Blackface, ebogjonson, and me

In a strange sense, ebogjonson and I are joined by blackface.

To be more precise, we're connected by our overlapping blogospheric histories of having taken on, as a de facto tag team, several high-profile incidents of blackface/racism on the intertubes. To my ears, ebogjonson is the blogosphere's most eloquent voice on the subject and his post "should I use blackface on my blog?" is among the most classic gems to be produced in this new media. As he says, "The advice for white people to stay away from the blackface is the kind of gift that just keeps on giving."

He also has another passage which I often quote: "...self-professed intent and racial virtue are largely irrelevant here, as the simple fact is that blackface and minstrels and house negroes are dangerously wild and crafty memes that have been laughing at intent and virtue for over 140 years. Anyone who has been paying the slightest attention to race in America knows that these are the sort of images that tend to slip out of a user's grasp almost immediately, so deliberately handling them constitutes a form of willful recklessness."

Admittedly, neither ebog nor I has had much to say about the recent spate of "ghetto parties" thrown by white college kids across America. Speaking only for myself, this is because these youthful displays of white supremacist ignorance have largely struck me as beneath contempt and worthy only of swift administrative punishment and social backlash.

Now we come to Shirley Q. Liquor, a phenomenon which I've been content to ignore for some time, but which continues to gather pop-culture steam. In an article in the Lexington Herald Leader, Gary Dauphin sets aside his unfiltered ebogjonson blogger-persona and gives the paper a slightly watered-down version of the "wild and crafty meme" soundbite in a form that they can run:

Shirley Q. Liquor draws fire because Knipp plays her as a bundle of all the worst stereotypes attributed to poor black welfare mothers. Shirley Q. -- Chuck Knipp in over-the-counter cosmetics intended for black women -- speaks with a free-flowing Ebonics syntax, prefacing all conversations with a pleasant "How you durrring?" She smokes and drinks and finds nothing wrong with some righteous shoplifting, though she doesn't usually miss church. The names of her children are inventive derivatives of venereal diseases and consumer goods. She sings, in free verse, about wanting to know "Who is my babydaddy?" She has her own version of The 12 Days of Christmas,The 12 Days of Kwanzaa.

She is also the one who had sold out mostly white, gay clubs regularly until protesters forced the cancellation of recent shows in Los Angeles; Hartford, Conn.; and New Orleans. She is the one selling a lot of spoken-word CDs, singing ringtones and T-shirts online.

She's not new. (In 1996, Shirley Q. Liquor ran for office in southeast Texas, hailing from the Cocktail Party and promising to reduce humidity by 50 percent.) But the heated nationwide debate around her in recent years has taken on new life in the wake of the protests and cancellations.

It's a cabaret show, Knipp reiterates. And while it's OK not to find Shirley Q. funny, to find her a symbol of Knipp's failure as a human being is wrong, he says.

"I don't think that black people should be exempt from parody," he says. "We should act like nothing is funny about any of them? That's a form of racism in itself." [...]

The debate over Shirley Q. Liquor -- for the most part previously confined to the black and gay media -- is about to spill over into the mainstream, with among other things a profile in Rolling Stone magazine. The issues have raised questions about whether Knipp is shining light on something that the rest of the country has politely refused to discuss for decades. It has called into question the motives, as well, of his audience. That is, if we laugh at Knipp, who are we deep down, anyway?

"Blackface is a charged and wild symbol," says journalist Gary Dauphin, who is black. "It gets out of your control quickly no matter your intentions."

Dauphin, a film critic for The Village Voice and for Essence and Vibe magazines, has written extensively on race and blackface. The problem with Knipp is that he doesn't realize that "things are bigger than his intentions," Dauphin says. "You have to have the maturity to say some things are bigger than me." [...]

Many in the black community, even when not backing Knipp, do not support Cannick's protest.

"I'm not interested in banning and boycotts," says Dauphin, the journalist, adding that he doesn't think Knipp is a racist, but "I do think he's being kind of a jerk."

Returning to non-respectable blogger-form, ebogjonson adds:

First off, I don't remember, but I hope that what I really said was "I do think he's being kind of an asshole," as that gets you closer to my thinking than the wan, family-paper-friendly phrase "jerk."

Second, I was a film critic for the Village Voice once upon a time. [...]

