Could it be that Connick actually has a few black friends - and has learned something from working with them?

Could it be that Connick actually has a few black friends - and has learned something from working with them?

Being so heavily involved in the New Orleans jazz scene and having put a considerable amount of personal time into helping rebuild parts of the Lower Ninth Ward in the Katrina aftermath, it’s hard to imagine him NOT having a fair number of African-American friends.  Fats Domino, Trombone Shorty, Allen Toussaint… he’s friends with all of those guys.

Good on him for trying to use his privilege to Make Things Suck Less.

Nice to see, especially after I was just reading the list of people signing the “Free Polanski” petition. 

Emma Thompson?  Natalie Portman?  Guillermo del Toro?  Really?  Y’all have to suck that much?

I don’t have any black friends, but I found the act to be offensive.  Also, not very well executed nor clever.  Mr. Connick spoke plainly, was offended without being offensive, and anyone who looked at that and decided that he was grandstanding just doesn’t understand how mature people disagree.

I’ve always liked him as a person, not so much as a singer or actor, but now I know that if I ever see him I’ll try to get close to thank him for that.

He didn’t try to shame the performers, though he did give them a bad score.  He tried to make a bad situation into an educational moment.  A similar thing happened in my high school when there was a battle of the air bands (pretty much a lame attempt at lip sync for some fundraiser) and one group did “Shout” in blackface.  There was a small minority of black students who were offended, much discipline was demanded, and it was pretty much discovered that the history of blackface acts was something totally misunderstood.  After some actual teaching, the white students felt bad and apologized to everyone, the black students were mature enough to know that the apology was sincere, and both the black and the white students learned a lot about the history of that tradition.  I am still proud of how well the thing was handled, and glad that people really wanted to understand each other.

Ms Kate - That’s an odd statement. Why should black friends or learning from black friends be any aspect of expressing displeasure with black face?

hey hey there’s no show - pretty much exactly - maybe one day we’ll all be lucky enough that the damn fools on American Idol let some damn fools in black face on stage so American Idol can be sued out of existence.

Agreed with the above- I thought HCjr’s response was mature and classy. Unlike the act.

Being from New Orleans, he also understands the one place that blackface is A-OK, and in fact, de rigeur: the ZULU Social Aid & Pleasure Club Carnival Day Parade!!  http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/zulu parade

OK, looking over all those photos just got me so geeked for Mardi Gras.

Right fucking on, Harry. Thank you. You rule and I will now YouTube you for an hour.

That performance was appalling. How does anyone think there is anything ok about that shit? Disgusting.

Being so heavily involved in the New Orleans jazz scene and having put a considerable amount of personal time into helping rebuild parts of the Lower Ninth Ward in the Katrina aftermath

HCjr does and has done a lot for New Orleans.  Good to see he was educating some people in this situation.

Packman, do I have to put irony and snark tags on everything?

I was so surprised by this I had to go back and read it again, and then I realized… *Australians*.  I love Australia, it’s an outstanding country and full of the most generous, kind, friendly people I’ve ever met… when they’re dealing with me, Little Miss English-Irish-WASP. 

They really have so much farther to go to even look like the so-called “post-racial” country of America; they’ve gotten away with being decades, if not centuries, behind on racial issues because Aboriginals there are not so well associated with mainstream civil rights movements, and well, I think the rest of the world is too distracted by the kangaroos.  I don’t think the country really has the understanding or vocabulary to easily talk about why this is clearly offensive…and they should by now, but they faff around with token efforts.  It’s really sad, because in so many other areas they come off as Supremely Awesome, but the moment I realized it was a bunch of Aussies it made sense.  I wasn’t even surprised anymore.

Sorry.

This has been on the radio all day. Many people have said it’s unacceptable, but most are unfamiliar with the history of blackface (even though it’s a part of Australian history as well).

In short: Hey hey was a popular variety show in Aus for about 30 years. It was cancelled a while back, but they’ve started making it again (like Dr Who). This is the second episode of the new series. This group “Jackson Jive” apparently won the weekly talent contest 20 years ago, and have been brought back on as a “where are they now” type gimmick.

Mr. Connick spoke plainly, was offended without being offensive, and anyone who looked at that and decided that he was grandstanding just doesn’t understand how mature people disagree.

It’s more that he’s American, and a lot of people are perceiving his offence as an example of American imperialism - “outsiders telling us what to do and how to think” and all that. A lot of people don’t like foreigners telling us that we’re doing it wrong (I believe America has some similar sentiments). It’s shooting the messenger, basically, and I see it as a convenient excuse for the supporters of the show to avoid examining their own racism than a legitimate criticism.

@ MonkeyShines: regardless of whether Orson Welles’ performance was in good taste, this clearly wasn’t.

Blackface in service of a minstrel act is a different thing, and to be condemned.

on the plus side, it’s nice to see that gross, overt stupidity knows no international boundries.

It’s more that he’s American, and a lot of people are perceiving his offence as an example of American imperialism - “outsiders telling us what to do and how to think” and all that. A lot of people don’t like foreigners telling us that we’re doing it wrong (I believe America has some similar sentiments).

Sure, and I know you’re not disagreeing with Connick here, but they did invite him to give his opinions. He gave them. Imperialism my ass.

“Hey Hey Its Saturday” is one of those long-running Australian shows that was seen as being about ‘good old-fashioned Australian fun’ but really had entrenched the old-school attitudes of sexism (in particular) and also racism and blatant nostalgia for ‘the way things were’.

Hey Hey was axed some time ago, due to sagging ratings, expense and an understanding that its ‘time was up’.

Daryl Somers, the host, moved on to host Dancing With the Stars (Aust version) for a number of years before being shafted from that for various reasons.

He has since been shameless in his bids to have HHItsS resurrected, mainly because of his ego and desire to be on television.

