I'm more interested in Larry Wilmore's segment (at 02:25), in which he satirizes common white expectations of a heroically positioned black man -- expectations, that is, that Obama would be another iteration of an old Hollywood standby, the Magic Negro.
I do agree that with Wilmore's satiric point: that a lot of white liberals had their hopes for Obama primed by the cultural pervasiveness of this racial stereotype, and that part of their current disappointment in Obama is a realization that he hasn't proven to be another Magic Negro.
So I'm interested, as Wilmore seems to be, in common white reactions to Obama as a black man. But I'm also interested in common white reactions to Larry Wilmore, as a black man analyzing those common white reactions to Obama as a black man. More about that below the clip . . .
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | ||
| The First 364 Days 23 Hours | ||
I first saw this clip at Gawker, which has long struck me as a place that assumes its readership is comprised primarily of media-savvy, relatively hip, mostly white people (and maybe even people who, although they openly hate "hipsters," often actually fit the hipster profile). In Gawker's post about this clip, the main point of which is that the "The Daily Show" writers "still haven't gotten a good bead on" Obama, Wilmore's segment is briefly described -- and not analyzed:
Larry Wilmore followed and did his thing, which is basically: Talking to white people like they are all racist. This was pretty funny too!
I don't know about you, but given the general tone at Gawker, that description reads to me like sarcasm. Sarcasm that really means, "Wilmore did his same old shtick, which really wasn't all that funny, because it's actually offensive. It's reverse racism, because come now, not all white people are racist! Who does this black man think he is, implying things like that about white people?" And so on.
I think that as before, Jon Stewart does play "typical white guy" here to Larry Wilmore's "racially wise black guy." Stewart again acts rather cowed and frightened by Wilmore, as well as disappointed. He becomes disappointed because although he's feeling sort of racially vulnerable, he still is listening respectfully to what Wilmore has to say. As a result, his typical and naive white liberal hopes -- in this case, in Obama -- are being exposed as such, and then dashed yet again.
In other words, I think that Wilmore's satiric insights -- in this case, about a common white-liberal tendency to let Obama's non-threatening blackness evoke the hoary Magic Negro stereotype -- are brilliant. And Stewart and his writers seem to agree; I think they're basically providing a platform of sorts that makes the insights offered by Wilmore available to those white people willing to grapple with them.
As for Stewart's ongoing role in the brief, staged dialogues that he sometimes has with Wilmore, I think he may be enacting how he and/or his writers think the show's largely white liberal audience should receive Wilmore's insights into their thought and behavior. That is, humbly, and respectfully. Even if, for a lot of white people in such a dialogue, that can be uncomfortable, and even scary.
I wonder, though, how many white viewers actually do grasp Wilmore's deeper and (for them) newer insights. Is the brief Gawker assessment above of Wilmore -- which takes up only a tiny part of their assessment of this two-part segment -- typically dismissive of black insights like those offered by Wilmore? If so, that wouldn't surprise me. After all, white people, even well-intentioned liberals, aren't used to listening respectfully to black people talking about race. Especially if instead of talking about themselves, they're talking about white people.
The Gawker assessment of this segment was written by Adrian Chen, whose name suggests that he's not white. Nevertheless, I think his assessment of this "Daily Show" segment, in its basic dismissal of what Wilmore actually had to say, reflects a common white reaction to black insights into common white ways.
Also interesting in these terms is the reaction to Wilmore of the show's studio audience (also largely white, I assume, which is not to say that people of color don't also enjoy "The Daily Show"). An especially good line of Wilmore's, for instance, seems to fall on deaf ears ("[Obama's] just suffering from the hard bigotry of high expectations!"). Listening carefully to the laughter and other audience reactions again makes me wonder just how willing, let alone ready, white people in general are to listen to black observations about whiteness. And of course, recent conversations in the comment threads on this blog have made me wonder the same thing. Wilmore is basically functioning as a comedian here, but like many black comics before him (and like Paul Mooney, for example [nsfw], today), he has serious revelations to offer white people about themselves.
Gawker is a popular site; at this writing, a day after that piece on the "Daily Show" was posted, it's already been viewed over 8,000 times. So far, it only has 18 comments, two of which address Wilmore's segment -- how do you read them? Do they seem to be taking Wilmore's serious comedy seriously?
Yeah, it seems lots of people were disappointed that Obama was not the "Magic Negro" that they were hoping for.
Next time, Dems, you need to run Morgan Freeman - he's GOD.