Lastly, it's not that I "do not support Cannick's protest," it's that "I'm not interested in banning and boycotts," especially media-related bannings and boycotts. I know I'm splitting a hair, and that I blog about media-related outrages all the time, but I'm pretty much of the First Ammendment absolutist, "bad speech calls for good speech" school. I also view the boycott as being most appropriate for addressing corporate, institutional or labor-practice level issues. Boycotting, like, a dude strikes me as being a bit like breaking-up with him; it's personal and involves dynamics of betrayal and rejection that make me hesitant to label my refusal to consume or patronize said dude's comedy a "boycott," this even if I get a 1000 other people to join me.

I also have to confess to long harboring a fear that we go after offensive images only after we've lost every possible other battle. (That, or we've won every other battle, and so have the leisure to focus on glamour outrages like who won an Oscar.) Happy-go-lucky media people tend to be more liberal, more susceptible to shaming and easier to stare down than, say, fundamentalist terrorists and warmongers who think god talks to them, and so whenever I meet a self-described "media activist" I'm like: what? Working on housing equality involve too much heavy lifting?

I agree. I have to admit I sometimes feel a wave of political tedium run through my limbs when I hear about the next media outrage and subsequent boycott/protest. Not that there's anything wrong with any form of anti-racist activism that anyone should choose to take up, indeed I applaud every ounce of effort being applied out there. But I share ebog's fear of losing focus, of becoming a "lightweight anti-racist", of getting too comfortable with ritualized media floggings to give proper attention to the deep structural issues of housing and employment and the court-prison system and imperialist war and so on.

As always, it's probably a matter of balance. Every progressive activist constantly confronts such an overwhelming list of important matters to spend energy on. I suppose it's up to each of us to select a mix of projects which reflects our most deeply held priorities and beliefs, which maximizes our effectiveness, and which gives us a good feeling about how we're spending our time on Earth.

When it comes to Shirley Q. Liquor and ghetto parties and blackface TV, I suppose we must simply continue to emphasize to all who will listen the long glaring history of white supremacy that makes these cultural constructs regressive and divisive, and to keep on keepin' on as many other fronts as we can take on as well, working together in the great progressive bucket line: handing down heavy buckets of water to be thrown at a world on fire.

Comments

[Yolanda Carrington]

It's impossible to go after every cultural instance of white supremacy, there's just too damn many of them. If I went after all the shit that goes down in my hometown alone, I'd never get anything else done. But like you said, it's about balance.

By the way, have you heard about this bullshit racist trend on YouTube? I was just told about it only last week. Really fucked up.

[atlasien]

Thanks for helping promote the CKY=KKK site Y. Carrington!

It just boggles my mind that so many creative hours from hundreds of people have been poured into lipsyncing, editing, creating and uploading these racist videos.

I believe it's important to keep protesting blackface, yellowface and colorface. Otherwise people become too comfortable and complacent with cultural appropriation and "user-friendly" racism.

[Carmen Van Kerckhove]

Wow so much food for thought here. I share those fears too, Kai. I'm gonna ruminate on this one - just wanted to drop a quick note.

[Kai]

Carmen, well I must admit I was kinda nervous that you'd take offense at this post, but I suppose you know by now how much I support New Demographic. Good to hear that you're turning these things over in your head too.

Yolanda, atlasien, actually I somehow missed this phenomenon. Yeah these idiots are racist losers who wish they knew something about Chinese language or culture. Sorry, dumb asses, you lose: I have a feeling they'll be regretting this soon enough, like all those kids in blackface on Facebook. Sometimes one stupid move can haunt you for many years, ruin reputations and careers, relegate you to a life of misery. So it goes. ;-) In other words, I don't think it's enough to get YouTube to take these clips down; I think the faces of all participants should be captured and circulated and labeled as virulent racists who have no place in any responsible corporation or NGO or any other entity that does not want to be explicitly connected with racism. So yeah, I might take your bait and post something about it, and you know me, it won't be nice. No promises, though, we'll have to see. :-D

[Donna Darko]

proper attention to the deep structural issues

it's probably a matter of balance

we had this discussion last year at reappropriate and the conclusion was the same as yours. balance. it seems people get reeled into structural analyses with the more surface incidences. if you look at racialicious or feministing, the tyra, black hair, ice cream or models posts get the most comments while serious posts on harry allen or technology, gender and race posts get no comments.

[Donna Darko]

young women are turned off by serious feminist issues and come to feminism through this trojan horse method. young people of color may become interested in structural analyses the same way. i didn't come to feminism or anti-racism this way but this seems to be the norm.