Although i didn’t watch either of the ‘revival’ shows, I am absolutely unsurprised as to the fact that something as offensive as this made it to air.

Ms Kate - yes, thanks, sorry

This is appalling. The channel that broadcast this is well aware that the act would be offensive, as they’ve had this ‘blackface’ issue before with a ‘personality’ called Newman making the same mistake and having to apologise on air, and take part in counselling and other activites to address the problem.

The fact that no-one at the organisation stopped this happening is much worse than ignorance. It’s appalling that a foreigner was the only person who objected to this. There should be a heavy price paid by everyone responsible for this.

Sure, and I know you’re not disagreeing with Connick here, but they did invite him to give his opinions. He gave them.

Yeah, apparently we’re only supposed to get effusing praise from the international community. Which is presumably less patronising than someone trying to teach us something.

I’m listening to the radio now. Most people don’t understand why it’s racist, and reference the films White Chicks and Tropic Thunder. And talk about the “PC- police”.

*sigh*

Sorry again.

MonkeyShines, do you happen to remember, just off the top of your head, the last time a black actor or a black troupe performed Hamlet in whiteface (a think that does not, for the record, exist as a cultural phenomenon)? Since the characters are pasty Danes, and all, and it would make so much artistic sense.

For your edification: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackface

To be crystal clear, MonkeyShines, because I doubt you will read up on this just because I threw a link at you: white actors wearing naturalistic flesh-toned makeup to act black roles produces a lot of justified unease in the modern viewer because it inevitably recalls blackface.

Real hardcore classic minstrel-show blackface, however,  the kind these racist Australians put on, is not naturalistic and is not supposed to be. That’s why black minstrels wore blackface, too. This shit means something.

People outside North America usually don’t understand American racial history.  I spent a semester at the University of Cape Town about 8 years ago and the African American (as in American students (like me) who were black (which is not like me)) objected to a white South African DJ using the n-word on the campus radio station.  There was some dialogue about it in the campus newspaper with people pointing out how the South African blacks had a similar trigger word that started with a k. 

The main defense from the DJ was that he had learned the word from American rap/hip hop songs and didn’t know why it was bad.  I was on the fence about the issue until a conversation with one of the African American students.  His comment was that true, the word in South Africa had no negative significance, but if the university wanted to create an inclusive environment for African American students, they had better know what offends them and do their best to avoid saying it.

Of course, if Australians had their own problems with black-face and/or minstrel shows, well, then they don’t have a similar excuse.  Not to mention that the internet makes claims of ignorance really dubious.

Being from New Orleans, he also understands the one place that blackface is A-OK, and in fact, de rigeur: the ZULU Social Aid & Pleasure Club Carnival Day Parade!!  http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/zulu parade

I LOVE the Zulu parade.  I still have my prized Zulu Coconut that I caught during 1994 Mardi Gras when I was going to Loyola in New Orleans.  I had no idea that it was the most prized throw at Mardi Gras when I caught it.

I miss NOLA sometimes.  Sigh.

I’m amazed they managed to go for ALMOST an entire episode WITHOUT globally embarassing us.

Yay!  Next week we get to have the “Are we REALLY a racist nation?” pretend “debate” which will resoundingly be answered “How very DARE you?” by the people who listen to talkback radio.

Newsflash: Australian readers of News Corp. websites overwhelmingly claim that the skit in question was ‘not racist.’

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,28383,26182943-10229,00.html

In the process, these same readers overwhelmingly show themselves to be both ignorant and racist.  Although, assuming that the other newspapers in question are as prestigious as the Herald Sun, which fills the bogan news category in Melbourne, Australia, I am not at all surprised by these results.

A similar lack of surprise occurs when you realise that the show is featured on channel… 9(?), which as far as I can tell (having only been in this country for 3 and a half years), has not in that time ever broadcast a show worth watching.

.........I don’t know what to say.

The history of minstrel shows is something that hasn’t been taught in this country, so there is bound to be even greater ignorance elsewhere.  As I mentioned above, I did get a short crash course in high school, but I now know how incredibly rare that was (not the racist incident, but the educational opportunity actually being taken advantage of.)

In foreign lands, especially those without many connections to Africa and fewer connections to people of African descent (I know we probably all are, but that’s not what I’m talking about now,) there is a tendency to use what we see as racist imagery to sell toothpaste and such.  Not that all of that imagery is American, as the Belgian Tintin’s adventure in the Congo proves that even enlightened (/snark) Europeans have their own racist imagery (and racist racism) issues.  After we moved on (though not entirely) from images of happy blacks being used to sell things, we had our “Ancient Chinese Secret” ads on television (well into the 80s, if I’m not mistaken.)  Now, we’re sexualizing the nation of Brazil I guess, which is good because it’s not likely that China will rule us all because we’ll gladly let the Brazilians take over first.  Mostly for the waxing.

All of them physicians, too—not like they’ve all been in the Outback for the last 40 years, isolated from the rest of humanity.

Clearly that performance is racist, but does it necessarily follow that black face is always racist?  Orson Wells, a staunch liberal, once performed Othello in black face and it is generally considered one of the finer renderings of the role.

Yeah, because Wells was focused (to use Connick’s words) on making black people look like clowns. Little-known bonus fact: Shakespeare’s original title for Othello was “Dat Angry Ol’ Moor.”

That was a little joke for the grown-ups, monkey. Since you need the extra help, I’ll make it clear:  we don’t judge historical figures by modern standards, but we do judge their intent and motives. My 10-year-old niece got that concept in another discussion, but apparently it’s still difficult for you to grasp. I know you long for occasions when a white man can dress up in blackface without making people uncomfortable and creeped out, but in the U.S. and Western Europe those days are over.

Seriously, if this is your best attempt to provoke debate in the interest of presenting an “alternative viewpoint”, you might want to consider doing it on a blog where people know neither history nor common sense. Dana excepted, I’ve never seen a commenter here who’s so consistently wrong on the basics.

