OK, I have not been neglecting the Cafe, but BBW is up and running! My intentions to wait until January (tomorrow) to start the new blog were foiled when it became clear that she would not wait (in case anyone out there has ever heard a writer talk about characters leading them in certain directions, this new blog kind of declared herself and has taken me for quite a ride so far). Anyway, I am here to share a bit before I go off the ring in the New Year with friends.
2010 was definitely a roller coaster, but what year isn't? Sadly, this year could not end fast enough for me for reasons that I cannot fully express except to say that someone hurt me and it has yet to dissipate, despite the cheery face I have paraded around since the offending incident.
I am upset and angry, because I am the one who is suffering from this person's actions. I am not sure that she cares about my feelings (not quite sure that she can), but it still hurts. What she did was cruel and mean-spirited and even if time heals all wounds, there has not been enough time between the incident and today to make this go away.
So I resolved to write about it, and then leave it all here on the page in a symbolic act of leaving it behind in 2010. Why here on the blog? Because I expect there will come a point in time when I will want to look back to see how far I have come in dealing with my pain.
On the BBW blog, I said that I had a series of revelations and the first one was specifically written for this situation--I will bloom where I am planted. Right now it happens to be in a giant pile of sh&*, but that is supposedly an excellent fertilizer. Thus, no matter how stinky and nasty the behavior directed at me becomes, I will bloom anyway.
I do not know what 2011 holds. Lord knows I am hoping for better days. I pray for the person who hurt me because she truly needs prayer. I also need prayer because I have no idea what I am facing, but since I believe that God is bigger than my problem, I am not going to worry. I am a conqueror!
Friday, December 31, 2010
Saturday, December 18, 2010
From a Colored Girl with thoughts on "for colored girls"
(This has been waiting for me to finally edit and post.)
I finally saw the movie and my review is...meh. I prefer the play.
A few years ago, my local PBS station aired a televised adaptation in the 1980s that starred Lynne Whitfield and Alfre Woodard, and I at that time, I lamented that there were few, if any, playwrights as bold as Ntozake Shange. I might have even cited Mr. Perry as the best example of what was being offered--and how it was not even in the same league in terms of complexity, sophistication and intent. I saw this stage adaptation as a child and in reflecting on my childhood impressions of it, and the mature themes were so over my head that I should not have had such positive and lasting memories of it. But I did. And I am so happy that I had those memories going in to see Perry's film version (alongside the positive impressions of having read the poem in college.)
I was disappointed by the thin narrative that was created as the vehicle for presenting this work. While I liked the idea of the women all living in the same apartment building or having overlapping interactions with each other in the same block, I was not convinced that these lives would have interacted so easily in 2010 as they did in the 1970s. In the original work, part of the excitement was the awareness of self and the awakening of black women on the tail end of the women's movement as relevant themes. But when you fast forward 35+ years to the future and try to tell the same story in our time, a lot gets lost in translation.
In this film, the woman in orange becomes the older sister to the woman in purple and their mother is a deranged woman in white. The woman in brown works as the executive assistant to the woman in red who blows off the woman in green when she makes a charity call. The woman in blue is a social worker who visits the women in brown to check in on her children; the woman in yellow is a dance instructor who teaches the woman in purple. The woman in gray (?) is the apartment manager in the building where orange and brown live on the same floor as neighbors. The woman in green stops by this apartment building to check in on her man who lives downstairs, while the woman in yellow walks by this same building everyday on her way to her dance studio.
And beyond that, there is little that truly binds these women to each other. These are superficial relationships, which certainly are plausible, but in our modern times, superficial means that we barely see each other on the street, let alone care enough to notice. This thin thread that supposedly connects these women is problematic for a film that depends on some type of interaction among its characters to make any sense. Not that it is totally improbable, but the thinness of their connections reveals itself as the film unfolds. Why is the woman in orange estranged from her younger sister in purple? And why would she send her naive younger sister to another deranged woman in white for help (portrayed by Macy Gray with such intensity that it was easily one of the most haunting performances)? And in 2010, there is a such thing as Macy Gray's woman in white? And why would the woman in red be perceptive enough to notice her husband's wandering eye but not so much as to notice the abuse inflicted on the woman in brown, her assistant? And the woman in blue was the link to all of them? Really?
