretically) one's head is clear and better able to retain the material studied.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Chuck D equivalent to Michael Moore? He is one of the most respected blacks of all time. He helped shape the black identity during the 90s. Sure he was radical, but he needed to be and he knew that.
How about Jesse Jackson? Nelson Mandela? Chinua Achebe? Walter Dean Myers? Muhammed Ali?
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Chuck D equivalent to Michael Moore? He is one of the most respected blacks of all time. He helped shape the black identity during the 90s. Sure he was radical, but he needed to be and he knew that.
How about Jesse Jackson? Nelson Mandela? Chinua Achebe? Walter Dean Myers? Muhammed Ali?
We are going to have to disagree about this. I'll email you a list of fiction and non-fiction authors you may want to look at if you want my opinion of people I consider to be thoughtful members of the anemic black intelligentsia.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
I don't really check my e-mail but you can if you want. If none of those people are on your list, then yeah, there's a pretty big disagreement here.
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: Scott,
I wasn't right to write, "I'll cast myself." Historical circumstances have conspired for me to play John the Baptist. I have decided to accept the nomination.
You don't get to pick. If you really believe that, you are a half-eaten sandwich short of a picnic. Either that, or you're an aspiring writer who is convinced they are in posession of the manuscript that will hearken a new era. I'll believe it when you can produce results that don't fit comfortably into a resume.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Irami....what you don't get, what you never get, is the fact that you could drop the "Black" right out of the title of this thread and it would not just be as accurate....it would be MORE accurate.
Intellectuals in general have been crying the same old song you are in this thread about almost every point you make....regardless of race.
You are upset you don't get to pick your own standard for books? Neither does anyone else who is trying to sell a story. If they did they would be the editor/publisher. You don't have enough representatives of your race owning publishing houses? Why don't they? Did anyone stop them, or does it just not interest them?
If it does, should they get a free pass to start one? No one else does....they have to earn respect, participate in the field and arrange funding. They have to prove that above all else they can publish books that sell, that make a profit.
People would have to buy it....and almost by definition these days anything that sells CAN'T be intellectual to meet your standards.
I know...how about we arrange quotas and MAKE people read it. And the government can foot the bill!
Wait, that wouldn't work either.....
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:The point at issue is the need for black economic control of cultural institutions which are supposed to serve blacks.
I think the existence of cultural institutions supposed to serve blacks is part of the problem.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Any school with black kids is a cultural institution that's supposed to serve blacks. Any theater in a black neighborhood is a cultural institution that's supposed to serve blacks. Any museum in a black community is a cultural institution that is supposed to serve blacks.
The liberal left integrationist assumption is that we can use the same curriculum devised by whites for whites, plays written by whites for whites, and museum content designed by whites for whites and have it be as timely and relevant. I don't think that's the case.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Any school with black kids is a cultural institution that's supposed to serve blacks.
No. It's a school that's supposed to serve children.
quote:The liberal left integrationist assumption is that we can use the same curriculum devised by whites for whites, plays written by whites for whites, and museum content designed by whites for whites and have it be as timely and relevant.
It must disturb you to realize that on this issue you agree strongly with the Ku Klux Klan.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I don't think so....I don't think Irami sees himself as a "liberal left integrationist".....at least that is what I got from that quote, anyway.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Accept, for a moment, your charge that the 'real black story' is not being told. Are you so convinced it is important? It is, as you have defined it, a story of poverty and powerlessness, things which you would surely like people to be getting away from. In making a rose, do you study the story of the fertiliser?
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:It is, as you have defined it, a story of poverty and powerlessness, things which you would surely like people to be getting away from.
It's not so much about poverty and powerlessness. It's a story of a perpetual minority in a proudly hyper-competitive majority ruled democracy, in a country with a cultural history of abusing it's privilege, kind of like being a Jew still living in Germany. Actually, I'd love to read stories about Jews still living in Germany or Poland. In theory, it shouldn't be any different than being an Teuton in Germany, but I think that there would be meaningful differences, due to historical factors.
If we take group dynamics seriously, as a perpetual minority, you aren't going to have as much money or brute influence, but that doesn't mean you need be poor and impotent. It's similar to being a woman. You aren't going to be the strongest or the richest, for reasons of biology or primogeniture, but the appeal is different, if for no other reason than it'll make you reevaluate the importance of being rich and powerful.
____________
The story of black Americans can be an insightful critique of modern democracy. With all of the talk surrounding and the blood spilled over installing secular democracies around the world, how it's worked out for black Americans in this land of plenty is a worthy subject, your mileage may vary.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Kwea, the point is that Irami is actually arguing for segregation.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
Thanks Sam. This really cleared up the whole debate for me. Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
There are merits of segregation, especially when it comes to ownership of artistic and cultural institutions. If the LDS had to rent their temples from Catholic landlords, I imagine there would be an LDS movement to buy the temples back, for good reason.