The whole “it’s ok if it’s outside a national historical context” excuse bugs me to no end.  It doesn’t matter where you go in the Western world—if you don a conical straw hat, buck teeth, and “slant” eye-makeup, you know what you’re fucking doing to some degree Aussies (or Canadians) may not share US history or an African-American population critical mass, but we fucking know, as a collective group (with perhaps some under-the-rock exceptions).  We knew well before the Michael Richards and Ted Danson fiascoes. So I call bullshit. 

Hell, many Canadians know about the South-African “kaffir” too (in part because of Mathabane’s international bestseller).  To the point where cooks and shops here calls kaffir leaves “lime leaves”, almost without exception.  And SA doesn’t export cultural products anywhere to the same degree the US does. People are just choosing to shut out or ignore the information that’s out there in the cultural stream. Empathy is one of the functions of the learning process—opening oneself up to the absorption of difficult information.  I can buy exceptions, like I said (e.g. those with learning differences or who are still really young and green), but not general populations.  Those Aussies and white South Africans likely understood that they were treading provocative ground but chose not to err on the side of respect—such understandings are on a continuum, not completely switched off or on.

Have always loved Harry. Saw his latest album and wasn’t impressed but I’m going to buy it now if only to show my support of a man with some class.

This is something that really pisses me off because you know the knee-jerk reaction from apologists is “well, in Australia, there isn’t the legacy of racsim like there is in America.”

First off—tell it to an Aborigines.

I hear this over and over again—that racism that takes place in another country isn’t really racism because it’s not within the paradigm of America’s slave history. Japan uses offensive stereotypes of African Americans in advertisements and videogames? No big deal because Japan doesn’t have a history of racism like the US so clearly the offensive material wasn’t meant to be offensive. Rinse and repeat all over the globe.

So why is “racism” something that only America gets to claim, for the apologists? I think it’s mostly because America has a clearly defined racially-based civil rights movement (and enough of a minority population that when they get upset about something, people take notice), and groups that advocate for minority civil rights and so these items became visible. But there’s also the tricky double-reverse racism bogey going on: because we have clearly defined civil rights organizations in this country that will step up to the bat when there is a violation of civil rights or a flagrant act of racism and condemn it… which dovetails nicely with the apologist belief that the only reason that “racism” is still around is because the minority community won’t let us get beyond it because they’re in this state of perpetual victimhood. If we didn’t have all these people getting uppity and protesting because some privileged white boys decided to hang a bunch of nooses in a school’s tree after a racially-charged incident, then those nooses would never have been hung in the first place! Don’t you people understand? The reaction to the racist act was the real racism!

Deep breath.

Good on Harry Connick Jr. I really appreciate when someone who could have just laughed nervously or kept quiet about something so wrong speaks up and gives assholes what for.

And quite apart from racism, note that these idiots can’t count to 5, either.

Ranylt—I have a bunch of Asian cookbooks that refer to using “kaffir lime leaves”—I had no idea that word had a racial charge to it… my first encounter with the word was a cookbook and I just thought that it meant a certain breed of lime tree (like thai basil). Guess I have to go update all those recipes I copied out of it!!!!

@ Ponygirl: Well to be fair I haven’t googled the etymology, and they may be on a completely separate linguistic strand and have no real reference to one another.  But most folks I know tend to avoid it because it’s so dodgy-close.

Oh God. I had to stop and start the clip at least four times, it’s so cringe worthy.

So far, the issue here in Australia has taken a fairly typical path.

-Blatantly racist thing happens
- Lots of people fill the airwaves/interwebs bleating that Australia is not racist and never was (or if it was, it was for their own good) and proceed to completely avoid the issue at hand by pointing out that Australia is “multicultural” and “diverse” and what not before demanding anyone of an opposing opinion to love it or leave.
- Racist incident receedes into background as the debate turns into “is Australia racist/evil/etcetera.
- Mainstream media decide, after a completely impartial review of the evidence, of course, that Australia is not racist, or at least not as racist as some other countries so that lets us off the hook, eh? Either way, shut up you whinging left wing PC pinkos! Loosen up!

So far not much has happened in terms of the station taking action (namely cancelling the show) which given some of the other stuff that’s occurred on that station on other shows, isn’t so surprising. As for the innocent mistake angle, that’s total bullshit in my opinion. This was an act that had appeared on the show 20 years ago doing the same thing and were invited by the show to come on this special to do the same act. For this to happen, a whole team of people would have gone through several processes where it would have been obvious that they were going to do blackface and it appears that no one has gone “Oh wait, actually, maybe it’s not all that great an idea after all”. As if no one related to the show knew that this would have been offensive, and not just to Americans. The knowledge even comes out in the clip when Harry says “if this happened in America…”. They knew, but went ahead anyway. At best, it’s racial privilege to the extreme.

..you know, it always weirds me out when I see people being surprised that Aussies are just as racist as, like, the whole rest of the world. Yes, they have their share of idiots, and unfortunately some of them have access to TV studios. Do you really expect a country of 20 million Steve Irwins?

Without seeking to dismiss the segment (because it was racist and tacky and should never have been aired, and also someone really needs to up and banish Zombie Daryl Somers, the TV Host Who Just Won’t Die Already), this post is a classic case of an American hamfistedly projecting their domestic politics on to the rest of the world, completely failing to absorb the basic fact that history means that race relations went down differently elsewhere on the planet.

Aus doesn’t have a racial demographic that even remotely parallels the cultural history of African-Americans. The Aboriginal experience parallels that of the Native Americans, and their 20th century migration waves (Greek/Italian, Vietnamese, Lebanese) are similar to the experiences of those groups elsewhere on the planet. Even the Kanaka labourers weren’t in the same boat, having more in common with modern sweatshop workers (stuck in dodgy contracts that somehow never get paid off, sort of thing). African immigrants to Aus are recent; coming from Nigeria and the Sudan in the last 10, maybe 20 years tops (and that’s leaving out the longer-running influx of white South Africans). Aus racism is clear and present, but the details of its expression are very different to the US’s.

