What Would James Baldwin Say About All This ‘Monkey Business?’
Posted By The Editors | March 6th, 2009 | Category: The Drinking Gourd | 11 comments
Print This Post
By Stacey Patton
I’ve been contemplating the resurgence of all of these antebellum-era stereotypes about black Americans, whether it was expressed by some Atlanta-based redneck selling tee-shirts of President Obama as “Curious George ,” a Greenwich Village baker cooking up “Drunken Negro Head” cookies, the New York Post printing a racist cartoon of Obama as a chimpanzee being shot dead by police officers, or an angry Barnes and Noble customer slipping a monkey book into a display window with other titles celebrating Obama’s journey to the White House.
In these instances, I found myself conspicuously devoid of anger. I couldn’t muster the energy to join a protest or express disgust about the perversity of those sick individuals, nor did I want to.
After all, white racists have been comparing black folks to apes, monkeys, gorillas and other kinds of primitive animals since before slavery was even codified in the legal and social structure of this nation. History has taught us that whenever African-Americans assert themselves politically, socially and economically and shatter myths about their alleged inferiority, they become targets for the projections and distortions of others who are trapped in their own fear of lost identity and status.
As a student of history, I’ve learned to analyze white images of black people and divorce myself from them. I look at them and say, I don’t look like that. I don’t know any black people who look like that. President Obama does not look like a monkey or chimpanzee. These images don’t reveal any truth about black people’s humanity. Instead, I look at them and ask, what do these images say about the people who created them?
James Baldwin
I have James Baldwin, one of America’s most prolific authors and social critics of the 20th century, to thank for that lesson. In 1963, on the 100th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, Baldwin wrote a lengthy letter to his 14-year-old nephew James on how to handle white racism.
He wrote: “The details and symbols of your life have been deliberately constructed to make you believe what white people say about you. Please try to remember that what they believe, as well as what they do and cause you to endure, does not testify to your inferiority but to their inhumanity and fear.”
While I understand that it is important for African Americans, and all good-natured Americans for that matter, to be vigilant about confronting racism, Baldwin’s lesson should be heeded by all. African Americans especially need to stop internalizing the distortions of others and wasting so much energy fighting the ideas of others, ideas that can never be killed, as our long contentious history of race relations has proven.
Understand that all these images aren’t really about us. Baldwin put it elegantly to his nephew: “Try to imagine how you would feel if you woke up one morning to find the sun shining and all the stars aflame. You would be frightened because it is out of the order of nature. Any upheaval in the universe is terrifying because it so profoundly attacks one’s sense of one’s own reality. Well, the black man has functioned in the white man’s world as a fixed star, as an immovable pillar: and as he moves out of his place, heaven and earth are shaken to their foundations.”
Let them call us monkeys! For god’s sake, we have the White House. And accept that we are neither a post-racial nor a post-ignorant society. Expect, now more than ever, to witness these expressions of hate and stupidity.
We need to embrace Baldwin’s wisdom and put our energies to better use. Take to the streets and protest for better schools in urban areas where the dropout rates among black students are astounding. Protest inside our communities where black-on-black murder among young men is sabotaging our future. Boycott black rappers and producers who insist on degrading black women in their lyrics. Protest the ignorance that breeds sickness, poverty, homophobia, and other ills plaguing our communities.
And as Baldwin wrote to his nephew, these racists are “still trapped in a history which they do understand; and until they understand it, they cannot be released from it.” And for blacks, who internalize all this hate, “you can only be destroyed by believing that you are what the white world calls a nigger.”
Stacey Patton is Senior Writer/Editor for TheDefendersOnline and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
Mission Critical: Succeeding at Black America’s Last Chance
International Women’s Day: Crossing Bridges for Women Around the World
Detroit Diary: Don’t Leave Young Workers Behind
Black History Month is Over. But Should it be?
Cartoon: March 12, 2010
AIG Lenders Pay For Discriminating Against Blacks
Victory, For Now, For Gay Marriage in D.C.
“Precious” and the Oscars
We’re Not the Na’vis: The True Ecology of Avatar
The Abdication of Desirée Rogers
Top 25 African-American Films of All Time
Sarah Rector: The Richest Colored Girl in the World
My Top 10 African-American TV Shows of All Time
‘If You Learned It, Then You Should Have Got an A On It’
What the Amy Bishop Case Says About Race and Crime
‘I Can’t Believe You Brought Home a White Boy’
A Fun Face?
Chemical Relaxers: The Facts Might Not Be So Relaxing
Black Farmers Settlement Fund: Now you see it, now you don’t
From Orange Mint and Honey to Sins of the Mother: The Power of Story Endures
LDF Defends Chicago Black Firefighters
Is That Your Child? Mothers Talk About Rearing Biracial Children
Will the ‘Real’ Michelle Obama Please Stand Up?
Mental Health Parity 2010
You say: “In these instances, I found myself conspicuously devoid of anger. I couldn’t muster the energy to join a protest or express disgust about the perversity of those sick individuals, nor did I want to.” Mentioning in fact the NY Post cartoon editorial.
