By Antonio D. French
Filed Friday, April 20, 2007 at 5:59 AM
Blame it on Imus. The debate over the use of the so-called "N-word" is back in the national discussion. Who can say it? Should anyone say it? Why is it apparently alright for some people to say it and others not? Labels: Culture
Jabari Asim is a native St. Louisan and deputy editor of the Washington Post Book World. He has written a very timely book called "The N Word: Who Can Say It, Who Shouldn't and Why". This week he appeared on Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report" to promote the book and discuss (with some delicate humor) the most controversial word in our language.
Yesterday I appeared on WGNU's "The Real Deal with Syl and Tim" to discuss a wide range of current events. And like at so many dinner tables across America recently, somehow a discussion of the Imus controversy led to a broader discussion about language and the N-word specifically.
Asim will be in St. Louis to discuss his book on Monday, April 30, at the St. Louis Public Library Central Branch, 1301 Olive Street, at 7:00 p. m.
Keep up with "the real deal" as told by Syl Wilson and Tim Person on their MySpace page at www.myspace.com/realdealwgnu920am
23 Comments:
Did you hear one of the brothers Roberts on KMOX yesterday with Paul Harris?
The Roberts Brothers have announced a new policy for their media empire, whereby they will no longer air material, including rap and hiphop, containing derogatory racial or sexual messages.
They will not ban the artists; they will just not air certain works. In Mr. Roberts' words (summarized), they are taking a "principle over profits" approach to their business.
Mr. Roberts mentioned that he has no quarrel with anyone's use of free speech (within reasonable limits). On the other hand, on their radio and televsion stations, as owners they are free to set standards for content they deem appropriate.
4/20/2007 8:22 AM
That sounds reasonable to me. It is a fine line between public airwaves and private use of them.
Perhaps it is time for more companies to take a principle stand.
But the bigger issues still sits in the room: why can some groups use the n word when other's can't? could there be a disconnect that many people have heard for years: we are oppressed, we continue to be oppressed and we want justice...yet on the other side of the coin, those same people degrade their own people.
In a perfect world everyone would respect each other, regardless of skin color or other attributes. But alas, this is far from a perfect world.
4/20/2007 9:29 AM
I applaud the Roberts Brothers taking that stand. If African Americans do not stand up for us, how can we expect whites to respect us. As an African American woman, I do not separate racist comments from sexist comments. Both are intended to degrade, demoralize, and disrespect another. While the hip hop industry did not invent disrespecting black women, they certainly do sensationalize it and reinforce those values with each other and newer generations of youth. The media continues to promote those values at the expense of our communities.
We have become so desensitized to when we are being disrespected, no one even takes notice. Case in point was when the mayor of Jennings, a white man made insulting comments to the St. Louis American referencing a dog when he spoke about his opponent a black woman. These comments were said just as casually to the media and when asked if he wanted to retract them, he indicated that he would not. Yet, no one took notice and no one cared.
Each person must take responsibility for their own actions and words. We cannot say it is ok for me to disrespect us and women, but not for you. I take neither as a term of endearment. It is denial, hypocrisy and ignorance that would make anyone think that it is otherwise. To hear it from Imus doesn't bother half as much as hearing it from my own so called brothers because it is in my own community that I should be able to find solace.
4/20/2007 10:56 AM
Artistic freedom?
Instead of pseudo-prior restraint, maybe you shouldn't listen or buy the cd's.
4/20/2007 12:35 PM
Fashion changes, Antionio. Culture — not so much.
If it didn't develop from a cultured form, it isn't culture in my book. And for me, the marks of a cultured form have to do with universality and development, which is the reason culture is easier to spot with the passage of time.
Saggy pants, bandanas, long hair and side burns, `fros, shiny shirts and bell-bottoms, words unconventionally used, hip-hop, disco, grunge, the rest of the here today - gone tomorrow fads and fashions are not culture. In a way, they are anti-culture; invented, used and/or marketed in order to shock the cultured and thereby appeal to the uncultured.