---
Oh - folks got the sads now 'cause he doesn't have a magic wand to fix everything right away?
Please. His presidency has managed to restore a certain amount of confidence in the US around the world. Eventually, this should be more effective than any Homeland Security regulation imagineable.
---
I cannot tell a lie. I really thought he was magic.
Damn you, privileged, white upbringing!
Oh wait, there is a fourth comment there, one that I agree with (the part about Wilmore, that is; I don't consider Colbert's satiric persona an annoying one-trick pony):
This Larry Wilmore needs his own show. Sorry, but Colbert is a one trick pony who's act is grating and one dimensional. I want a Wilmore show instead.
But then, if Wilmore did have a show, and he continued to talk to white Americans like this, I don't think it would last very long. That's because white Americans in general aren't ready to listen to a black man's insights into their common ways of being.
[And by the way, again, I'm not saying that people of color don't watch and enjoy "The Daily Show" -- I'm sure many do. I'm interested in common white reactions to it, and especially to Larry Wilmore. I'm also not addressing here Obama's declining popularity more generally, so no comments, please, about what that has to do with his politics, unless your comment clearly has something to do with stuff white people do.]
I think Wilmore hit the nail on the head. I don't think anyone has ever been held to such a high standard as President Obama. And white people are, essentially, expecting magic.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that if Wilmore had his own show he wouldn't have much of a white audience anymore. We're still under that notion that, unless it's Oprah, if a black person is the star of anything - whatever it is is meant for a black audience.
I think few people actually get The Daily Show. Even (maybe especially) the hipsters who "love" the show.
ReplyDeleteYou hit on why I don't think they get it, macon:
And Stewart and his writers seem to agree; I think they're basically providing a platform of sorts that makes the insights offered by Wilmore available to those white people willing to grapple with them.
You ask if perhaps some people dismiss what Stewart says. They do -- as soon as they think he's not talking to them, they're totally missing the point. He IS talking to (and about) you. Even with all the talk of people voting for Obama out of guilt, lying about their plans to vote for Obama, etc... we still see this issue of people who are suddenly upset with him because he isn't the magical negro they thought they were getting. Can you blame them though? Is there anything about our society that suggests black folks who rise to this level of respect and power are anything less than magical? Hell, even the ones of us who aren't this respected and powerful are magical (per our mainstream entertainment media).
On another note, maybe it's because up until about 2007 when I started caring about my life post-undergrad, I never really knew what kind of approval ratings Bush had and in fact, the ones I recall were awfully low; however we are bombarded regularly with these "amazing" drops in approval on Obama. There's something to that -- but that's for another time I suppose.
To get what Stewart, his writers and guests like Wilmore do is to open up to the idea that you, yes you white guy with all your black friends, I am talking to you, might actually have some real racist tendencies.
@A.Smith re: "To get what Stewart, his writers and guests like Wilmore do is to open up to the idea that you, yes you white guy with all your black friends, I am talking to you, might actually have some real racist tendencies."
ReplyDeleteYes, I think this is the essence of white fear about engaging in any dialog about or examination of racism. Most of us prefer to hold on to the seething bigot definition of racist because it allows us to exclude ourselves. Ergo, we see any wider use of the term--anything that implicates the system in general or WIWLs in particular as delusional or another use of that ever-ready "broad brush" (a metaphor that invariably comes out when our racist dander is up).
On the larger question of the OP, I realize that I fell victim to that stereotype, too. I really wanted to believe that Obama could single-handedly (i.e., magically) change the political culture of Washington and take on the moneyed interests, and when I think about that now, it's clear that I wouldn't have sincerely believed that about any white candidate. Part of the disappointment over the last year, I think, is waking up from that illusion and realizing that I've been duped by white culture yet again. I have felt angry at Obama, but now I see it's anger that comes from buying into the stereotype, and that it's misplaced if directed toward Obama himself.
Obama deliberately framed himself as a Magic Negro - see Paul Street and Black Agenda Report on how.
ReplyDelete@Magical
ReplyDeleteI won't pretend like I intend to read this report...
But if someone could make a convincing argument that President Obama deliberately framed himself as such, I would respond that all he did was use decades of white beliefs on white people, to his own gain.
It's not his fault if people believed the bullsh*t when they'd been telling themselves and each other that for decades and long before Barack Obama was even born.
However, I don't think anyone could make a convincing argument that he deliberately framed himself this way. People just want an excuse to a)believe in a magical negro and b)be upset that President Obama is not said magical negro.