The economic, cultural, and political play between segregation and integration in a plural majority-ruled democracy can't justly be solved with a blithe laissez fair approach for two reasons: 1) money isn't the only motivator for cultural/economic institutions. We pretend that it is, but it's not. Sure, most publishers would rather make money than break even, but there are mitigating factors. There is a reason why O.J. Simpson's book was dropped, and it's not because it wouldn't have sold. If anything, the danger was that it would have sold too well. There is a reason why there are Christian publishers, and it's not the same reason that Willie Sutton robbed banks.
2) Group dynamics make it the case that when all else is equal and quite a bit is uncertain, in the marketplace of ideas, the owners are going to pick what appeals to them, and this isn't necessary a bad thing, but it does open up problems, especially for a perpetual minority in a majority-ruled society.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:1) money isn't the only motivator for cultural/economic institutions
Then why assume that it'll be the only determining factor? If people aren't motivated solely by money, surely people will also work against their own financial interest to help out valuable institutions -- for their own personal definition of "valuable," of course.
quote:but it does open up problems, especially for a perpetual minority in a majority-ruled society.
Oh, absolutely. Tell it to the obese atheist. But do I think we obese atheists should take our ball and go home -- or, as you're doing, demand that everybody else buy us a ball and a place to play? Hardly.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
I want a ball.
-pH
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Segragation? Sounds unpleasent and outmoded. I think we need to look beyond dualities a bit, but it will never happen in my lifetime. This sort of attitude really will not help people to evolve.
Posted by David Bowles (Member # 1021) on :
No, the answer is the destruction of the white majority. Even if there were separation of the two racial groups, the whites would continue to exploit the blacks and subjugate them... a new Black America would perforce need to trade and so forth with White America, and the UWSA would undoubtedly use its greater numbers and economic prowess (ill-gotten, of course, at the expense of minorities) to maneuver the UBSA into a second- or third-world level of economic subservience, much like the present USA does to Latin America and large chunks of the East and Middle East.
Just as the only way to eliminate US hegemony is to destroy this country, so the only way to eliminate the perfidious power of whites over blacks is to annihilate them altogether.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Doesn't that sound a little extreme to you? How about we start with a few more black publishers, black school boards, and prison officials who read these books and go to these schools.
I actually don't think that white politicians and owners are looking to exploit us any more than Roger Federer is looking to exploit Andy Roddick, he is just looking to win. If the Man has his foot on my neck, I really think it's so that he can get a better view of the stars and hasn't thought to notice where he is stepping.
A classic example of this is black participation in the Union movement over the last 100 years. What a complicated mess that is. Integrating the trade unions was a good idea, right up until we realized that since blacks came in with the lowest seniority, we just ended up creating more jobs for whites. Then the answer was black Unions, but liberal whites saw them as anti-integrationist and Communists saw them as denying the common "brotherhood of workers."
[ March 29, 2007, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by David Bowles (Member # 1021) on :
All-Black school boards? Stupid idea, unless the community is nearly 100% African-American. I live in an area that is > 90% Hispanic, and the school boards reflect this. Do you have statistics that you can point me toward that show a similar demographic representation is NOT happening in predominantly Black areas?
As for prison officials, I'd like to see a study that credible demonstrates that any dearth of African-American applicants for such positions is due to some sort of systemic barriers rather than, say, very few Blacks wanting the jobs... and of course I think a better focus for your concern would be lowering the percentage of prison inmates who are African American...
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:How about we start with a few more black publishers, black school boards, and prison officials who read these books and go to these schools.
That's what I said, and you can have all of the black publishers, black school boards, and black prison officials in the world, but unless you have a black intelligentsia, serving as the organizing force, you'll just get these awfully shallow ghetto-trash novels on one side, and on the other, black people spouting retread, class-based, white capitalist solutions-- or leftist critiques-- that are unable, unwilling, and intellectually ill-equipped to address the singular ethnic problem of the black situation in America.
I chose black publishers and black school boards as a plausible first step towards the long term goal of cultivating a black intelligentsia.
Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
Irami,
I think you would accept Henry Louis ("Skip") Gates, Jr. as one of your black intelligentsia.
Is it possible that the real crisis of the Negro intellectual is the growing anti-intellectualism (at least according to Jesse Jackson at the 2006 anniversary of Brown vs. the Board of Education) within black America? That a black man isn't "hard" if he's an intellectual? That the rappers, basketball players, and football players are far more glorified than the intellectual? Of course, my hypothesis is slightly biased since the number of college educated black American women is much higher than that of men, isn't it?