So, blackface’s connotations are pretty much unheard-of, as are a whole lot of similar US cultural landmines. People really don’t get it, and shouldn’t really be expected to pay any more attention to US race relations than, say, those in Portugal or the Ukraine or Cuba. You can tut about ignorance all you want, that’s fine, but the foot-stamping how-dare-you-foreigners-be-unfamiliar-with-the-intricacies-of-our-great-nation’s-checkered-history stuff is just really irritating, and not a particularly mature way too look at this kind of problem. HCJnr managed to avoid that and go for the teaching moment, lets follow his example.

Ranylt—it looks like it’s a variation of the word kieffer, but calling it a “lime leaf” is simple enough. It’s sort of like using the word “niggardly.” It’s got a completely different etymology (it’s scandinavian I believe) but it just sounds a little too close to the slur. It’s not really that important a word to use for me when there are plenty of substitute words.

but the foot-stamping how-dare-you-foreigners-be-unfamiliar-with-the-intricacies-of-our-great-nation’s-checkered-history stuff is just really irritating,

OK, this is BS that needs to be called out.

Blackface is not some deep metaphorical interpretive dance. It’s not like the tradition is steeped in nuance and symbolism. It didn’t take a great mind applying years of dedicated study to produce. Some asshole thought it would be fun to paint their face black and then put on an offensive parody of an African American. Thus the “tradition” was borne. It’s not complicated, it’s not hard to replicate, it’s not something that is only applicable to American culture.

I can understand not knowing every whether each and every slang term for a minority is a slur or not (usually they are, sometimes they aren’t). If there is no history of racially-based genocide in a country, you could even convince me that hanging a noose from a tree could be a racially-neutral act in another country. But literally dressing up in blackface and a nappy black fro wig so that you can pull your best Whats Happening interpretation doesn’t need a cultural historical context to be offensive.

Newton and Leibniz invented calculus at about the same time independent of one another and these were great minds who applied themselves to their genius. Blackface is not something that needs a particular cultural history to be offensive.

Looking at the Wiki blackface link provided above, it appears that Australia didn’t have the history of minstrel shows, so I can sort of understand it would be seen there as mildly naughty and not deeply offensive.  I would guess that the producers expected and hoped for some reaction by an American host and Connick reacted appropriately and with class.  I doubt the Australian producers would have dared to do this if Kanye West was the guest judge, though.

Well to be fair I haven’t googled the etymology, and they may be on a completely separate linguistic strand and have no real reference to one another.

The name of the lime probably comes from the German Käfer; Bug, due to the resemblance of the little limes to beetles. These days it is usually referred to as a Makrud Lime due to the semantic load carried by the other word.

Thank you, 41. ‘Mildly naughty’ is exactly where it sits in most Aussie’s minds. Recall that we’re talking about the country who made <a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acropolis_Now>”> popular. People who aren’t familiar with the history of minstrel shows just see blackface as vaguely tacky ethnic comedy - they may know Americans are sensitive to it, but don’t realise exactly why beyond ‘its a joke about being black’. They don’t get that its different from dressing up as any other ethnic minority for the lulz.

That kind of blase attitude to stereotypes can be really othering to someone belonging to an ethnic minority, so its not a good thing, but its not the vicious assault on racial dignity that some people are making it out to be. Nice to see we couldn’t go 5 minutes before implying that talking the Americans down off the Ledge of Outrage means defending the segment itself, though :/

Australia not racist?  Google “Cronulla Riots”, people.

narf, you’re not convincing anyone that this bad behavior should be excused even mildly.  People here are mature and intelligent enough (generally, as like all generalizations this one has exceptions,) to know that Australians might not “get” it in the way that Americans would be expected to “get” that blackface is damned disrespectful and is not part of polite conversation about race even for most of our racists nowadays.  Sheesh, yourself.  It’s a black eye for your country that this happened, but it’s not the injury but the healing that should be remembered.  So far, your country is doing the band-aid of pride trick which hides your embarrassment rather than facing up to the fact that something stupid happened and Australia was involved.  Not a big deal, and few would think less of you as a person for it unless you don’t stop trying to justify it.  Take a lump, say you’re sorry, and move on.  And most importantly, learn something.  It’s good for you.

Now I’m hoping that some European person will enter into the comment fray with some classy “Blacks aren’t awful, it’s the Albanians you need to worry about” schtick.

#43: The “we’re equal-opportunity bigots” defense.

I would guess that the producers expected and hoped for some reaction by an American host and Connick reacted appropriately and with class.  I doubt the Australian producers would have dared to do this if Kanye West was the guest judge, though.

That’s the real problem here: the show’s producers. Even making the generous assumption that educated physicians living in a predominantly white Commonwealth country and exposed to American media would genuinely think that wearing blackface was remotely cool anywhere in the West in 2009, and even if the audience is also that moronically racist, there’s absolutely no excuse for the producers of the show.

The job of a producer involves being aware of international cultural trends, to the point where they’re tasked with selecting and flying in an American celebrity judge. Whatever the nature of their audience, the producers of that show do understand that a minstrel show is more than “mildly naughty.” They also get that an act that clownishly impersonates a racial minority, presented without apology or irony, is racist. They thought that Connick would either react as a “bad PC American cultural imperialist” or just be a “good sport” white guy and accept it, and were probably surprised that he did neither. I suspect that’s also what has the audience most upset.