@A. Smith - Black Agenda Report is not "a report," it's a political journal where some of the brightest leftist thinkers such as Glen Ford, Bill Quigley, and Tim Wise write. Following your contention, if Obama did frame himself in accordance to white beliefs - doesn't he deserve whatever dismay he gets for the frame he put himself in? After all, Obama marketed himself and is thus received differently than Malcolm X, Aime Cesaire, or Jomo Kenyatta. "Magical Negro" is not the default lens through which a black man is viewed.
ReplyDelete"After all, white people, even well-intentioned liberals, aren't used to listening respectfully to black people talking about race."
ReplyDeleteChange "even" to "especially" and you'll just about have it. People who think that they are already enlightened often have the "pretending to listen" down pat, and the "actually listening" is hard work for them.
I keep running into your blog by Googling various films and TV shows I like...now it's like I'm going Ah! Stuff White People Do had something to say about this! Glad to be discovering you. As a white chick who's in rabid denial of being a hipster but also living in Santa Monica, I've always thought Wilmore's pieces on the Daily Show were the single most important result of Obama's administration so far.
ReplyDeleteListening carefully to the laughter and other audience reactions again makes me wonder just how willing, let alone ready, white people are in general are to listen to black observations about whiteness.
ReplyDeleteI think part of it also may be a lack of context or previous knowledge that they can use to help process new insights at the time they're given. For example, my fella and I were watching Chris Rock's new special a couple months ago, and he does this routine about how he doesn't trust white people. He quips about how if he was sitting with Regis Philbin and Philbin suddenly stuck a knife into his [Rock's] neck, Rock would not only not be surprised, he'd be apologizing to Philbin for how he left his neck exposed.
I immediately put it into context, but I was only able to do that because I'd read the discussion fromthetropics had started with her post about microaggressions. It made sense to me on the level of, "we feel like we have to protect ourselves from white people every day, because we're constantly under all these assaults," and also from an internalized-white-supremacist-culture level of, "and when bad things happen to PoC, we PoC deserve it for one reason or another."
So I think I got what Rock was saying there. But if I had watched that special six months ago, I wouldn't have. I would have just thought he was being hyperbolic for effect and laughed at the absurd idea of Regis Philbin knifing him in the neck, and then moved on without ever really thinking about what Rock was actually trying to convey.
I started learning about anti-racism a lot longer than six months ago, but even with what I had already learned, I wouldn't really have understood what Rock was saying without having read fromthetropic's post first. I just wouldn't have had the context to understand it (or even just to realize that there's something deeper there to understand).
So yeah. I think part of the problem is white people not wanting to listen to or recognize black insights as valid (and goodness knows I've been realizing how often I still do this, even though I'm trying not to), and part of it is that even when/if white people do want to understand, they may still lack the context or understanding to "get" what's really being said.
It seems like the only line that got a lot of laughs and not so many "I'm offended" groans was the dig at conservatives with the clips of O'Reilley and Beck at the end. I have a feeling the WIWL feels their being liberal is automatically synonymous with anti-racist, which is why we can laugh hardest at the conservative buttheads but not ourselves.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious if anyone else heard those "offended groans" at various points during Wilmore's commentary. Is it just me?
Perception is one of my favorite concepts, and Obama is one of my latest favorite examples of WP's & POC's difference in perception. [Some] WP see Obama as magical, racially "transcending" (fail), and by God--he just speaks so well! And I think WP get so wrapped up in how he speaks that they tend to miss what he actually says (which helps explain their inability to fully "see" him). Because when a Negro delivers a well-spoken speech, that's enough to stop and marvel. Content, on the other hand, is dismissed before even being considered for dismissal.
ReplyDeletePOC look at Obama, and yes, we see a man. Yes, we see an educated man. A family man, a spiritual man, blah blah blah blah. We see his virtues and appreciate them, but we can also see he's a total (albeit cute) skinny little nerd who dances slightly off rhythm, and whose wife obviously owns every last hair on his balls--just as the gods intended.
Conclusion? [Some] WP see Obama, their verdict is "Mighty magical healer of white folks' guilt." POC see Obama and think, "Eh, he aight."
"I have a feeling the WIWL feels their being liberal is automatically synonymous with anti-racist, which is why we can laugh hardest at the conservative buttheads but not ourselves."