The narrative structure was not the only problem with this film. I listened to a review that suggested that Perry inserted himself into this film in several not so subtle ways, and I have to agree. Each character came straight from the Tyler Perry canon: the moral center (Madea) was the woman in gray; the troubled woman in need of Jesus was the woman in brown; the women in white were the embodiments of bad choices/consequences/karma; the righteous victims of circumstance, the women in blue and yellow; the fallen women were the two sisters in orange and purple; and then the been-there but-still-trying-to-get-it-right was the woman in green. Oh, and the bitch was the woman in red. And the righteous blue-collar brother was there too (dressed in navy blue), as was the professional man who creeps on the side (dressed in gray)...
While I could find flaws in each of the women, I have to focus my attention on the woman in red, portrayed by a very stiff Janet Jackson (the weakest link of the ensemble cast). Not only was it the most unoriginal character in the film (because she was simply the black version of Miranda Priestly in "The Devil Wears Prada"), but she was so out of place that she appeared to be in another movie. Am I the only person who found her totally unnecessary? (Others have criticized Thandie Newton's performance as screechy, and well, I have to agree. But it worked for me...)
Finally, the most disappointing aspect of this film was the way in which Ntozake Shange, the genius who gave us this beautiful piece of work, was marginalized. To string all of this together, her poetry was largely discarded, which might have been necessary in order to make room for Perry's narrative, but the result is a film that retains only the outline of the original choreopoem. My favorite monologues were cut short or poorly edited to fit into the allotted scene ("Toussaint" being the most egregious cut of all). And when the characters do recite from the original piece, it doesn't work. Imagine a typical scene in any other Tyler Perry movie, then have one of the characters turn to the camera to recite a soliloquy from Shakespeare and you will get my point.
Well, having said all of that, I give Tyler Perry a lot of credit for tackling this work. I do not believe anyone else would have the balls to attempt such a drastic re-staging of this work, especially since there are so few women of color directing films these days. Perry is a savvy businessman who knows that he needs to expand his audience, so by taking on a sacred feminist work like "colored girls", he pretty much knew that this would pay off. Sure, he has taken a lot of heat for what is perceived to be his hated of black men, this play has never been about the men who wreak havoc on the lives of the women...this is about the women who have allowed these men into their lives. Even if Perry had not directed this, a black female director would have received the same condemnation.
However, Perry is guilty of moralizing where the point was not to make moral assumptions about the characters. Shange's intent was not to impose judgment on these women, but to highlight the choices that these women made in their own individual pursuits of happiness. In his update, Perry punishes each woman for her moral failings--infidelity, infertility, rape, murder, terminal illness, physical deformity, mental depravity, psychosis...i.e., the wages of sin.
So, back to my original suggestions: read the original play, watch the PBS adaptation, and then watch this film and compare and contrast the three. What you will discover is that Perry paid a respectful homage to a work that he clearly admired, but unfortunately, did not successfully adapt for 2010. It is not a terrible movie, but it not great either.
I finally saw the movie and my review is...meh. I prefer the play.
A few years ago, my local PBS station aired a televised adaptation in the 1980s that starred Lynne Whitfield and Alfre Woodard, and I at that time, I lamented that there were few, if any, playwrights as bold as Ntozake Shange. I might have even cited Mr. Perry as the best example of what was being offered--and how it was not even in the same league in terms of complexity, sophistication and intent. I saw this stage adaptation as a child and in reflecting on my childhood impressions of it, and the mature themes were so over my head that I should not have had such positive and lasting memories of it. But I did. And I am so happy that I had those memories going in to see Perry's film version (alongside the positive impressions of having read the poem in college.)
I was disappointed by the thin narrative that was created as the vehicle for presenting this work. While I liked the idea of the women all living in the same apartment building or having overlapping interactions with each other in the same block, I was not convinced that these lives would have interacted so easily in 2010 as they did in the 1970s. In the original work, part of the excitement was the awareness of self and the awakening of black women on the tail end of the women's movement as relevant themes. But when you fast forward 35+ years to the future and try to tell the same story in our time, a lot gets lost in translation.
