So I'm reading that book for a book discussion group at Alma and it's very interesting. So far, though, there are some things I don't agree with. Most of them stem from the fact that the author decided to redefine racism so that basically, anyone white American is essentially racist because he/she receives advantages solely because he/she is white. Hmmm.
I also find it hard to believe that (1) finding your racial identity is more important than finding any other part of your identity and (2) that in order for an African Americans to find their identities, it is essential and part of a "process" that they immerse themselves in their own racial culture at the exclusion of every other ethnicity. The author herself even brags about not remembering the names of any of her white undergraduate classmates. Is it just my liberal arts education speaking, or is everything in our world connected and do we need to understand many different facets of life to truly grasp any one area?
Further, I don't think that I, as a German-Irish American, need to go through a period of feeling bad or guilty about the color of my skin in order for me to have some sort of racial identity. For me, developing a racial identity would mean researching my ancestors and accepting the good with the bad. Everyone wants to have a positive self-image, but that doesn't mean we should be unrealistic and blind to the changes that need to be made within our own race. Not everything about majority or minority cultures is a positive thing that needs to be embraced and held up as a virtue.
And finally, the use of dark and light as a way to protray good and evil in works of art is not a racist thing. Who likes dark, gloomy days better than bright sunny ones (as a general rule - everyone needs a rainy day now and again)? Dark and light have historically been used in art because of those connotations, not racial ones. So the fact that Scar in The Lion King is a shade darker than Mufasa is not racially motivated. Sorry. And yes, as Christians we sing about God washing us whiter than the snow, because the color white (not the skin tone) is a symbol of purity.
Regardless of my issues with the book, I'm finding it very interesting, especially the ancedotes about children as they discover race. I'm truly looking forward to the discussions with my collegues, though I hope we'll all keep an open mind. Trying to talk about it with a coworker who had read it in college this morning just didn't go all that well. I suppose I shouldn't have aggravated the conversation at the end by asking her if she was going to see the chairman of the Republican party this afternoon - but it wasn't that nice of her to say she'd only go to spit on him. Don't hate, it's not nice. By the way, I'll update on that later. It should be interesting, because he's coming to talk about Michigan's economy.
2 comments:
I was going to throw in my 2 cents on this, but you summed it up really well. I think people need to remember that their race is only ONE defining characteristic of who they are.
~CH
Ooh ooh! Republican party chairman? (At ALMA? Will wonders never cease...) Let me know how that goes! :)
As for the rest: Ayyy-men. Well said.
Ryan
Post a Comment