ReplyDeleteThis, big time. I think/fear that a lot of white people "like" the Daily Show because less because what it's actually saying, and more because it's the polar opposite of Fox News-type media. TDS is like a brand, in a way. "Liking" TDS says good things about you: that you're liberal, hip, intelligent enough to get the jokes (they think), and of course— need it even be said?— not racist. Oh, and it says you're an independent thinker! Muuuch too independent and individual and special and educated to fall into racist tendencies. I mean, as if! That's so old-school and redneck. Totally not hip.
Oh, and, Wilmore's a genius by the way.
ReplyDeleteYou have got to love that Avatar reference. Nice one.
I think it's very telling that TDS became really popular (or, the TDS brand became popular--nice, karinova) w/the hipster-WIWL types in the late years of Bush Jr. The show was pretty much just "let's make fun of the Republicans." It did *not* used to be like that (I have been watching TDS *almost* since Stewart started on it).
ReplyDeleteEven during the '04 election season, when it became obvious very quickly that Stewart wasn't quite the independent he kept claiming to be, he had harsh words for liberals as well as conservatives. That kind of dropped off a couple of years ago as Bush got so, so bad.
WIWL and, especially, hipsters can't stand to be made fun of. I just hope TDS can continue to maintain its viewership even as it re-begins to poke fun at its current major demographic.
Oh. Huh. You know, I think I just discovered why one chunk of my friends prefers TDS and the other group thinks Colbert Report is funnier.
does anyone else feel that pres. obama and the 1st family have over the past year come to be generally perceived-perhaps almost subconsciously-as less and less 'black'?
ReplyDeleteto me it seems so. they're mostly surrounded by WP, in either white or sort of race neutral contexts and environments, doing WP sort of stuff a lot of the time, dressing like WP...it just strikes me that it's like a kind of exception has been made for the obamas. they are the quintessential 'safe' BP who WM like me are comfortable around; who we'd LIKE to have move in next door. suppose instead that he'd put a lot of BP around him in all sorts of capacities and levels, if HIS white house was noticeably blacker. eeeeeh....i'm not so sure that would have gone down so well w/WP; even 'non-racists.'
a lot of WP don't like the pres. its true-but i think the racial aspect of that is less and less. they don't like obama because they think he's a crypto-muslim or a neo-trotsky.
obama's problem is the same as that of bill clinton; he's too far right for the real Left, and WAY too far left for the Right. and that's too bad, because he'll have a devil of a time fighting the partisanship.
but i voted for obama, and i'm satisfied w/his work so far.
@Moi - I get what you're saying about white people being overly impressed with black people being articulate, but I wince a little at the essentialization - whites see this, non-whites see that. I say that because as a PoC so many of my relatives see Obama as a magical negro, though perhaps differently than whites do. They interpret him according to their conception of him even in opposition to his actual words/acts. I.E. my dad claims Obama was being disingenuous when he scolded black men on father's day - that he really doesn't have such a low estimate of black men but he had to say what he said to get in to office to and once there he'll stick up for black people. But now that he's in office and, for example, callously dismissing black congress people, my dad is saying, wait, once he swore himself in he was supposed to pull off the Clark Kent disguise and turn into racially conscious superman - and that didn't happen. But then again, my family thinks Obama can dance : )
ReplyDeleteMalcom said
ReplyDelete"I'm interested in common white reactions to it, and especially to Larry Wilmore."
I had never heard of the "Magical Negro" stereo type before until I got into this blog.I think the deeper racial message that Wilmore was alluding to would have just went right over the "average" white guys head.I think whites would have agreed with him but not understood what he was getting at unless your familiar with "anti racist" thinking.I think the show was more directed at white liberals not your average white guy (what ever that means).Obama was the first Democrat I ever voted for.I voted for him because I believe he is honest and that's a rare thing in Washington.I was impressed with Michele Obama and they are blessed with a beautiful family.I feel he has character and that his values best reflect mine and that even if I disagreed with him on some things I Trust him to make the right decisions.So unlike liberals I don't have an agenda that I expect him to fulfill.Philosophically I've always been libertarian and politically I'm independent and centrist. I value more liberal ideas now then I did a few years ago..
@Randy
"they're mostly surrounded by WP, in either white or sort of race neutral contexts and environments, doing WP sort of stuff a lot of the time, dressing like WP".What !?! Dude this makes no sense to me.It racist though maybe their are cro-magnum white people that think this crap.
"they don't like obama because they think he's a crypto-muslim or a neo-trotsky."
Those are the people who watch Fox News.