Not that fashion cannot contribute to culture — culture does develop and not in a vacuum. But development is a blend of other cultured forms. Think George Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue*". This is a blend of African-American Blues from folk-culture and the highly developed European Classical techniques that produced what I think is the best example of American culture in the sense I mean it — jazz. Couldn't have happened anywhere else. The Great American Songbook and by extension Broadway owe their existence to jazz. Yes, I know — this is just one thread of jazz, but I see it as the highest development (apologies especially to Dave Brubeck); the one that has the most universal and longest-lived influence on us. Everyone should get out to the Muny this year. Or rent a DVD of a broadway show: appropos this thread, I reccommend Porgy and Bess or South Pacific.
One thing I just don't get is the flight from development and culture a friend of mine calls the Lust for the Primitive. For some reason Primitive is celebrated as somehow more genuine or authentic than Developed or in my view Cultured. I don't know why this is. I see Sloppy Fridays, the supposed rehabilitation of the N-Word and many other examples of what used to be called Bad Manners as examples of this.
To pick up on something AfricasDaughter is saying, degradation is easier than developemnt, and we seem to have arrived at the point where everything is degraded in the name of freedom, but since degradation can't be demonstrated scientifically it stays in the realm of opinion and can't be spoken of as being FALSE or wrong or bad in an objective way. We seem to say that philosophies can't be judged, and that fads and fashions can't be judged, cultures can't be judged: all cultures are equal I have heard. So if hip-hop is culture then it follows that its views of women are beyond criticism; we can only talk about how they make us feel and we can't say that they're bad in themselves. The only way out is to say that hip-hop is not a culture or that all cultures are not equally good — heresies both. (I personally think both statements are true. I am a heretic.)
Philosophical questions like this might be a little much for PubDef, but I've been thinking a lot about it lately. But I think if we can't (re)develop some judgementalism, we will not win the next Battle of Lepanto.
t
*If anyone listens to this, it is part 1 of the original 1924 recording made without any electronics at all — no microphones, no tape recorders, just a megaphone looking thing with a diaphragm and a needle cutting a groove directly into wax (well, probably shellac). Gershwin himself is playing the piano. This is very cool: for the first time in history we can hear music from almost 100 years ago the way the composer wanted it to sound. It gives us an incredible window into our own culture.
4/20/2007 7:16 PM
here today - gone tomorrow fads and fashions are not culture. In a way, they are anti-culture; invented, used and/or marketed in order to shock the cultured and thereby appeal to the uncultured.
You hit the nail on the head. Appeal to the uncultured (and less educated) to make those doing the shocking feel important and might, and to make those it appeals to as part of a group.
4/20/2007 10:10 PM
Tom Leith said...
"this is just one thread of jazz, but I see it as the highest development (apologies especially to Dave Brubeck);"
You should apologize to Kenny G, also.
But don't worry about the minor figures of jazz like Duke Ellington, Miles Davis, and John Coltrane. Even from their graves, I am sure they appreciated your comments.
I have a feeling governor Blunt or Mayor Slay might want you to give a guest lecture on jazz at a soon to be opened charter school.
4/21/2007 1:42 AM
Sometimes words which seemed innocent 40 or 60 years ago become completely different, sometimes in an offensive way.
Sam Cooke, in 1961 sang "let me take you to a place---somewhere up New York way---where the people are so gay---twistin the night away..."
In 1943, Nat King Cole, (by the way, he was a very great piano player) recorded a song about a buzzard who took a monkey for a ride in the air-----I read somewhere that white people thought the song was funny---many black people regarded it as a morality tale---google "straighten up and fly right" sometime. Monkey time by major lance seemed cool in 1963----
Sometimes the sheer number of repetitions of a word can cause it to lose power. Just a few years ago girls did not call each other the b word, or the wh word unless they wanted to fight. I am not saying it is ok--but I do think it has lost some of its sting.
I am not sure that will ever be the case with the n word.
4/21/2007 1:58 AM
Tom, I think your argument that Jazz is culture and Hip-Hop is not is the best example so far on this thread of how most discussions on the use of the "N-word" quickly devolves into an attack on a class of people.
In my opinion, the "N-word", which I do use on occasion with my close African-American friends, is a curse word and should be treated with the same care.
I would not use "MF" around children or elders on in a professional environment. I would not use the "B-word" on the street or in addressing a woman whom I just met. But I have used both of those words before, as I am sure everyone reading this has.