Yet in your related links you post: http://thedefendersonline.org/2009/02/19/calls-to-shut-down-new-york%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cracist-rag%E2%80%9D/
and in it you write; “With less than 24 hours to mobilize, a boisterous throng of nearly 1,000 protestors and civil rights activists held the first in a planned series of city-wide demonstrations to condemn the New York Post for publishing a violent and racially offensive cartoon about President Barack Obama.”
First the cartoon was not in any way about the President but the fact that you state that the cartoon is violent and racially offensive and claim that it in fact is about the President shows a sense of your lack of journalistic integrity. In the above story you claim a sense of detachment from the silliness and in another your in the eye of the storm conveying the sense of protest as legitimate and even repeating the biased language. Clearly you mustered the energy to find this event newsworthy and clearly you express disgust by using the loaded language in the article that you did. So in essence you are being disingenuous.
Dear Thaddeus,
Thank you for your comment. We appreciate your readership and diligent attention to the details of our content.
Before you attack my “journalistic integrity” or label me “disingenous” for what you see as a contradiction, please understand the context in which these two stories: “Calls to Shut Down New York’s Racist Rag 2/19/09″ and this most recent piece are presented.
You are comparing a news story and an editorial piece. First, you are correct to note that in the piece on the New York Post cartoon I was clearly in the “eye of the storm conveying the sense of protest.” This is what a successful news story is supposed to do. But nowhere in my piece did I explicitly say that the protest was “legitimate,” as you assert. And second, if there is “biased language” in the story, then it was conveyed through the quotes from the protesters themselves. What I felt about the protest is a mute point. I was not there to participate or pass judgement, but to report the facts.
In the above editorial piece, I did not “claim a sense of detachment from the silliness,” as you contend. Instead, I sought to engage in a bit of reflection by exploring the wisdom of James Baldwin, a literary genius who wrote about these very same issues in the 1960s. There is brilliance in Baldwin’s letter to his nephew, which can be extracted and applied so that we can transcend the “silliness,” as you described it, and be selective about the battles we choose to wage so that we don’t deplete or destory our psychic core.
In the traditional print news environment, editorial writers rarely, if ever, write news stories and reporters don’t write editorials on the news topics they cover. However, the blogosphere is a new media species that has changed the rules. Blogging is a new form of journalism that blends reporting and editorializing in new ways.
The Editors and Writers of TheDefendersOnline are engaging in a form of advocacy journalism, one which is consistent with LDF’s mission ” . . . to pursue racial justice to move our nation toward a society that fulfills the promise of equality for all Americans.” We don’t pretend to be objective, detatched or unbiased. We are, however, honest, accurate and fair.
Again, we appreciate your comments and readership. And we look forward to hearing more from you. Stay tuned for more provocative content from TheDefendersOnline.
Stacey Patton
Senior Editor
Loved your post, Stacey. BTW – I thought your readers would be interested to know that whites – specifically, Irish immigrants to America in the 19th century – were often depicted as monkeys and apes. Nazi Germany depicted Jews as rats. And so it goes. . .
Thaddeus – take another look at the N.Y. Post cartoon.
You say: ‘if there is “biased language” in the story, then it was conveyed through the quotes from the protesters themselves. What I felt about the protest is a mute point.’
Wrong again in the Post “newstory” you say: ‘…held the first in a planned series of city-wide demonstrations to condemn the New York Post for publishing a violent and racially offensive cartoon about President Barack Obama.’ If you don’t think saying the cartoon is racially offensive, “reporting” it as a fact, is biased language then you need to go back to journalism school. Also it’s moot point not mute point. Did it incite offense amongst people of certain demographics? Certainly, but that doesn’t make the cartoon racially offensive. Perhaps wording it as: “the cartoon which caused offense because &c. &c”. There is a difference and it does matter, especially if the goal as you state is to advance the society to fulfill the promise of equality for all — using loaded language in your “reporting” does not advance the conversation it simply takes a side and digs its heels in.
Finally you go through all that trouble to say you’re not biased only to end your piece with essentially saying this is a blog and so it’s biased deal with it. That’s no way to respect your readership. I’m sure this won’t get posted since you pay so much attention to comments that I’m sure you’ll personally delete anyone attacking your “credibility”.
Also Eric – I did look at the cartoon again, it still didn’t change the fact that the stimulus bill was written by the democrats in Congress and not the President. Perhaps you should take another look at those Saturday morning cartoons on how a bill becomes a law.
Hello Thaddeus,
It’s wonderful to hear from you again : )
You wrote: “I’m sure this won’t get posted since you pay so much attention to comments that I’m sure you’ll personally delete anyone attacking your “credibility.” We have a wonderful Web Technician who monitors all comments. And unless they are “off topic, inappropriate, derogatory or highly offensive” we respect the input of ALL of our readers and post their comments on the site. I am way too busy to be trolling the comments section.
Your input is always welcomed, Thaddeus. Perhaps you just might be able to teach me a thing or two about how to be a “credible” journalist/blogger. By the way, maybe you should post a link to your blog in the comments section or we can add it to our blog roll. I’d love to see your journalistic work. And if you don’t have a blog then I’m extending an open invitation to you. Write some pieces for us!