"he's too far right for the real Left, and WAY too far left for the Right. and that's too bad, because he'll have a devil of a time fighting the partisanship."
Thats true: I believe him to a centrist within left of center idology.He also inherited a mess that no U.S. preseident in the last 70 years has had to deal with..
I agree: blacks had their own concept of Obama as magical in that White people would judge the whole of us through him. Maybe this time, as in the case of Joe Lewis or Jack Johnson; he will embody everything that’s noble about us in white people’s eyes. Just as a white radio commentator remarked how Joe Lewis was, “A credit to his race” only after he defeated Max Schmeling. This man is going to be our ticket to equality! Things are going to change some blacks hoped. Course, just in case we thought too highly of ourselves after Johnson’s victory at Reno, a white commentator penned, “A word to the Black Man.”
ReplyDeleteDo not point your nose too high
Do not swell your chest too much
Do not boast too loudly
Do not be puffed up
Let not your ambition be inordinate
Or take a wrong direction
Remember you have done nothing at all
You are just the same member of society you were last week
You are on no higher plane
Deserve no new consideration
And will get none
No man will think a bit higher of you
Because your complexion is the same
Of that of the victor at Reno (Or the national stage)
Our hopes and dreams were embodied in Obama, the same way we looked to black Heroes previous to him. Blacks celebrated, thinking things will be different. After the first and second world war- again we murmured, “things will be different.” Whites will treat us with respect and finally view us as equals, because we fought too! Although privately, some whites still echo the text from, “A word to the black man.” Don’t lift your head too high because a black man has been elected president. Don’t think too much of yourselves, because individually- you have done nothing. Don’t think we’re going to treat you any differently- or lift you up any higher because a black man occupies that office. So yes to some of us he was our magical Negro. But for whites he would prove to them that they weren’t racist. He would magically remove the taint of centuries with just a wave of his hand. "Things will be different," whites said. The world will look on us differently because we elected a black man to the Presidency. “Barack is going to fix it for us,” echoed simultaneously by both races... I’m sure even now after Obama’s lackluster first year, whites are saying see? I told you a black man can’t be president. To us that translates; no black man should ever have the audacity to hope.
Randy said...
ReplyDelete“Does anyone else feel that pres. Obama and the 1st family have over the past year come to be generally perceived-perhaps almost subconsciously-as less and less 'black'?”
I think it’s the only way some whites can tolerate him in the office of president. Last year we elected a black man to the presidency and we had a black coach win the super bowl. During that same time a black man was appointed chairman of the Republican Party and we were just at the beginning of black history month. That was bad year for some whites because we were in the news a lot for doing Good Things. We were just too damned visible for the likes of some. I guess some whites feel, we’ll have to give him a temporary white pass because we still have three years to go. Better get used to it. Better get used to seeing Michelle’s naked arms and her big butt in profile. Better get used to little black children running around on the white house lawn. Better get used to watching the first couple (a black couple mind you) Opening state dinners- giving addresses and waving to the people like their better than us. Some whites have to force themselves to do what seems to come naturally for others. See the first family as equals.
I agree that white people are astounded about how a black person is saying something instead of what they are actually saying.
ReplyDeleteThe first episode of The Boondocks Huey told white people the truth and all they did was applaud him and marveled at how well he spoke.
As for the magical negro a lot of people were shocked that he wasn't I remeber being on different message boards and people were shocked that racism was still alive and kicking even though obama became president
A.Smith said...
ReplyDelete@Magical
“However, I don't think anyone could make a convincing argument that he deliberately framed himself this way. People just want an excuse to a)believe in a magical negro and b)be upset that President Obama is not said magical negro.”
News editors in back rooms were asking, how can we frame this black man to fit the image of “every man?" Media outlets were already hard at work spinning his image to suit their liking. Terrorist- the racial other, militant couple with the secret hand-dap; take your pick. Whites on both sides were framing him as either the magical negro- or the devil incarnate. I think he knew he had to disassociate himself from certain personalities lest he appear too black- too angry, or too militant. Jesse, Sharpton- Rev. Wright- Farrakhan; all had to be avoided like the plague. He couldn’t take a stand on too many minority issues; having to assume a position on race that was both conciliatory and accommodating. We are not giving this black man credit for always looking for the middle-ground; avoiding conflict by forging towards the center. We forget just how intelligent and discerning he is.
would like to watch the clip but there is a large message on it saying i cant watch as its unavailable in my country (UK)
ReplyDeleteWendy,
ReplyDeleteDid you try the Gawker post? Most of the clip is there, but not all of it (if I remember right). Sometimes "Daily Show" segments show up on YouTube as well, though I haven't found this one there yet. Maybe there's some separate UK "Daily Show" site?