Compare this with the Jewish culture, which IMO, seems pro-intellectual. Or the white American culture, which seems neutral on being an intellectual, or at least very mixed between the people who do not revere an education and the people who do.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Gates is so so. I think he is a step better than Jackson, Pitts, et al., who think the whole problem is solved by forcing black families to go to church.
quote:Is it possible that the real crisis of the Negro intellectual is the growing anti-intellectualism (at least according to Jesse Jackson at the 2006 anniversary of Brown vs. the Board of Education) within black America?
The roots of black anti-intellectualism are complex and manifold. I don't know them all, but I can tell you a few. It starts in the situation of slavery, and then it becomes bone deep with Jim Crow. With Jim Crow laws, educated blacks fared worse for the awareness of the corruption of the American cultural, legal and economic system. They were resented by whites as uppity and dangerous, and they were estranged from blacks for bringing the evil eye of whites who were powerfully invested in and would forcefully maintain the status quo.
By educating blacks from 1860 to 1970, you risked awaking a lumbering, sleeping giant of a black righteous class that could argue the same fine points whites were using to maintain their authority. In peril, was the sanctity of our American institutions. Contrast this with non-slave immigrants. By and large, educating immigrants isn't going to make them distrustful of democracy, but by educating black people, you may show how the system had been used against them, disclosing the immorality of our American institutions(which are at best amoral), and then-- and this is the kicker-- ask them to participate, anyway.
The result is a disrespect for white authority and white laws, and since whites(and God) founded and maintained the nation's institutions, the aura of worldly lawlessness which abounds in black America. Whatever law is on the books of this country isn't our law, and that's the ethos explaining the high black incarceration rate. I'll be the first to say that I don't respect written law. That's why I can't get excited about law school or the ERA thread.
As a people, the struggle for our dignity wasn't won through black participation in formal education. It wasn't won through physics or chemistry. It was won through moral authority, and its the US' social and moral problems that need to be addressed before black people will abide by white institutions, I think. ______
Back in 1961, Neely Fuller said, "If you don't understand White Supremacy (Racism)--what it is and how it works, everything else that you understand will only confuse you."
The major disconnect between formal education and black youth is that formal education teaches "everything else" while black people, youth and adults, are still trying to figure out how some Man's foot got on their neck. For example, until I figure out how my doofus white male boss, who gets three times my salary, is in a position to be my doofus white male boss, I don't care about fractions.
[ March 30, 2007, 05:34 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:the US' social and moral problems that need to be addressed before black people will abide by white institutions, I think.
Perhaps it would be easier if you stopped thinking of them as white institutions...?
And you realize, of course, that doofus bosses are doofus bosses regardless of the race of the employer and the employee, right?
Posted by David Bowles (Member # 1021) on :
Well, Irami, I for one am reluctant to allow people in my society to ignore present law because some earlier iteration of it was used in to exploit their ancestors...
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:As a people, the struggle for our dignity wasn't won through black participation in formal education. It wasn't won through physics or chemistry. It was won through moral authority, and its the US' social and moral problems that need to be addressed before black people will abide by white institutions, I think.
Personally, I think that as long as this is your attitude, you haven't won at all; you've merely forced recognition that you have a right to dignity, which is a totally different concept.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Well, Irami, I for one am reluctant to allow people in my society to ignore present law because some earlier iteration of it was used in to exploit their ancestors...
We are only talking about a generation, if that. What's important isn't the actual laws, or even that it took another hundred years to get those laws enforced, but the fact that the system that created those initial laws is still in tact. The fixes for the race problem in America affected at a superficial level. We've treated the symptoms without treating the disease. There is something profoundly inadequate about majority rule democracy. There is something profoundly inadequate about posing as a capitalist meriocracy when in the end, positions are doled out by family relations, status symbols, sporting partners, fraternity brothers, college buddies, and pretty tall people. Lastly, there is something profoundly inadequate about having the balance of your life being determined by how well you study some other culture's curriculum. It's a little like worshipping a false idol.
The middle bit about the false capitalist meritocracy doesn't bother me so much, except that we are slow to admit it. And since we are slow to admit it, it creates a culture of hypocrisy and degrades the individual humanity of those not in the chosen groups.
If we just admitted that, "Hey, I don't like being around a fat atheist assistant. They are bad for my morale. I'd rather have this cute little former Catholic school girl, not only is she fun to look at, we can joke about going through cataclysm," or on the flip side, "Look, I know these tests are culturally biased, or at least morally uninvolved, but I don't have time to read these 5,000 essays, so just give me the highest 20, and we'll go from there to weed to five."
