Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Cultural Transformation and Our Personal Lives

Returning to Tuesday's class in which I discussed the dynamics of cultural transformation and how such transformation generally occurs on the fringes of collectivities...

When we encounter the "change makers" in a culture, more often than not they're people who have moved away from the mainstream and sought out ways to think outside the box. Most of us, most of the time, aren't doing that; we're smack dead in the middle of schools of fish carrying us through the well travelled and comfortable waters (that we don't even see as H2O). Einstein wasn't a professor or a student in some top physics program when he envisioned his theories, for example. Those professors would have scoffed at his imaginative discoveries and likely would have lured him into their unimaginative clutches for fear of not belonging. But his independence from the judgement of those he admired allowed him to follow his own call and create a new way of seeing the world.

As I think about all of the sub-cultural groups into which I'm embedded and that cajol me to continue to be a supporting actor in my own life, I'm constantly struck by how much I think inside the boxes that are all around me. I dress like my colleagues; I eat most of the same foods and dishes as others around me; I carry the thoughts that are similar to those of my friends; my music is a mix of the styles to which I've been exposed. That's an interesting example, by the way. I was recently listening to classical Chinese music and it didn't arouse my senses. So I kept listening...and still nothing. Why not? What am I missing by not hearing a synthesis between those melodic tones and the others that clearly appeal to me. I could be sitting on the most intriguing and dynamic fusion of sound that I could ever encounter, one that would open in my mind some amazing breakthrough idea about life -- but I don't hear it because maybe, just maybe I'm too stuck in the center of some familiar cultural system.

I understand that this is normal, that this is inevitable, that this happens to everyone. But I'm searching for dynamic wisdom...for something much larger than myself Maybe that's just me.

Check out this video:

Sunday, September 6, 2009

What Are They Thinking?

In this electronic image of a poster with head shots of U.S. Presidents, take a look at the "photo" that was selected for Obama. Let me help you. Check out the lower right-hand corner. The image was a joke sent out in an email by an aide in the Tennessee state legislature. I think you can assume that the aid was a GOP staff member--but don't be fooled to think that there are no Democratic aides that would make a similar blunder.

This goes into the file labeled, "What in the world were they thinking?" I'm torn between assuming, on one hand, that the people who end up in this file are just a few knuckleheads AND that this is emblematic of the depth of racism in our society on the other. (People really do seem to make a lot of racist jokes...or so I've heard.)

Here's another one for the file.

Shortly after the arrest of Henry Louis Gates, Jr., a Boston police officer and member of the Massachusetts National Guard sent out an email--and to lots of people, I should add--in which he called Gates a "banana eating jungle monkey." Ouch.

By the way, there is a sub-folder in this file that is titled "What the F are they thinking?" and this one probably goes there. The police office, Captain Justin Barrett (he's not a twenty year old rookie), asserted that he felt remorse and was sorry for the email and that he is not racist because, afterall, he has friends from all racial and ethnic backgrounds. "It was a poor choice of words," Barrett said. "I didn't mean it in a racist way. I treat everyone with dignity and respect."

Can I disentangle this just a bit. It seems to me that if I went to a KKK meeting and asked someone in a hood to define "negro," they just might say something like, "Negro? Why yes, son, that would be a 'banana eating jungle monkey'." What else would they possibly say that would be acceptable to the racist hoards waiting to reclaim the country from the brown skinned barbarians?

Here's another one for the WTF file:



Unfortunately, this guy only had the funds to pay an entry level, mail order public relations clean-up person and so he couldn't come up with something more convincing than blaming it on supporters of Charles Darwin. That was a pathetic attempt to spin this slip and it went nowhere. My god, brother, have some respect for our intellect.

I find myself saying some pretty off-the-hook things at random moments and yet I never seem to slip into this level of racist banter. I guess since I don't have the thoughts, the words never leave my lips. But I have to wonder if this how many of us think in our private moments. And then when these private moments get loose in the public domain, they spin about until we're all dizzy with the feeling of impending dread of having to suffer another media circus.

Sometimes the "attack of the racists" goes a bit too far -- like the condemnation of the poor schmuck who a few years back correctly and unwisely used "niggardly" in a meeting among colleagues. He got hammered pretty hard because his office mates didn't know what the word meant. (Of course, he might have been baiting them because without the "dly" the word is pronounced just like the N-bomb.)

Other times, however, I suspect that people who engage in what is so obviously offensive and racist behavior clearly deserve what they get. "We don't give a damn if it's part of your cultural heritage; we don't do that any more." Sure there can be a very fine line between these two reactions, and I don't want to be the judge of who crosses it. But sometimes enough if enough.

Friday, September 4, 2009

Saturday, August 29, 2009

Political Correctness or Blatant Racism?


Microsoft in Web photo racism row Click on link if you would like to read an article about this.

So someone at Microsoft decided that a black man in an advertisement directed at Polish consumers is not a good idea. Or perhaps I should say "a black man's head," since his hands were fine.