@Magical
ReplyDeleteWe're going to have to agree to disagree, most likely on this point.
And no, "magical negro" is not the default lens through which white people see black men, but it is the default lens through which they see black men who achieve a certain level of success which is what I was getting at in my very first response in this thread when I said (sarcastically):
we still see this issue of people who are suddenly upset with him because he isn't the magical negro they thought they were getting. Can you blame them though? Is there anything about our society that suggests black folks who rise to this level of respect and power are anything less than magical? Hell, even the ones of us who aren't this respected and powerful are magical (per our mainstream entertainment media).
You want to know why Tiger Woods rose so fast (besides distancing himself from black people)? He was framed as a magical negro (shhhh... don't tell him that) and he fell just as quickly when everyone found out he wasn't really completely magical. The irony is, many people who followed Tiger when he was in college say he had a reputation for being a womanizer. He became successful on a national stage, was framed as magical by the press, and it's like none of that other stuff mattered -- until now.
As for President Obama framing himself differently from, say, Malcolm X, the comparison isn't completely fair. Different times, different end goals and different beliefs. Malcolm X didn't want (in his early years) to be liked or accepted by white people. I'd argue he wasn't really even trying to be liked by black people. He just wanted better lives for black people. By trade, politicians have to make you like them. President Obama framed himself as no more magical than any other person running for an elected office. They all want us to think they have a wand (though I would argue Obama went out of his way to caution people about expecting major changes very quickly) -- except President Obama is now suffering from people who feel let down by expectations they heaped on him that they would not have heaped on him had he been white.
I totally agree with you suggesting some PoCs are guilty of framing Obama as magical, albeit differently from WP. Some PoCs are experiencing the same disappointment, but because of different issues. None of it is fair or appropriate. The man is just a man. All of it really drives me crazy.
@mgibson-
ReplyDeleteForgive me if I'm missing your point, because I think I may be --
But the way the press framed him is different from the way he framed himself.
You are right about his discerning abilities and how they played out with how he distanced himself from certain people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.
However, understanding you gotta play the middle is not the same as being magical. Magical negroes come in and fix everything. I wouldn't disagree with the assertion that he framed himself in a way that suggested he was "normal" (and I know we have threads and threads AND THREADS on how white and male is the "norm" and from which everything else is judged, so draw from my usage of that word what you will) and non-threatening. He absolutely did.
I don't believe he framed himself as magical -- I believe he tried to counteract that in many speeches, including his victory speech on November 4, 2008.
The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who wont agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government cant solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagreeThe road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.
Anyone who continued to see him as magical did that to themselves but he's still feeling the burn of unrealistic expectations
I've got an idea for a future post: "Laugh nervously at racially-tinged humour".
ReplyDeleteMacon: are you suggesting that *all* criticisms of the POTUS are racial? Your post reads like that.... just curious.
ReplyDeleteJeremiah, I'm not sure if you're referring especially to the [bracketed] end of the post? Anyway, no, I'm not suggesting that *all* criticisms of the POTUS are racial. What I meant at the end of the post was that I don't want this discussion to be derailed by discussions of the POTUS and his policies and so on that doesn't have to do with racism/white supremacy, since the ways of white folks are the topic of this blog.
ReplyDelete@Jeremiah re: 'Macon: are you suggesting that *all* criticisms of the POTUS are racial? Your post reads like that.... just curious.'
ReplyDeleteJust curious? Uh-huh. I think we're gonna get the "broad brush" defense. I just re-read macon's original post, and I can't see that implication anywhere--and I was looking for it. Could you give a specific example?
In case you don't have an example, I'll respond to your question. Race is so intermingled with criticism of Obama that it has to be considered as a factor in the statements of his critics. Yes, ALL of them. Sometimes, as with the monkey caricatures and fear-mongering (see death panels) it's obvious, and sometimes the racial aspect needs to be teased out (the whole "radical" characterization is absurd on the face of it in light of what actual radicals say and do compared to Obama--unless you think of black men as angry rebels in the first place). Sometimes, race isn't a factor (Paul Krugman's critique that Obama's stimulus plan wasn't strong enough). But because racism is so pervasive in our society, to assume its absence unless it's blatant seems kind of naive, in a willfully ignorant sort of way.