There’s not much that can be done about the audience’s racism, or the apparent racism of the performers. But the one of the media’s roles is to set the tone for national discourse, and presenting this act was an embarrassing failure on their part. Unfortunately, this sort of failure seems to be part-and-parcel of the MSM throughout the industrialised West—witness American cable “news.”

Australia not racist?  Google “Cronulla Riots”, people.

... or “Dictation Test”.

The name of the lime probably comes from the German Käfer; Bug, due to the resemblance of the little limes to beetles. These days it is usually referred to as a Makrud Lime due to the semantic load carried by the other word.
Comment #42: Sarcastro on 10/08 at 09:46 AM

Also more likely to do with the globalizaiton of food supply (thus needing more non-regional/non colloquial names) and either more growers wanting to get into the act, or a few trying to protect turf. 

But on that note of sound-sort of alike but not connected etymologcally at all?  No way am I going to edit my recipe collection, the exception being “now that I know and it’s spelled exactly the same” probably not if I were sending a recipe to a South African.  And yes, I will use the word niggardly when it is the more precise word, just as I will continue to drink kefir, and use “boy” to refer to male children under a certain age, and “monkey” to children contorting themselves on playground equipment.  Context, people, context.

Ursula @ 24:

The main defense from the DJ was that he had learned the word from American rap/hip hop songs and didn’t know why it was bad.  I was on the fence about the issue until a conversation with one of the African American students.  His comment was that true, the word in South Africa had no negative significance, but if the university wanted to create an inclusive environment for African American students, they had better know what offends them and do their best to avoid saying it.

Another point, though, is that education should prepare people to live and work in our interconnected world.  The ‘n word’ may not have cultural significance in South Africa, just as blackface may not have the same history in Australia as in the United States.  I remember traveling to Brazil with an educational group many years ago and being required to learn things like not using the American “OK” hand gesture there because of different connotations. Similarly, if that DJ had an opportunity to meet a prominent Black American like, oh, maybe the President, it would be in his best interest to understand the meaning and appropriateness of various ways of describing ethnicity. Yes, we all have individual national histories, but in an interdependent world that is not an excuse for ignorance.

But then, I’ve had one of ‘those’ lime trees that was mentioned above growing in my yard for the last 15 years or so and never knew about issues with the name.  On the other hand, I never use the actual name.  The limes, on the other hand… YUM!  They’re the secret to my insanely delicious grilled citrus chicken…

And yes, I will use the word niggardly when it is the more precise word, just as I will continue to drink kefir, and use “boy” to refer to male children under a certain age, and “monkey” to children contorting themselves on playground equipment.  Context, people, context.

“Niggardly” (from the Old Norse “nigla”) has nothing to do with “negro” or its cognates. Kaffir (the insect-like lime—German origin) similarly has nothing to do with “kaffir” (Arabic for “heathen”) “Boy” is obviously an appropriate term for a male child or any race under the age of 13 or so.

I’d check the races of the kids on the playground equipment before I used the word “monkeys” to describe them, though.

I work with a woman who’s from Ethiopia. One day I was griping about that racist postcard with the watermelons on the White House lawn. She had no idea why that was racist.
TBH, I’m not exactly sure why myself. Obviously I know it’s a stereotype, and those always suck, but I don’t know where it came from, so it was kind of hard to explain.

That’s the real problem here: the show’s producers. Even making the generous assumption that educated physicians living in a predominantly white Commonwealth country and exposed to American media would genuinely think that wearing blackface was remotely cool anywhere in the West in 2009, and even if the audience is also that moronically racist, there’s absolutely no excuse for the producers of the show.

While I completely agree with the general sentiment being shared here on the matter - that the action was clearly racist and that all parties involved should have known better, and that ignorance isn’t an excuse, it should be noted that in the most literal sense, Australia is NOT part of “the West”.  The eastern edge of the continent is actually further east than most of the “Far East” countries like Japan.

Anyway, yes, I do get that culturally speaking, they are considered part of “the West”.

</me being nitpicky>

Being so heavily involved in the New Orleans jazz scene and having put a considerable amount of personal time into helping rebuild parts of the Lower Ninth Ward in the Katrina aftermath,

I might have to become a fan of his. Using his privilage to fight this ignorance is the best thing to do. (And one of the few things us white people can do) I’m waiting for the GOP to pull a stunt like this. I can see Beck or Lush Rimjob doing it.

I work with a woman who’s from Ethiopia. One day I was griping about that racist postcard with the watermelons on the White House lawn. She had no idea why that was racist.
TBH, I’m not exactly sure why myself. Obviously I know it’s a stereotype, and those always suck, but I don’t know where it came from, so it was kind of hard to explain.

I’ve heard two reasons: one was that watermelon was sweet and easy to grow in Dixie, and hence a food choice of lazy and undisciplined poor people; the other was that watermelons (and chickens) were relatively easy to steal in a quick, one-off poaching raid on the old plantation—so add “thieving” to the list above. It developed from there by the ignorant racist moron version of the “Operator” party game.

it should be noted that in the most literal sense, Australia is NOT part of “the West”.  The eastern edge of the continent is actually further east than most of the “Far East” countries like Japan.

And we see how much they love the Japanese (man, if you want a good chance at seeing someone foam at the mouth just mention Japan to your average Aussie).

In any case, I was indeed talking about the West in terms of culture, not geography.

They’re the secret to my insanely delicious grilled citrus chicken…

Recipe must be posted, or—as they say in these parts—it didn’t happen.

Add me to the list of people who had no idea of “kaffir”. And I will put limes on and in any dish.

Good on Harry; waiting for the sh!tstorm about him becoming “overtly” “political” for something he “doesn’t know anything about”.

However, now that we’ve come this far, the hijinker in me wonders which rightwing-seeming American musician would do what Connick, Jr. did if in the latter’s place?

Yes, well, The Gong Show (and its rather obvious foreign market knock-offs) was always known for such sterling good taste…..and by sterling in this case, I mean Roger Sterling.