In this film, the woman in orange becomes the older sister to the woman in purple and their mother is a deranged woman in white. The woman in brown works as the executive assistant to the woman in red who blows off the woman in green when she makes a charity call. The woman in blue is a social worker who visits the women in brown to check in on her children; the woman in yellow is a dance instructor who teaches the woman in purple. The woman in gray (?) is the apartment manager in the building where orange and brown live on the same floor as neighbors. The woman in green stops by this apartment building to check in on her man who lives downstairs, while the woman in yellow walks by this same building everyday on her way to her dance studio.
And beyond that, there is little that truly binds these women to each other. These are superficial relationships, which certainly are plausible, but in our modern times, superficial means that we barely see each other on the street, let alone care enough to notice. This thin thread that supposedly connects these women is problematic for a film that depends on some type of interaction among its characters to make any sense. Not that it is totally improbable, but the thinness of their connections reveals itself as the film unfolds. Why is the woman in orange estranged from her younger sister in purple? And why would she send her naive younger sister to another deranged woman in white for help (portrayed by Macy Gray with such intensity that it was easily one of the most haunting performances)? And in 2010, there is a such thing as Macy Gray's woman in white? And why would the woman in red be perceptive enough to notice her husband's wandering eye but not so much as to notice the abuse inflicted on the woman in brown, her assistant? And the woman in blue was the link to all of them? Really?
The narrative structure was not the only problem with this film. I listened to a review that suggested that Perry inserted himself into this film in several not so subtle ways, and I have to agree. Each character came straight from the Tyler Perry canon: the moral center (Madea) was the woman in gray; the troubled woman in need of Jesus was the woman in brown; the women in white were the embodiments of bad choices/consequences/karma; the righteous victims of circumstance, the women in blue and yellow; the fallen women were the two sisters in orange and purple; and then the been-there but-still-trying-to-get-it-right was the woman in green. Oh, and the bitch was the woman in red. And the righteous blue-collar brother was there too (dressed in navy blue), as was the professional man who creeps on the side (dressed in gray)...
While I could find flaws in each of the women, I have to focus my attention on the woman in red, portrayed by a very stiff Janet Jackson (the weakest link of the ensemble cast). Not only was it the most unoriginal character in the film (because she was simply the black version of Miranda Priestly in "The Devil Wears Prada"), but she was so out of place that she appeared to be in another movie. Am I the only person who found her totally unnecessary? (Others have criticized Thandie Newton's performance as screechy, and well, I have to agree. But it worked for me...)
Finally, the most disappointing aspect of this film was the way in which Ntozake Shange, the genius who gave us this beautiful piece of work, was marginalized. To string all of this together, her poetry was largely discarded, which might have been necessary in order to make room for Perry's narrative, but the result is a film that retains only the outline of the original choreopoem. My favorite monologues were cut short or poorly edited to fit into the allotted scene ("Toussaint" being the most egregious cut of all). And when the characters do recite from the original piece, it doesn't work. Imagine a typical scene in any other Tyler Perry movie, then have one of the characters turn to the camera to recite a soliloquy from Shakespeare and you will get my point.
Well, having said all of that, I give Tyler Perry a lot of credit for tackling this work. I do not believe anyone else would have the balls to attempt such a drastic re-staging of this work, especially since there are so few women of color directing films these days. Perry is a savvy businessman who knows that he needs to expand his audience, so by taking on a sacred feminist work like "colored girls", he pretty much knew that this would pay off. Sure, he has taken a lot of heat for what is perceived to be his hated of black men, this play has never been about the men who wreak havoc on the lives of the women...this is about the women who have allowed these men into their lives. Even if Perry had not directed this, a black female director would have received the same condemnation.
However, Perry is guilty of moralizing where the point was not to make moral assumptions about the characters. Shange's intent was not to impose judgment on these women, but to highlight the choices that these women made in their own individual pursuits of happiness. In his update, Perry punishes each woman for her moral failings--infidelity, infertility, rape, murder, terminal illness, physical deformity, mental depravity, psychosis...i.e., the wages of sin.
So, back to my original suggestions: read the original play, watch the PBS adaptation, and then watch this film and compare and contrast the three. What you will discover is that Perry paid a respectful homage to a work that he clearly admired, but unfortunately, did not successfully adapt for 2010. It is not a terrible movie, but it not great either.
Jumping the Gun...a bit
OK, so the new blog is alreay live because I just could not WAIT to write something! That reminds me a bit of what it was like when I started the Cafe five years ago...Wow, just realized that it has been that long!