@randy:
ReplyDelete"its true-but i think the racial aspect of that is less and less. they don't like obama because they think he's a crypto-muslim or a neo-trotsky."
but, see, I'm not sure that's "not racial" at all. Both being a "crypto-muslim" or "neo-trotsky" are closely linked to perceiving him as an Other, no? (Aren't these the same people who are obsessed with his birth certificate?)
A.Smith said...
ReplyDelete"Anyone who continued to see him as magical did that to themselves but he's still feeling the burn of unrealistic expectations."
No I don't believe he framed himself- that wasn't his job; it was his image makers behind the scenes. His campaign manager, his publicity machine; they're the ones complicit in his magical makeover. To help whites see the nobler side of themselves through his “power” to bring people together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_negro
“The magical Negro is a supporting, sometimes mystical stock character in fiction who, by use of special insight or powers, helps the white protagonist get out of trouble.”
Now that’s not much of a stretch when we consider the two wars we're currently engaged in. The economic crises and his pledge to whisk all of those troubles away with the simple phrase, “yes we can.” He didn’t scare whites but rather- he inspired them. Just think of the possibilities whites in power murmured.
This from the, The Los Angeles Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,3391015.story
“Obama the 'Magic Negro'
The Illinois senator lends himself to white America's idealized, less-than-real black man.
The senator's famously stem-winding stump speeches have been drawing huge crowds to hear him talk of uniting rather than dividing. A praiseworthy goal. Consequently, even the mild criticisms thrown his way have been waved away, "magically." He used to smoke, but now he doesn't; he racked up a bunch of delinquent parking tickets, but he paid them all back with an apology. And hey, is looking good in a bathing suit a bad thing?
The only mud that momentarily stuck was criticism (white and black alike) concerning Obama's alleged "inauthenticty," as compared to such sterling examples of "genuine" blackness as Al Sharpton and Snoop Dogg. Speaking as an African American whose last name has led to his racial "credentials" being challenged — often several times a day — I know how pesky this sort of thing can be.
Obama's fame right now has little to do with his political record or what he's written in his two (count 'em) books, or even what he's actually said in those stem-winders. It's the way he's said it that counts the most. It's his manner, which, as presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden ham-fistedly reminded us, is "articulate." His tone is always genial, his voice warm and unthreatening, and he hasn't called his opponents names (despite being baited by the media).
Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him.”
In this sense he is a modern figure contrived totally of the white imagination. They built him up to occupy the dizzying heights of power and it is they who will bring him down should he fail to deliver. He had faults- defects and shortcomings; whites just didn't want to see them. Some of us blacks were simply blinded by hope; clothed in black skin.
Yes we can…. Yes we can…. Yes- we can.... Just keep repeating these words over to yourselves and believe. Now that has magical overtones...
@A. Smith - I agree to disagree with you : ) Magical Negro, IMO, is NOT the default lens for any black man who reaches a certain level of success. Part of the Magical Negro trope is his priorities. As Time Magazine pointed out, Bagger Vance uses his magic not to stop the Klan but to teach white men how to golf. I would argue that Randall Robinson was as successful as Obama before he became pres - and has arguably done more real world good even since Obama became Pres, but he doesn't get the Magical Negro treatment because he doesn't have Magical Negro priorities. Robinson spoke out against apartheid in South Africa when it was unpopular - when Obama was asked for a comment on what even Jimmy Carter has called apartheid in Palestine - instead of seizing the platform he said, "I'm not in office yet," and made some comments on sports. Robinson critiqued the government's response to Katrina as racist. Obama said it was not racist - merely incompetent - and has gotten a D rating on New Orleans rebuilding - but don't worry, the bankers got their bailout money...
ReplyDeletesarcasm intended here:
ReplyDeleteObama only seems "magical" to people because ANY reasonable human being sitting in the Oval Office seems like a miracle after 8 years of Dubya.
Ever since Obama started to receive this super harsh criticism about 6 months ago, I was VERY puzzled by it. I kept saying to everyone "Can he be in office a year FIRST?" It seemed like they were not only criticizing what he did/did not do, but blaming him for the results of the previous administration as well.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't put my finger on why these people would be so overtly harsh and much more critical than they had EVER been of Bush. Wilmore's segment finally revealed it to me and now I absolutely see how that fits.