Just as it would be inappropriate for teens, who probably use all sorts of curse words (as we all did) in the park, at baseball practice, or at parties — just as it would be inappropriate for them to use such language around their parents or other adults, such are the reasonable (and necessary) restrictions on the use of the "N-word" by non-blacks, or blacks in mixed company.
There is a whole category of "four-letter words" that we are careful about using. There are some people who commonly break those rules too, and those people are simple called "rude" or "assholes", or as you say, Tom, "using bad manners." But never do we consider banning the word "MF" from our vocabulary.
To a large degree, this is all common sense and whenever this becomes the national discussion, as it does from time to time, I always feel like it is being used as a smokescreen for larger issues we should be discussing, but sadly never get to.
4/21/2007 9:42 AM
Antionio,
Who doesn't consider banning the word "MF" from our vocabulary?
I have banned it from mine — I can't remember the last time I said it. I'm sure I wasn't yet 21, and I know I was uncultured.
Everything my mother ever told me not to say, including the N-word, ought to be banned. We should not be careful about using these words; we should not use them. Because words have meaning and power, outside an academic discussion of the words themselves, it is wrong to use them, always and everywhere. We dare not spell-out the N-word here when discussing the N-word! Why is that? Because we know Good Manners are the only acceptable manners. Mom was right about everything. Pity her message was not reinforced in the park, at baseball practice, or at parties, or by other adults.
On the last point we agree entirely: the focus on a particular word, whatsoever it may be, distracts us from larger issues we should be discussing. I think one issue we cannot discuss is class, not in the money and privilege sense, but in the cultured vs. uncultured sense. People generally, but especially young people, have confused the two. Bling isn't class. Class isn't necessarily popular. But anyone can be classy. It doesn't cost a thing: in fact it pays big dividends.
t
4/21/2007 12:36 PM
kjoe writes:
> But don't worry about the minor
> figures of jazz like Duke
> Ellington, Miles Davis, and John
> Coltrane.
Or Billy Strayhorn or Johnny Mercer, or Benny Goodman, or Count Basie, or Thelonius Monk, or Paul Desmond, Mel Torme, or Ellis and Winton and Branford Marsalis (talk about a dynasty!), even Frank Sinatra not to leave out mere performers, and ... well people under age 30 are playing jazz right now and carrying the tradition forward.
I guess the reason I singled out Brubeck is that his big innovations were mainly rythmic, fabulously rythmic, but not developed the way the jazz orchestra is developed. I love his trios. Paul Desmond's Take Five on the Carnegie Hall record still give me chills.
Dennis Owsley from KWMU or Ross Gentile or Bob Pelc — anybody from over at WSIE for that matter, Michael Parkinson from Webster, Paul Wescott, any number of people who actually know something about jazz and its history would probably be thrilled to death to give a presentation at the mayor's new charter schools. I bet you could even convince some of the several St. Charles North high School jazz ensembles to come and play the music they talk about. I would like to go listen myself...
t
4/21/2007 1:11 PM
I agree with Tom, some words should be completely banned. I have never used the MF or F words, I have never used the N word, I have never used the hymie term, I have never used the S--t word, nor blasphemous terms with God's name attached.
Some words are so filthy as to not merit being in our vocabularies. Others are so derogatory toward others as to not merit being in our vocabulary. And then there are those that are so offensive to God that don't belong.
Jesus said: "...For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted and by your words you will be condemned."
Whether one believes in Jesus Christ or not, those are sobering words and a mighty strong warning. How can both blessing and cursing come from the same heart and mouth?
What loving son or daughter can speak the MF word without regret when thinking of one's own mother?
What man or woman can call someone the N word or the hymie term (or Kraut or Dago) without recognizing his or her own prejudice?
What man or woman can curse someone using God's appellation without fear for his her judgment one day?
Words aren't benign. They are powerful and say more about us than about the other person.
4/21/2007 3:34 PM
Tom I might be guilty of a shallow reading of what you wrote---I happen to love Gershwin---I do about 5 music things a week---sometimes I will tell a bunch of kids demanding Nelly or Snoop to wait until later (and I do play that stuff later)----we need some Gershwin! I got one of them to do the Sinatra duet of "They can't take that away"---I also like "I Got Rhythm", too---sometimes it is just fun to say I'm gonna play some (deleted) Gershwin.