But instead, the employers or institutions run the fat atheist or low scoring candidate through all of these hoops, sometimes even recruit them, to give the appearance of a fair procedure. That way, the employer, the cute little chickie assistant, the high scoring sociopath, and the recruiter, are all confident in the justice in the world, and the people in the infelicitous groups are left feeling terribly, terribly uneasy. And if they are conscientious, even when they do happen to be in the right group, they understand that it's a contingent fact not based on what it's purported to be based.
[ March 30, 2007, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:and of course I think a better focus for your concern would be lowering the percentage of prison inmates who are African American...
The simplest way to do this, of course, is to lock up Whitey. Would you like to volunteer? Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
How about admitting the world isn't black and white....and I am not talking about just race as an issue.
Pardon the pun.
There IS a meritocracy....but it isn't absolute. Most things aren't, and while viewing them as such makes formulating opinions easier it doesn't mean those opinions are even close to the truth.
The best worker doesn't always get the job....but the best worker may not be what is needed, either. Even hear of the Peter Principle? Where you get promoted to the level of your utmost incompetence?
There is a blend, a mix of reasons, that people advance in the business world, in the world of finance, and in most other realms. Nothing is just because of favoritism, or race, or intelligence. It is a combination of factors....some in our control and some not.
But being a great worker, or student, or apprentice....whatever....makes you far more likely to advance to the next level, if that is what you want. It often is more of a meritocracy than it is anything else.
But if you don't play by the rules, stop whining about it. You aren't treated any different than anyone else who ignores the rules.
Most of your arguments sound exactly like the critiques of modern lit....the one dominated by whites, according to you....it is all Steven King and Dan Brown that sells rather than more intelligent fare......
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I just finished, "The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual," and it's easily the best historical analysis of the dilemmas put to ethnic blacks in America I've read.
It's a book of uneven quality, but the outstanding chapters are thoroughly compelling, insightful, and bold. His overall argument, that the radical solution to the current problems faced by the black community-- and to the structure of modern pluralistic democracy-- need to derive from a hitherto slim to non-existent class of black American scholars, and not imitators, and furthermore, that this class of scholars stand financially and politically independent from whites, is compellingly wrought.
quote: Most of your arguments sound exactly like the critiques of modern lit....the one dominated by whites, according to you....it is all Steven King and Dan Brown that sells rather than more intelligent fare......
But to suspicious extent, WASPs are still coasting on the dubious wisdom of the founders.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
No....PEOPLE are, as your complaints about the black people mentioned by others here in this very thread prove.
Even by your standards, which seem to be very similar to the complains of many educated white lit professors, there isn't a lack of popular black writers, but a lack of what YOU consider QUALITY black writers.
Popular doesn't equal intelligent writing to intellectuals of any color, and in fact popularity can hurt an authors standing in any intellectual community....
Regardless of the race of the author.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Does anyone one else just love the irony of this thread?
edit: I mean, there's just this huge disparity between who Irami seems to be saying are the only people he is talking to and the people who he actually is talking to.
[ April 13, 2007, 09:31 AM: Message edited by: MrSquicky ]
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:His overall argument, that the radical solution to the current problems faced by the black community-- and to the structure of modern pluralistic democracy-- need to derive from a hitherto slim to non-existent class of black American scholars, and not imitators, and furthermore, that this class of scholars stand financially and politically independent from whites, is compellingly wrought.
Is it similarly true that the problems faced by whites in America can only be solved by white scholars, who need to distinguish themselves from scholars of all other races?
It sounds to me that the overall argument of The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual is built upon a premise of racism.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:Is it similarly true that the problems faced by whites in America can only be solved by white scholars, who need to distinguish themselves from scholars of all other races?
To be fair, I'm not sure this is such a revolutionary idea (I'm referring to the "need to be solved" statement, not the rather different "can be solved" one). Historically, you could substitute any ethnic or cultural group and apply the same principle.
--j_k
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax:
quote:His overall argument, that the radical solution to the current problems faced by the black community-- and to the structure of modern pluralistic democracy-- need to derive from a hitherto slim to non-existent class of black American scholars, and not imitators, and furthermore, that this class of scholars stand financially and politically independent from whites, is compellingly wrought.
Is it similarly true that the problems faced by whites in America can only be solved by white scholars, who need to distinguish themselves from scholars of all other races?
It sounds to me that the overall argument of The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual is built upon a premise of racism.
I agree, although of course I don't think having more black business owners or publishers is a bad thing for anyone.
But I object to it if they only get the jobs because they are black, rather than on merit. I think that of there was a white man claiming that blacks being involved in these types of endeavors was diluting the power of the white man I would be just as offended.
Whites are NOT one group of people with a common agenda, and anyone who thinks otherwise is ignorant.
What is good for me isn't always good for the guy working at another store, regardless of his race.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)