@Roxie-I think that Obama's criticism is probably less than Bush's but in a worse form - i.e. tea parties. For example, I don't think Obama's popularity rating has dipped as low as Bush's.
ReplyDeleteLOL - I'm watching the local FOX news right now and they "casually" mentioned how the White House's "value dropped 5% since Obama took office a year ago."
ReplyDeleteThey couldn't just say "value dropped 5% over the past year."
[Anonymous, you seem to have missed this part of the post:
ReplyDeleteI'm also not addressing here Obama's declining popularity more generally, so no comments, please, about what that has to do with his politics, unless your comment clearly has something to do with stuff white people do.
~macon]
I'm going to have to think about this. I confess that I have been disappointed in the way Obama has done several things, but how much of my disappointment is legitimate, and how much is a (subconscious) belief in the Magic Negro stereotype? Thanks for the post.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is a question of magic negro or not (at least not for me). My disappoint is not that things are all sunshines and unicorns (I know it takes more than a few months).
ReplyDeleteBut, the transparency and hope and openess seem to have been a thing of campaign time only. I know, politicians always lie, over-promise and do whatever is necessary to win. But, Pres. Obama was very adamant that he was not that guy.
Plus, it seems too many (or at least for health care) that he is letting Congress do the heavy lifting. I know about separation of powers and such, but he still seemed complacent to deal with whatever the House and Senate sent his way.
Finally, the habit of blaming any bad news on George W does wear thin. yes, the situation was a mess after W; yes, much of the bad news now is still hangover from then. But, you cannot blame everything bad on someone else and simultaneously take credit for all good news.
I do like his aura of education. His public speaking skills, especially compared to the prior guy, lend credibility to the Office. I understand that oratory skill is not necessarily directly correlated with intelligence, but it does make a good impression.
I like the big ideas, even if I disagree with the spending or some implementation. Addressing health care, immigration and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are paramount and takes courage.
I won't issue a 'grade' or any of the other BS too many news outlets do. I think that the direction of many policies is too expensive, too expansive maybe. But, these are issues needing to be addressed, and addressed openly. The wingnuts and libtards are not the issue; the far left will always support him (even if they bitch about it, who they gonna vote for? McCain). And the wingnuts will never support him. These groups are too entrenched in ideology.
BUT.. the 60-70% of America between these polarities... they mostly want to take care of their families, to help others where they can to be left alone. Those are the folks who pushed Obama over the top. If a populist could remain a true populist, that person would have a huge support base... but the idealogues would hate it. We had Reagan Democrats, now we have Obama Republicans. Can he hold them 2 terms?? we shall see.
Not expecting magic, just living up to campaign promises of openess and honesty
I just wanted to say that today was the first time I've come across this blog and it's really made me stop and consider race from a new perspective. I was brought up with certain racial habits or patterns of thought that still cling to me. I don't really notice them until I have to stop and frame the same situation though a few mental filters.
ReplyDeletePolitical parties just muddy the waters of racism. Each politically active person should be judged on his or her own merits or demerits when it comes to racism. If you're a white Republican are you automatically a racist and if you're a white liberal Democrat are you a closet racist? There are some Democrats that fall into that "allowance" of PoC's capability and intelligence. As if by supporting PoC, they prove their own inability to be racist. These morally superior thoughts are self limited though by the qualification that these particular PoC who achieve great things are unusual in some way from their compatriots.
For the white Republican aspect, I grew up in this environment and for those that aren't openly racist they seem to have nearly the same mentality whereby they make allowances that one or two PoC might just be able to contribute something to society. This is typified by their elevating the one particular PoC in their own party to a high political post. They person in question probably deserved the post, but the timing was suspicious given a Democrat PoC suddenly in the White House.
Another thing I found interesting is how PoC will sometimes dismiss PoC who happen to choose to be Republicans. Despite nothing being in the Republican charter that would seem to openly endorse racism. They view these individuals as sell outs or puppets of a white agenda. I have no doubt they are used politically because of their color as both parties are capable of that, but I question if anyone should be so dismissed simply because of their endorsement of a different political/governmental formula.
Sorry for my writing style, grammar, punctuation and spelling (whew!), but I did want to post my thoughts and to congratulate you on a very nice and thought provoking blog.
Thanks for commenting, Joseph, and I'm glad you like the blog. I agree that white members of both parties typically display racism, and that some of that is more similar than they usually realize. (I have nothing to say about POC dismissing Republican POC as sellouts, especially since this blog is about stuff white people do.)
ReplyDelete