[Donna Darko]

harry allen brought home the fact art and politics are separate. white men and women listen to hip hop but it doesn't necessarily make them less racist. the cosby show masked structural problems in the black community. pop culture and music start the conversation but politics and anti-racist education are more important.

[Colin]

Kai,

I personally don't agree. I feel more like atlasien does, fighting white supremacy in the media is just as important to me as the fight against the structural inequities in our society. My feeling is that the media and their depictions of different groups and societal strata are important parts of how we see each other and how all political decisions get made in this country now.

That said, we should be getting anti-racism in the mainstream media more than the colorblind BS that is propagated by so much of today's so-called leaders so that we can frame and prime the policy debate in more humane and anti-racist ways. To take it further, I feel that unchecked, promoted, fad racism in the media is one of the greatest forms of institutionalized white supremacy and it affects massively all other forms of such racism. Therefore, I do not think people who attack and take on the white-owned, white-dominated, white supremacist media are in any way "lightweight"; their battles might not be the MOST important, but I hesitate to demean media battles as mere quibbles or the actions of a person who's "losing focus". I hope I haven't taken you out of context, but it seems like you think attacking policies and institutions is more important than attacking the media and culture that fosters the opinions and beliefs for such institutions to exist.

--------------------------------

I also do not agree with ebogjohnson (can I call you ebog?) on protests and boycotts. I think you're dismissing the right to assemble (also 1st Amendment) right off the bat, though that's really neither here nor there.

To add to that, I don't get how a righteous boycott against racist imagery promulgated through the mass media can't be part of an effective strategy to limit the effects of people like Knipp and their hateful ignorance on American minds and, down the line, policymaking. I don't see how it's not "good speech" to their "bad speech" to encourage people to turn away from him and explain why to turn away.

I lastly disagree with this comment: "...And so whenever I meet a self-described "media activist" I'm like: what? Working on housing equality involve too much heavy lifting?", and I don't think you're some mean ole asshat or something, but in all seriousness, when I read this all I could think myself was, "What will you do when the same prevailing attitudes and beliefs behind the racist housing system manifest themselves in new way?"

That's all I could think of, when one problem seems to simmer down for a bit structurally or legally, somehow someway it finds it way back to the surface under a new name, and I can only wonder "how much of the same old, same old is enough"?

[Kai]

Colin, I agree with you entirely. I hope I never claimed that media activism (in which I regularly take part) cannot be part of broad structural anti-racism. Indeed the whole premise of this post is that ebog and I are "joined" by our railing against racist media depictions in the form of blackface. And I think if you re-read ebogjonson's full post (especially the last paragraph in which he says that he himself is essentially a "media activist" and is being self-deprecating in his criticism of such), and my own comments on "balance" among different forms of activism, you'll see that all of us are really not in much disagreement. I didn't mean to demean the importance of media activism, nor the signifance of mass media in promulgating other forms of racism. I hope I didn't come off as condescending toward any particular type of activism (I was a little concerned about that, actually). But my sense right now is that we're kind of on the same page here. We need media activists, just as much as we need lawyers working on correcting or reforming the prison system, just as much as we need protesters in the streets denouncing police brutality against people of color, etc. The fear of becoming a "lightweight anti-racist" is not the same as denouncing anyone in particular for such; it's just a fear, possibly even unjustified; yet nonetheless expressed in my post and ebog's and even Carmen's comment. Or at least that's the way I see it at the moment.

Anyway thanks for your comment.

[Colin]

Okay, sorry for misinterpreting your comments like that. Maybe I need to work on how I interpret things people say a bit better, then. When I read the words "lightweight anti-racist", I got the feeling that you thought someone focused on media activism is some how weak-minded and/or unprincipled as compared to those fighting the structures of racism, and it seems like we agree that would be a poor conclusion to come to.

[Donna Darko]

patricia hill collins called media stereotypes "controlling images" that depict marginalized groups a certain way. controlling images are one of the most powerful ways to continue subjugating less powerful groups.

the deep structural issues of housing and employment and the court-prison system and imperialist war and so on

but like i said last year, all our efforts seem to be in combating these stereotypes and about half our efforts should be targeting deep structural issues like housing, employment, the prison industry, imperialist war and so on.

[Donna Darko]

White-distributed hip hop and the white-produced Cosby Show are not anti-racist. Cultural productions are only anti-racist when they are produced by blacks, Asians and so on. If and when authentic cultural productions make it to the mainstream and there are no more controlling stereotypes, there are still myriad structural issues that must be attended to.