Watermelons are easier to grow than a lot of other fruits (in the hot sunny climates of the South), and when slaves had to tend their own food patches out of the same time they were given to sleep, that was important.

They’re Golliwoggs.  No way in the world is that not offensive; the image is from classic 19th-century racism.

“Watermelons are easier to grow than a lot of other fruits (in the hot sunny climates of the South),”

Oh yeah?  I tried to grow some once; I was all excited; first the vines sprouted, then the flowers came, then the flowers dropped off an little tiny watermelons grew; then they rotted.

Please, for gods’ sakes, remember that Australians and New Zealanders are two different countries with some important differences in culture.  New Zealand race relations aren’t anywhere near perfect, but at least the Maori had the right to vote from the beginning of parliamentary elections in this country (and special parliamentary seats put aside for them later).  Aborigines had to wait until the 1960’s.  I can’t imagine this little performance receiving anything like the same degree of support over here.

The above comment, I’ve just realised, being an interesting example of the reflexive kiwi cringe that occurs whenever Australia screws up.  Since so many people up north think that we’re the same country, us kiwis tend to get a little defensive.

How else are a bunch of white guys supposed to do a tribute to the Jackson Five? It’s not like Australia shared our particular racial history. The aborigines are more like the American Indians of Australia than they are African-Americans. There’s no tradition of belittling blacks as entertainment.

What I’ve learned about racism is that intent matters, as does perception. If there’s no African-Americans there to be offended, and the physicians in the band didn’t mean to offend, and they truly didn’t know any better, was it really offensive?

Eddie Murphy struck a blow for the anti-minstrel show movement when he played an old white man:
http://msp174.photobucket.com/albums/w116/bobosquirrel/Coming-to-America-em13.jpg

I work with a woman who’s from Ethiopia. One day I was griping about that racist postcard with the watermelons on the White House lawn. She had no idea why that was racist.
TBH, I’m not exactly sure why myself. Obviously I know it’s a stereotype, and those always suck, but I don’t know where it came from, so it was kind of hard to explain.

Admittedly, the watermelon stereotype is pretty culturally specific (unlike blackface, which isn’t at all subtle). Obviously black people in other parts of the world aren’t going to be strongly associated with watermelons, but black Southerners in the US are, because of the slave history mentioned in the several posts above. The main reason it’s offensive is that eating of watermelons is an integral part of the Sambo-esque image of simple, uneducated blacks that’s pretty pervasive in this part of the country.

Australia IS very Xenophobic, and quite sexist.  It also has good weather, and compared to all Australians, the blue collar working class is the most decent of all. (Steer away, at any cost, from those who would be in the middle class, but lack distinguishing intellectual, practial or creative skills to get them ahead—Toxic!)

How else are a bunch of white guys supposed to do a tribute to the Jackson Five? It’s not like Australia shared our particular racial history.

Strange, then, that these poor innocent Australians, with no idea of what connotations blackface holds, somehow, by pure coincidence, used exactly the unreal shade of black used during the minstrel days, a color which has no relationship to any living person *I’ve* ever seen, and certainly not to any member of the Jackson family.

Oh!  Golliwog is bad?

When I was little, friends of ours were in a clown troup called the Golliwogs.  They wore neon orange afro-like wigs (more like feathers, but the same round shape) and regular clown makeup.  They were fun.

Now I feel ill.

Hector, you do a tribute to the Jacksons by singing their music or by pantomiming their dance acts.  You do NOT turn them into a minstrel show and act like that’s a TRIBUTE. 

It’s racist shit, and you do not get to say it’s the only way to do a Jackson 5 act and not be called a racist fuck.

I was offended at the whiteface the “Michael” wore.

You do NOT turn them into a minstrel show and act like that’s a TRIBUTE

You cannot just assume that our cultural norms are universals that must be respected—or even recognized—around the world. You can say, “Hey that’s offensive,” and explain why. But claiming they should have known better in advance requires some more evidence.

For example, did you realize if you cross your legs so that the sole of your foot faces someone, that is a horrible insult to that person? That the A-OK handgesture is offensive? That filling a pause with the syllable um is an extreme faux pas?

OK, pre Creedence Clearwater Revival, they call themselves The Golliwogs and wore light colored wigs.  I will pretend that the neighbor teens that babysat me and were part of that troup were imitating a band they liked and were clueless as to the real meaning of “golliwog”

Fuck it.  I grew up in Indiana.  I’m the only clueless one.

Except, 45, that I wasn’t defending the behaviour or excusing it. So your rant is misplaced to the point where its clear you didn’t even read my posts. All I’m looking for is a reduction in the hysterical squawking that characterises much of the thread so far*, and a basic attempt to understand that things work differently in not-the-US. That’s why these things happen.

* seriously, acting like the colour they used was secretly designed to make it worse? The idiots bought some shoe polish or something and thought no further. Dumb, not evil, people. As someone else already pointed out, Aus racism is focused largely on East Asians and Indians.

The troupe doesn’t sound like real Golliwoggs to me, not with light colored wigs and regular clown makeup.  Golliwoggs are English; I never heard of it before watching an episode of “Extras” where Ricky Gervais’s friend was dating a black guy and invited him over.  She had a rack filled with dolls she had as a child, one of which was a Golliwogg, which she took in order to hide it.  He saw her doing it, and then they had an extremely awkward discussion and the date got ruined.

Golliwoggs are English, not American, the word is English, not American, it looks to me like it came out of the English colonialist viewpoint, I think the troupe just heard the word and didn’t realize what it meant.

People in a Commonwealth country, wearing makeup and styling their fake hair to look just like Golliwoggs, yeah, they knew what they were doing - and to do it as a supposed tribute to Michael Jackson??!?!?!?!

Golliwog is bad?

