The author and speaker in this TED talk, “Nina Jablonski says that differing skin colors are simply our bodies’ adaptation to varied climates and levels of UV exposure. Charles Darwin disagreed with this theory, but she explains, that’s because he did not have access to NASA.”
http://https://www.ted.com/talks/nina_jablonski_breaks_the_illusion_of_skin_colorVideo Link
African American writer Rich Benjamin spent two years living in — and writing about — America’s whitest neighborhoods. The response to his book (and TED Talk) was honest, raw — and sometimes misunderstood his purpose. Here, he responds to the response.
Some quotes to think about:
“From Daniel Patrick Moynihan to Jonathan Kozol, there’s a wealth of literature by white experts trying to explain “the ghetto” to America. I had simply done the reverse. As a black thinker and writer, I interpret and explain mainstream white America back to itself.”
“I saw a culture driven by conscious and unconscious bias; I learned that a country can have racism without racists”.
“Many Americans dismiss racial integration as a form of “social engineering,” the opposite also holds true: Segregation is a form of social engineering”.
I grew up in Pakistan in the 1980s, aware that thinking about my country’s history and politics meant thinking about America’s history and politics. This is not an unusual position. Many countries of the world from Asia to South America exist, or have existed, as American client states, have seen U.S.-backed coups, faced American missiles or sanctions, seen their government’s policies on various matters dictated in Washington. America may not be an empire in the nineteenth century way which involved direct colonization. But the neo-imperialism of America was evident to me by the time I was an adolescent and able to understand these things.
So in an America where fiction writers are so caught up in the Idea of America in a way that perhaps has no parallel with any other national fiction, where the term Great American Novel weighs heavily on writers, why is it that the fiction writers of my generation are so little concerned with the history of their own nation once that history exits the fifty states. It’s not because of a lack of dramatic potential in those stories of America in the World; that much is clear.
In part, I’m inclined to blame the trouble caused by that pernicious word “appropriation.” I first encountered it within a writing context within weeks, perhaps days, of arriving at Hamilton College in 1991. Right away, I knew there was something deeply damaging in the idea that writers couldn’t take on stories about the Other. As a South Asian who has encountered more than her fair share of awful stereotypes about South Asians in the British empire novels of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, I’m certainly not about to disagree with the charge that writers who are implicated in certain power structures have been guilty of writing fiction which supports, justifies and props up those power structures. I understand the concerns of people who feel that for too long stories have been told about them rather than by them. But it should be clear that the response to this is for writers to write differently, to write better, to critique the power structures rather than propping them up, to move beyond stereotype—which you need to do for purely technical reasons, because the novel doesn’t much like stereotypes. They come across as bad writing.
The moment you say, a male American writer can’t write about a female Pakistani, you are saying, Don’t tell those stories. Worse, you’re saying, as an American male you can’t understand a Pakistani woman. She is enigmatic, inscrutable, unknowable. She’s other. Leave her and her nation to its Otherness. Write them out of your history.
—
This is an excerpt from an essay published in Guernica magazine.
Click here to read the full essay.
What do you think of her response to the use of the word “appropriation”, and her recommendation for writers that may be accused of it?
Do you think it’s helpful or harmful if, say, a white American man wrote a story about a South Asian woman/an indigenous community/a black family? Is there anything inherently problematic about it?
Is it possible to capture the spirit of the subjects and properly relay the experiences of a group you don’t belong to?
Can you draw parallels between Brian Fay’s argument in “Do You Have to be One to Know One?” and Shamsie’s essay?
In March 2015 Ariana Miyamoto became the first half-black Japanese woman to be named Miss Japan. This video feature by Al Jazeera America explores the varied reactions to a mixed-race woman, or what the Japanese refer to as a “hafu”, being crowned Miss Japan.
“I don’t think the equivalent word for ‘hafu’ exists overseas; but in Japan, you need that word to explain who you are.” — Ariana Miyamoto
Furthermore, the video communicates to viewers the often misused and mislead power of assigning meaning to bodies and outward appearances as opposed to acknowledging individuals’ ethnicities or nationalities .
“My appearance isn’t Asian, but I believe I’m very much Japanese on the inside.” — Ariana Miyamoto
This piece connects well with our discussion of what it means to talk about race, how we use or misuse the term ‘race’ to assign meaning, and the significance of the language we use in race-talk.
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/live-news/2015/9/miss-japan-challenges-the-norm.html
Racism:
Racial Equity/Diversity Education:
White Privilege:
.png?1420310805)
Check out this video of Bill Nye the Science Guy using scientific evidence to argue that “race” doesn’t exist from a biological perspective. Nye first debunks the myth of purebred dogs by analyzing that canine breeding and evolution has yielded a broad spectrum of physical characteristics but no actual variance in species:
“We obsess about whether our dog is a pug-Jack Russell terrier mix with corgi overtones and an oaky finish…whatever. They’re all dogs, okay? And so the idea of a purebred is just a human construct. There’s no such thing – in a sense there’s no such thing as a purebred dog.”
He then draws s comparison between the idea of dog “breeds” and human “races”, both just being constructs:
“If a Papua New Guinean hooks up with a Swedish person all you get is a human. There’s no new thing you’re going to get. You just get a human…for humankind there’s really no such thing as race. There’s different tribes but not different races. We’re all one species.”
Any thoughts on Nye’s argument?
A two part series about how the racial integration of schools is a reform that has been shown to really improve the education for minority children, but that people have apparently given up on. It discusses the case of a school district in Normandy, Missouri (where Michael Brown studied), which accidentally happened upon an integration program.