(By the way, the fuel for the evening is some Spanish white wine).
Other than announcing that the other blog is live, I am please to announce that the Holiday Newsletter is also done. The husband wants to review it and offer some input, but this baby is down for the count! Woohoo!
Now, I have conditionally suggested that I would host Christmas dinner at my house, which is crazy because there is abso-smurfly no way it will be ready by December 24. Cleaning the living room will take until Friday, so if I were to even think about setting up a tree, clearing off the dining room table and then perhaps cleaning my bathroom to accommodate my family, that would take more time than is available on the calendar.
And now I have soured to the idea...don't want nobody in my house. Hell, I don't want to be here (another story for another time).
If this were to be written for the BBW blog, I would need to explain why my house is a mess. Quite simply because I have gotten used to the clutter and I don't feel like dealing with it. If you want more, then check out BBW in a few days. I'll explain how my house got this way and how the only hope left is an intervention by Niecy Nash and her TV show.
Well, in addition to the new blog, I have a Twitter account and an incomplete Facebook page. Follow me @busyblackwoman.
(By the way, the fuel for the evening is some Spanish white wine).
Other than announcing that the other blog is live, I am please to announce that the Holiday Newsletter is also done. The husband wants to review it and offer some input, but this baby is down for the count! Woohoo!
Now, I have conditionally suggested that I would host Christmas dinner at my house, which is crazy because there is abso-smurfly no way it will be ready by December 24. Cleaning the living room will take until Friday, so if I were to even think about setting up a tree, clearing off the dining room table and then perhaps cleaning my bathroom to accommodate my family, that would take more time than is available on the calendar.
And now I have soured to the idea...don't want nobody in my house. Hell, I don't want to be here (another story for another time).
If this were to be written for the BBW blog, I would need to explain why my house is a mess. Quite simply because I have gotten used to the clutter and I don't feel like dealing with it. If you want more, then check out BBW in a few days. I'll explain how my house got this way and how the only hope left is an intervention by Niecy Nash and her TV show.
Well, in addition to the new blog, I have a Twitter account and an incomplete Facebook page. Follow me @busyblackwoman.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
The New Adventure
So I plan to start a new blog in January called "Busy Black Woman". It will be the one that I promote and the one that I hope will mark the transition to a new phase in my life.
First, I need to say that my intention is not to abandon the Cafe. It was here that I got used to the idea of writing on a regular (or semi-regular) basis. It was here that I realized that I have a voice and that there are people out there who are interested in hearing it. It was here where I often said too much...but learned that unfiltered honesty can be both a fault and a virtue. It was because of this endeavor that I realized why I want to stake out new territory.
Beginning in January, there actually will not be any significant changes to this blog...but a few topics that I would normally discuss here will move over to the new space. I will continue with this blog as my personal diary of sorts, but I suspect that more of my time and effort will go towards the new blog. It will come with a few more bells and whistles and I will actually make the effort to build a following there. Of course, if people stumble upon the Cafe and like what they see, that would be nice.
I was telling a friend about my new venture the other day and during the course of our conversation, we spoke about destiny. She mentioned how she felt that she was destined to do something more substantial than what she was currently doing, and it occurred to me that most of us feel the same way. No one is truly where they want to be, but part of the beauty of the journey is everything we learn along the way. I shared with her what I thought was one of my many false starts in wanting to become a wedding and special events planner. A decade ago, I read every website, bridal magazine, various books, and even attended a networking seminar with every intention of starting a business as a wedding consultant. Things did not quite work out as I had intended and the only wedding I have ever planned was my own. But from that experience, I learned how to conceptualize major events, which has proven to be an invaluable skill for me in other aspects of my life.
Writing this blog has been very much like my adventures in wedding planning. The exercise of writing has benefited me in more ways than I care to admit. No, I will not be a journalist and maybe not even a great American novelist. But I will be able to apply what I have learned here to the next blog. And even if that fails to achieve my lofty expectations, there may be something else I learn in the process.
Ciao :)
First, I need to say that my intention is not to abandon the Cafe. It was here that I got used to the idea of writing on a regular (or semi-regular) basis. It was here that I realized that I have a voice and that there are people out there who are interested in hearing it. It was here where I often said too much...but learned that unfiltered honesty can be both a fault and a virtue. It was because of this endeavor that I realized why I want to stake out new territory.