Did nobody outside the so-called Commonwealth read Edith Blyton books when they were wee?

The aborigines are more like the American Indians of Australia than they are African-Americans. There’s no tradition of belittling blacks as entertainment.

In that, they were/are violently oppressed and disparaged by white society? Because being hugely racist against one set of people totally doesn’t relate to being hugely racist against any other group? Right.

The above comment, I’ve just realised, being an interesting example of the reflexive kiwi cringe that occurs whenever Australia screws up.  Since so many people up north think that we’re the same country, us kiwis tend to get a little defensive.

I have a feeling the Canadians often feel the same way about us.

How else are a bunch of white guys supposed to do a tribute to the Jackson Five?

Off the top of my head, they do it in silhouette behind a screen, with their actual race being the big reveal at the end of the number.

The fact that they used make-up at all, and used whiteface to single Michael Jackson from the others, tells us that this “tribute” was as much about skin colour as it was about singing or dancing.

There’s no tradition of belittling blacks as entertainment.

No, just people of colour

What I’ve learned about racism is that intent matters, as does perception.

As I said above, intent matters when you’re judging the actions and views of historical figures who lived in less enlightened versions of our culture. These guys are our contemporaries, are part of a global culture, and as educated folks I’m sure at least one of them knows about as much about the African-American experience (they are impersonating a Motown band) as we do about their Aborigines.

If there’s no African-Americans there to be offended, and the physicians in the band didn’t mean to offend, and they truly didn’t know any better, was it really offensive?

There’s a very popular series on TV tonight in the U.S. that deals with a harmless and clueless guy who doesn’t mean to offend anyone, but somehow manages to be outrageously offensive to the point where everybody cringes. Appropriately enough for this discussion, it’s adapted from an original British show which was also popular in Commonwealth countries.

You cannot just assume that our cultural norms are universals that must be respected—or even recognized—around the world.

Sorry, Hector, but in this case you can. To start with, we’re talking about an information-age, Commonwealth-culture, G-20 country in the year 2009. Second, we’re talking about media people (bigtime network TV producers) who are knowledgeable enough about American pop culture (which focuses quite a bit on race). They know about Golliwogs from the Commonwealth culture, and they also watch American shows like Mad Men. It’s silly to pretend otherwise.

You can say, “Hey that’s offensive,” and explain why.

And that’s exactly what Connick did, in a very kind and matter-of-fact way. The problem is that he shouldn’t have been put into the awkward position of doing so by the show’s producers in the first place, and that even his reasoned explanation was met with hostility by much of the Australian public.

And by the way, if a culture—historical or current—has a large racist component to it, I have no problem pointing out how stupid and counter-productive that racism is. I certainly do that with the modern U.S., and am not shy about applying the same critiques to instances in other cultures and sub-cultures, Western or otherwise.

seriously, acting like the colour they used was secretly designed to make it worse? The idiots bought some shoe polish or something and thought no further.

I didn’t say “secretly designed to make it worse.” I said “clearly taken directly from the whole culture (of minstrel-ry) that makes it racist in the first place.” Shoe polish my ass.

And we see how much they love the Japanese (man, if you want a good chance at seeing someone foam at the mouth just mention Japan to your average Aussie).

That’s a ridiculous exaggeration. Who do you consider the average Aussie to be? WW2 veterans? I think the rabid hatred of Japanese may have existed after WW2, and continued for a significant period, as I’m sure it did in the US and most of South East Asia, but to state that it still exists to that extent is wrong in my experience.

I actually think one of the notable features of Australian racism is it’s consistent pattern of despising groups of newcomers in turn (Greeks, Italians, Vietnamese, Lebanese) before relaxing in to a generally accepting, if somewhat patronising relationship with them, but continuing to despise Aboriginal people, and dark skinned people in general by association.

I’d check the races of the kids on the playground equipment before I used the word “monkeys” to describe them, though.
Comment #51: Gracchus on 10/08 at 02:50 PM

UHm no Grach, that’s just the point - it takes some generosity of understanding on both “sides.”  If people of ANY color refuse to see the similarity to the simian of little kids contorting themselves on playground equipment (which in my day were called “monkey bars”) screw ‘em.  My poin tis, that there is all this concern that “we” and I’m not sure who constitutes that “we” be careful of other cultures and subcultures offensive words.  But in my subculture, 60’s raised midwesterner,  that’s the term in all its non-racial glory for kids on playground climbing equipment.  What privileges one culture over another to demand changes in another’s behavior or language?

An Australian friend of mine once referred to dark-skinned people as “nignogs”. I chastised him for the racial slur, and he insisted it was not a racial slur. I said “Don’t you think the word ‘nignog’ comes from the word ‘nigger’?” He replied, “No, it comes from . . . nignog . . .” That’s what this reminds me of. White guys who deep down know exactly what they’re doing, but plead ignorance when called on it.

Oh yeah?  I tried to grow some once; I was all excited; first the vines sprouted, then the flowers came, then the flowers dropped off an little tiny watermelons grew; then they rotted.
Comment #62: Mike Toreno on 10/08 at 05:05 PM

You want poor but well drained light soil for watermelon, and LOTS of water.  Putting a yarn into a pan of water and cutting a slit in the vine isn’t unheard of.  It rotted probably because you didn’t have it on a straw bed, esp. if you have clay soil.  And you need night heat.  Just sayin’.

Did nobody outside the so-called Commonwealth read Edith Blyton books when they were wee?
Comment #75: Ranylt on 10/08 at 07:37 PM

Pssst, Ranylt.  Cultural miscommunique - wee is something one does, preferably in privacy with the bathroom door closed, not something one is, in the US.

That’s a ridiculous exaggeration. Who do you consider the average Aussie to be? WW2 veterans? I think the rabid hatred of Japanese may have existed after WW2, and continued for a significant period, as I’m sure it did in the US and most of South East Asia, but to state that it still exists to that extent is wrong in my experience.