If this had happened in the United States, I think it's probably more likely that the "photoshopping" would have occurred in the opposite direction--a white guy would have been replaced by a black guy. "We can't have a photo without at least one woman and one person of color, afterall." Given that this was directed at Polish consumers, however, I have to imagine that someone made a calculation about how much "color" would be acceptable to that very white population. I spent two months in Poland and it is clearly the "whitest" locale that I've ever visited--even whiter than the BJC during THON. (Can't we do something about that, by the way.)

Here's another way to think about this. Companies shift their advertising to appeal to different markets all the time. An ad for buses in San Francisco might have an Asian woman, for example, while the exact same advertisement for Memphis or Miami buses would replace the model with a black woman in Memphis and an Hispanic woman in Miami. Is that racist? Someone decided that a black person will be less appealing to Polish consumers. Would you use photos of straight couples in your advertisements in LGBT magazines? Sometimes, no doubt, but you'd more often opt for a gay or lesbian scene.

At the heart of the Microsoft issue is that they cut out the black man's head and replaced "it" with one from a straight up white guy. It just feels raw. Maybe the event got press simply because the manipulation that drives the advertising dimension of marketing was exposed for what it is...manipulation. And maybe it's because when companies shift the "cultural inflections" in their ads, it feels right. But when they do the same thing with "race" it comes across as disingenuine. And maybe, just maybe, all of those people sitting around the table in that photo represent one single culture -- corporate culture. To tell one of them that he has to "relinquish his seat at the table because of his race" is...well...racist. Isn't that what racism is?

But really, don't accept my interpretation of this Microsoft debacle. What do you think?

Saturday, August 22, 2009

How the Great Beer Summit Failed



If you didn't hear about the "beer summit" and the events that led to it, then clearly you were not paying attention to the mainstream media during the latter part of the month of July. Henry Louis Gates, Jr., a very famous and well known professor to any regular viewer of PBS television, was arrested on his front porch by a police officer near (or actually on) the Harvard campus. CLICK FOR: summary of events.

We're not particularly interested in debating who was "right" and "wrong" in this mess, nor whether the arrest was fueled by racial profiling or racism. What is interesting is the follow-up and it's impact on race relations. So is this it? We give two aggrieved parties a beer and, as Laurie Mulvey says in the video, they agree to disagree and we call it "dialogue"?

Tell us what you think about what she's saying. Is the event (and the spillover) indicative of our need for racial dialogue and racial healing...or is it merely another case of a small incident getting blown out of proportion by mass media outlets in search of sales?

Thursday, April 16, 2009

When Does a Conversation Step Over the Line?



How Jewish is Hollywood?


A few weeks ago we discussed African American elites and their privileged place in the socioeconomic hierarchy of the United States? Interesting conversation and one worth having. Here is another...

From the early days of the founding of this country, a belief running through this largely Christian culture has been that Jews are an enemy of the christian churches, will suffer the displeasure of God until they accept Jesus, and in more recent years, are members of a group that is intent on bringing down the United States government. Jewish people, many god fearing Christian Americans assert, and some very powerful ones at that, control both the banking and entertainment sectors of our society.

For those of you who do not know the history, and I'll assume that this represents most of you, the Christian churches have always had a rather rancorous relationship with Jewish people. In spite of the fact that Jesus lived and died as a Jew, and presumably will still be a Jew when/if he ever returns. In spite of the fact that early followers of Christ who wrote the Christian New Testament all considered themselves to be Jewish throughout their lives (yes, I'm not kidding). Jewish Christians turned against their Jewish brethren and throughout the years painted members of this group as the persecutors and murderers of Jesus--not the Romans. Why this happened is an interesting story, and one that I'll leave you to explore if you have any inclination to do so.

But the bottom line is that Jewish people have long suffered the wrath of Christians with long (albiet distorted) memories and short tempers...and a predilection to savage and brutal behavior. Martin Luther, for example, perhaps the most important figure in the emergence of Protestantism, wrote the script for Adolph Hitler. "Round up the Jews, the scourge of civilization, and put them in work camps or kill them," is essentially what he said. (Here's a summary.)

So it is with this in mind that I'm led to the current posting about the prevalence and power of Jewish moguls in Hollywood. Keep in mind that Hollywood does not determine this culture -- even though it certain plays a role in how we see ourselves as a people. To understand my reluctance to post the article one only has to read some of the comments that readers made about it. Some are thoughtful and considered, but all too many demonstrate a near total lack of understanding of a very complex issue. For those in this group, the article merely confirms their anti-Semitic thinking.

So when is it acceptable to open up a "pandora's box" of bigotry and misinterpretation? A few years back the Jewish Theological Seminary sponsored a coffee table book that described how Hollywood is run by Jewish people. It is called "Entertaining America," in case you're interested. Hmm... Check out the article and reflect on the implications.