By the way, I do appreciate you correcting me for using “mute” instead of “moot.”
Journalistically yours,
Stacey Patton
You wrote: “I am way too busy to be trolling the comments section.” Apparently not since you are doing just that. You seem to have a conflict between how you perceive things and reality as is apparent in this post.
I certainly could teach you a thing or two about credibility as I teach journalism for a profession. I would provide you a link to my blog, but I actually am too busy –teaching others how to be good journalists. If only there were enough hours in the day to indulge someone playing one on the internet. Thank you for the invitation to “blog” for you but I think I’ll pass.
I do appreciate your attempts at sarcasm though. ‘A’ for effort.
Get a life! Real professors don’t waste time like this. If you are so busy teaching other people how to write then you wouldn’t be on this blog spewing your negativity. You probably don’t even have a blog and you’re probably just some bitter loser who hasn’t really accomplished anything worthy. Keep up the great work LDF! Don’t waste your time with these cyber fools. Remember J.B.’s message. I’ve always had great respect for LDF. It’s nice to see you all on the Internet, spelled with a capital “I” Mr. no blog having wannabee journalism professor.
Peace,
GLF
Mr. Franklin, as I stated above I don’t have a blog and for a very specific reason. There’s no need to lose your composure over my comments pointing out very valid issues with the so-called reporting. Had I not received junk mail inviting me here I would have never taken the trouble to comment. As long as I continue to get these amusing missives in my inbox then I will continue to point out their faults with or without your insults.
Thaddeus,
Usually when I get junk mail or invites I just delete them. I don’t click on the site, make comments and then keep coming back to see what other people have to say. I’m sure you can always opt out of this site.
What if Obama does look like a monkey? Why are black people so afraid to look like other primates? White people look like monkeys too. You know why? Cuz we are monkeys. We are in the same genus- I believe that is the correct classification.
I’ll tell you something. Once I saw a photo of a shaved dog that looked just like my husband, who is white. In fact, I know many people who look like their dogs. I think white people sort of look like dogs. If I had to choose which species to more closely resemble, I would pick monkey over dog. But so what- humans are animals. We are animals. If you believe Darwin.
White people also look like hairless horses. But more like dogs. But that doesn’t make them inferior. People are so unwilling to face the fact that we are all animals. Unique animals, but animals. Maybe if we realized that-we’d stop eating them. Animals that is.
Now, are black people inferior to white people? No. Are we lower on the “evolutionary chain”? No. Many White people tend to be a bit insane about race, but insanity is usually about some trauma, some emotional and spiritual pain. It would be laughable if crazy people weren’t so damn dangerous. Do you think Nazis and Clansmen are respectable, reasonable and sane people? No? Insanity. Madness. Like I said, I would feel sorry for them if they weren’t so damn dangerous. So we poor non crazy white black latin asian arab people have to sit and figure out how to cure the nuts before they start another holocaust or something. That’s the depressing part.
I come late to this discourse (as a writer of fiction, eye am tempted to say “dis course” but for fear of a Thaddean curse will refrain–perhaps you will see fit to correct my first person pronoun usage)…in any case, hiding behind such pristine distinctions–linguistic or otherwise–masks the true content of this story.
Of course (dat course?) Murdoch’s elitist ragsheet was aware of the connections, conscious or below-the-surface, which would follow from such visual imagery. Forget the words; they are Mr. T’s way of hiding from the truth: the visual imagery, as indeed the language, is subjectively perceived. No one familiar with our culture and history could deny such connective tissue, save those “disingenuous” journalists who maintain the pretense of objectivity in language. Fools they be (and the disingenuousness is wholely (holy?) reflected by Mr. T in his shallow and obvious attempt to find flaw with an honest expression of thought and feeling. It is always so much easier to pick around the edges than to deal with substance. (By the way Ms. Patton, on first reading, I wasn’t sure whether it was a minor language oversight–for the meaning was not only clear, but unaltered in either spelling–eye actually prefer MUTE in that phrase–or a very clever wordplay. Moot of course has it’s most common context in the law…but that is by now a mutedly moot point.) Deal with the issues Mr. Professor, not inane and unproductive verbal pot-shots which do nothing constructive to further the discussion.We understand that you will be too busy to reply to such rubbish as this, and we are greatly comforted by a mute Mr. T. People must recognize that all of us have a unique perspective and a unique manner of expression…to be valued, not belittled by a pseudo-intellectual elitist, obviously in need of self-congratulation (if not self-medication). Go back on your valium if you have nothing constructive to offer.The true notion of diversity embraces difference, values other ways of both seeing and being. I leave with a great quote from Helen Keller, telling off the rich editors who called her a dupe of the left because they didn’t like and couldn’t counter the SUBSTANCE of her views: “If I cannot see the fire at the end of your cigars, neither can you thread a needle in the dark.” I would suggest to Mr. T. that he spend some of that prodigous free time learning to thread a needle in the dark….It shouldn’ be all that difficult: he has already mastered thinking in the dark.