To be fair, I’m talking about Aussies who’d be about 40+ ... most too young to have been WW2 vets, but still showing the same hatred. I’ve seen it first-hand several times, heard about it second-hand many times, and read about it. Some of it comes out of legitimate grievance, and it isn’t helped by the xenophobia of the Japanese themselves. But I am glad to hear that younger Aussies are getting past it.

UHm no Grach, that’s just the point - it takes some generosity of understanding on both “sides.”

Again, that’s the point when dealing with the other terms you mentioned—it’s easy to elicit that generosity when the words used demonstrably (e.g. with the use of a dictionary or Wikipedia entry at the worst) have absolutely no racist connotations in their proper usage.

But pointing to a jungle gym where 2+ black kids are playing amongst other kids and saying “look at those monkeys” has a chance of inadvertently offending people who may not be mind-readers. One African-American kid, no problem—monkeys is plural. That’s why I’d do a quick check, to avoid a Howard Cosell type gaffe. Cosell was a major supporter of African-American athletes, but one thoughtless and unintentionally offensive comment basically destroyed years of goodwill.

As you say, generosity of understanding from both “sides,” especially when the term has the potential for real ambiguity of usage.

Pssst, Ranylt.  Cultural miscommunique - wee is something one does, preferably in privacy with the bathroom door closed, not something one is, in the US.

She was “make” no miscommunique: she said “wee” and not “weeing” or “going wee.” Unless, perhaps, it’s common in the 60s midwestern subculture to drop the gerundive ending.

What privileges one culture over another to demand changes in another’s behavior or language?

At a bare minimum, history and repentance for same, with a side of ensuring respect is ingrained in future generations. Simple.

But pointing to a jungle gym where 2+ black kids are playing

How dare you sir! Do you not realize that you have placed black children tooclose to the word jungle in your example to be taken lightly.  What is next?  talk about rehabbing your porch and placign said gym with said children near it? 

  Pssst, Ranylt.  Cultural miscommunique - wee is something one does, preferably in privacy with the bathroom door closed, not something one is, in the US.

She was “make” no miscommunique: she said “wee” and not “weeing” or “going wee.” Unless, perhaps, it’s common in the 60s midwestern subculture to drop the gerundive ending.
Comment #86: Gracchus on 10/09 at 12:17 AM

Sigh, “joke Grach, J-O-K-E.  Performative joke at that.  But thanks for playing into the example - as a straight man, you’re hired.

It seems to me that if these men were seriously interested in performing a tribute to the Jackson 5, even a comic one, they would have tried to look like the Jackson 5, had 5 members, and tried to make their dancing look like the Jackson 5 moves. None of which they did. No, they went right to the Afro wigs, shoe polish makeup, and goofy-looking generic dance moves. That took it from mocking the specific Jackson 5 to mocking black people in general. And that is where they went wrong.

Connick handled it about as well as he possibly could. He didn’t call anyone out, he simply said he was offended and explained why. If Australians are seriously complaining about this then I think he must have touched a nerve with a lot of people that they’d rather not acknowledge.

I went to a very conservative college and did and said a lot of nasty, priviledged things that are totally embarrassing in retrospect. I know very well how awful it feels to face your own priviledge and own up to it. But I don’t understand why anyone would think they are important enough that their ability to laugh at a racist joke is more important than a black person’s feelings at being belittled, mocked and offended.

people of African descent
OT, but do you think this saying makes more sense then saying African American? Thoughts?

It seems to me that if these men were seriously interested in performing a tribute to the Jackson 5, even a comic one, they would have tried to look like the Jackson 5, had 5 members, and tried to make their dancing look like the Jackson 5 moves.

Exactly.

I will use the word niggardly when it is the more precise word

+

What privileges one culture over another to demand changes in another’s behavior or language?

+

Cultural miscommunique - wee is something one does, preferably in privacy with the bathroom door closed, not something one is, in the US.

= the suggestion that you indeed were joking on that last one.

As an Australian, I found this skit embarassing. There is NO WAY that we can claim to be ignorant of the connotations that blackface has. We didn’t get educated in a vacuum. The average Aussie knows more about American history than Australian history!

What I found equally inappropriate was the “Where’s Kamahl?” cartoon that flashed onscreen during the skit. For those not in the know, Kamahl is a very famous Australian singer of Malaysian origin. He was so offended that he’s been calling for the show to be “flushed”.

My personal opinion is that if you have to make fun of someone’s dark skin in order to generate a cheap laugh, you’ve got a pretty sad excuse for a comedy show.

Count me in as another embarrassed Australian. This should not have happened, and it’s shameful that there are people defending this skit, which was self-evidently racist and should never have been allowed to air.

Comments like birdonabeam’s @12 grate, though. It is entirely correct to say that racism directed at indigenous Australians by non-indigenous Australians is horrendous and pervasive, and that this racism often goes unchallenged in Australian public discourse and is perpetuated by the Australian media. The self-congratulatory ‘I’m-so-superior-and-enlightened’ thing, though? You can fuck right off with that.

Gracchus, I’ve been Australian for all of my 31 years, and the only person I’ve come across with a Thing about Japan/Japanese people was my maternal grandfather, who was a POW at Changi Prison Camp during WWII. Some of his generation probably still hold such views, and maybe their kids? but I don’t see rampant anti-Japan sentiment here.

Kaffir or Kieffer limes are not really limes, referring to their leaves as lime leaves is wrong and could lead to some nasty culinary episodes.  It is commonly referred to as a makrud lime where kaffir is considered offinensive.  Also limau purut or jeruk prurut for SE Asia.

“where k*ffir is considered offensive…”

is there somewhere this word is not considered offensive? i have the same reaction to this word as to n*gger, and am unaware of a locale in which it is something other than a synonym.