Surely you know that there is not universal agreement about R in Blue.
Since you mentioned only Gershwin and Brubeck---it kind of came across to me as "jazz is white people civilizing black music to make it culturally worthwhile".
I judged it to be a condescending attitude on your part---perhaps that particular sin should be applied more forcefully to me.
4/21/2007 4:50 PM
kjoe writes:
> I judged it to be a
> condescending attitude on your
> part
Evidently poor communication on my part. What I was trying to get across is the idea of development and how development can come from the collision of two cultures. I don't mean to say that Robert Johnson required civilizing (he might've, I don't know) but I mean that culture develops out of traditions, even primitive traditions. But if it doesn't develop it isn't properly speaking "cultured". Gershwin developed blues along one line, BB King along another line. Today you've got young guys like Michael Buble singing with great soul blusey Ray Charles numbers in terrific big band arrangements I am sure Ellington or Basie or Dorsey or Miller would be proud of. Not so cerebral as Gershwin, but still very highly developed and being performed today. Blues has become part of our culture through development, not by crude opposition to culture. Everybody borrowed from everybody else. It is astonishing, to see culture develop before one's ears.
What astounds me is the idea that Robert Johnson's blues were somehow superior for being more primitive.
There is not universal agreement about very much, but that doesn't mean there is no truth [grin].
Helen Louise evidently grew up in a more cultured environment than I did. Notwithstanding, there's only me to blame `cause Momma Tried.
t
4/21/2007 5:30 PM
Yes, t, I'd agree that H.L. was a pretty lucky duck. I grew up in a print deprived, acoutrement deprived household in an inner city neighborhood, and I'm darned lucky to even be making a living and getting by, let alone enjoying the luxury of having a radio to listen to Dennis Owsley on KWMU! I totally love my life now that I can get mom a tv and a window a/c. She thinks I'm rich because I (and the bank, of course) own an actual house (sans the a/c, sadly, but with a library nearby)! Isn't it funny what we consider a luxury, depending on what we previously experienced?
4/22/2007 12:14 AM
Did I grow up in a more cultured environment, and am I a lucky duck?
I grew up in a low middle class family of five living in a three-room, second floor flat. I heard cursing (never the F word or MF word) in my family and neighborhood and sadly also the N-word. What made a difference?
I was sent to Sunday school as a very young child where we sang "Jesus loves the little children of the world, red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight." It goes to show a child does take in and reason. As a very young child, I reasoned that if Jesus loves all races, I could never look down on any or use any perjorative terms about them. Therefore, I always spoke up for the rights of the downtrodden blacks of our society from a very young age and was sometimes called a "nigger lover" as a result. The key is what I was taught religiously.
I was also taught the Westminster Catechism of which the first question and response are: "What is the chief end of man? The chief end of man is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever."
Learning that, I reasoned and realized I could not glorify God by using filthy or blasphemous words toward others. Since God loved all of His creation, I was called as a Christian to love all too. This meant I could put no one down with perjorative words nor curse them, or fling filthy terms at them.
My Sunday school teaching taught me to respect others, to respect all. I learned a bit in my home, but not to the extent that I learned in Sunday school class.
Yes, there was a bit of culture in my family but use of words is not so much cultural as it is a matter of faith and respect.
What a child is taught is so important; it made a big difference in my life. I went to public schools too when dirty language was not abided or allowed.
What we are taught calls for a response--either acceptance and obedience or rejection.
4/22/2007 6:59 AM
ariel said---
" Perhaps an overabundance of confidence in delegating power.
One thing is certain: the federal government needs to get itself back into the business of being a guardian of the liberties extended to every American citizen. The removal of publicly elected people by executive order should not even be under discussion in America. Ever."
I agree. You had a post---wonderfully written, and I cannot find it---you mentioned the open court reading series, and the testing for nclb. I wanted to post it somewhere else, because you said a lot of what i wanted to say more effectively than i am able.
So much accountability is being lost through all the outsourcing to corporations---admittedly a necessary practice some times---that it really weakens our representatvie form of government at all levels.
Last night, I started my musical thing with some gershwin---"someone to watch over me" (no political message), by the time i was playing Timberlake and stefani, a brawl broke out---handled by the bouncers---I had a chance to talk to a member of the sports media and my state senator---the sports guy told me, quite honestly, that the reason there has not been much follow-up on the death of Tim Bacon is that people are physically intimidated and scared. There would not be much reward in saying anything. My senator is a bright guy---but i don't think he, or a lot of the democrats have any concept of what is about to happen after June 15th.
Kind of rambling, today--anybody know anything about the fund-raiser with Nixon and the kiansas governor friday night. I heard the union presence Not the teachers' union) was formidable.
4/22/2007 12:51 PM
Helen Louise asks:
> Did I grow up in a more cultured
> environment, and am I a lucky
> duck?
Clearly, you did. It isn't about how many people live in how many square feet, or whether one has A/C or a radio. Nobody should be deprived of cultured surroundings, and nobody need be.
t
4/22/2007 3:29 PM
Tom,
My point was that I grew up in a home and an environment where words were used that I could have picked up. I realize culture has nothing to do with square footage.
What children receive in teaching at very young ages can greatly influence them, as Sunday school classes and teaching influenced me.
Believe me, Muslim children are influenced by what they learn in the mosques and madrasas.
Moral of story: Use of the N-word or any offensive language can be countered by teaching children very early on that either it does not please their God or it is harmful to others. One can choose either or.
Parents can and do influence, but outsiders can also be influential.
I would like to see most of the words mentioned in this post removed from anyone's vocabulary.
4/23/2007 7:50 AM
There are a number of racial slurs which were once common that have become all but extinct in our societal vocabulary. History is full of them. The main difference is that the groups against whom the slurs were used DID NOT USE THEM ON EACH OTHER.
African-Americans cannot keep perpetrating the use of words that degrade their heritage and expect those words--or the ideas conveyed by those words--to die. Words DO have enormous power. There is no benefit to using such words to define one's ethnic identity. Negative self-talk is as detrimental to developing self-esteem and vision as verbal abuse from others. Perhaps more so.
4/23/2007 8:29 AM
kjoe: I have a post on stlschools.org/forum about NCLB/Reading First, etc. I have mouthed off so many times on this blog about it I'm not sure which one you want. Thanks.
4/23/2007 8:31 AM
Why do politicians, sports personalities and broadcasters always seem to slip up and use a slur? Is it because they, at some point in their day to day travels feel comfortable enough to use those words to descibe racist thoughts and feelings? Is it only seen as a slip up when they say them out loud? I doubt that they would say the slur, even as a slip of the tongue, if they did not feel that way deep down.
I personally hate "that word" and a small part of me dies every time that I hear it. Even in song lyrics. It is so filled with hate that I cannot imagine anyone wanting to use it in any context. Even amongst friends. I agree with Ariel's comment and perhaps as Rick Bonasch points out, the Roberts Brothers first step is a start.
But, as my sisters will tell you. Most of my culture comes in a yogurt cup.
4/23/2007 1:28 PM
Helen Louise writes:
> My point was that I grew up in
> a home and an environment where
> words were used that I could
> have picked up.
Yes, and mine is that you were in a cultured environment. You have spent a long time telling us which culture, and it is quite a good one; nearly the best [grin]. You were also created evidently a sensitive soul -- not everyone is given this grace; most come to the state you were in as a girl only by stages. This grace could have been overwhelmed in a less cultured environment, and contrary to the Westminster Catechism, you could have resisted it. But we should meet on a theology blog to carry this any further. [GRIN]
TRouble Writes:
> Why do politicians, sports
> personalities and broadcasters
> always seem to slip up and use
> a slur?
Sometimes for the same reason young men (and, sadly, women) slip into uncultured language when in an uncultured crowd. Sometimes for the same reasons spouses will say the most hurtful things they know to say to one another when they feel attacked or betrayed. And maybe some few of them really think that way. Context matters, and although we should not condone the language, we might excuse (even forgive) the people.
> Most of my culture comes in a
> yogurt cup.
Do not sell yourself (or society) short.
It seems we have pretty solid agreement on this point...
t
4/23/2007 10:25 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home