Beginning in January, there actually will not be any significant changes to this blog...but a few topics that I would normally discuss here will move over to the new space. I will continue with this blog as my personal diary of sorts, but I suspect that more of my time and effort will go towards the new blog. It will come with a few more bells and whistles and I will actually make the effort to build a following there. Of course, if people stumble upon the Cafe and like what they see, that would be nice.
I was telling a friend about my new venture the other day and during the course of our conversation, we spoke about destiny. She mentioned how she felt that she was destined to do something more substantial than what she was currently doing, and it occurred to me that most of us feel the same way. No one is truly where they want to be, but part of the beauty of the journey is everything we learn along the way. I shared with her what I thought was one of my many false starts in wanting to become a wedding and special events planner. A decade ago, I read every website, bridal magazine, various books, and even attended a networking seminar with every intention of starting a business as a wedding consultant. Things did not quite work out as I had intended and the only wedding I have ever planned was my own. But from that experience, I learned how to conceptualize major events, which has proven to be an invaluable skill for me in other aspects of my life.
Writing this blog has been very much like my adventures in wedding planning. The exercise of writing has benefited me in more ways than I care to admit. No, I will not be a journalist and maybe not even a great American novelist. But I will be able to apply what I have learned here to the next blog. And even if that fails to achieve my lofty expectations, there may be something else I learn in the process.
Ciao :)
Wednesday, December 08, 2010
Have a Little Faith
As an admitted political junkie of the liberal persuasion, the last few weeks have been terrible for me. The Democrats lost the majority in the House which means Nancy Pelosi has to hand over her gavel to John Boehner in a few weeks. Despite the success of health care reform, too many other legislative priorities have not gone anywhere and for the next two years it is pretty clear that the status quo will remain. Charlie Rangel was censured for financial improprieties by a hyper-partisan body bent on shaming him (I'm not suggesting that he did not deserve admonishment but this might have been overkill). And President Obama is being advised by people who feted him in the streets of DC just two years ago to hang it up in two years.
And on top of all of this, freaking BRAVO took "West Wing" off in favor of airing more lame reality shows! DAYUM!
The most recent disappointment comes in the form of the tax deal that was agreed to by the White House that would extend tax cuts for everyone for another two years. Some other concessions were made to ensure that unemployment benefits continue for those who would have lost them and there appears to be a Social Security reprieve of sorts, but this overall, this kind of sucks. The President can claim that he acted in the best interests of the Nation, and I honestly believe him. And perhaps the GOP can make the same claim (although they, I don't believe). But our national deficit, which has supposedly the reason why the country voted to change course last month, is going to increase, so I fail to see how this deal was anything less than Faustian.
But that is the unabashed partisan Ayanna talking. I hate this and I think the President should have resisted the urge to negotiate with people who will just as soon hold hearings about the authenticity of his Hawaiian birth certificate in the same breath as they applaud themselves for being so bipartisan...
The Ayanna who is striving to be more patient believes that there is a plan underway. President Obama is not an idiot. He may take a few losses, but he will get up and stay in the fight. I have to believe that this man is astute enough to recognize that if long term change is what he was elected to deliver, then that must mean some short term same-old same-old politics as usual.
As I mentioned to the husand this morning, this is the same GOP that impeached President Clinton after he struck a deal with them to balance the budget and to reform welfare. So the current POTUS is smart enough to recognize that these same people are going to smile in his face and lie to their constituents about how much they care when the truth is that they only care about remaining in power. And if your opponent only cares about winning at all costs, then you sometimes have to let them...
I remember feeling this way when George W. Bush won reelection in 2004. It was devastating, but soon enough he proved that he was nothing Great about this Decider...he was in over his head. In their lust for absolute power, the GOP propped up a man whose legacy will include two mangled war efforts, massive national debt, the destruction of a major American city by a natural disaster, two recessions, the near collapse of the auto, housing and banking industries; yet he believes that his worst Presidential moment was being called a racist by Kanye West.
So my faith may be a little shaken, but if I took to heart everything that the President said throughout the campaign, that yes we can, then I need to be prepared to take a few hits. No victory worth winning is easy, and that includes those battles that are not worth the fight. I have faith that things will work out in the end because it was faith that brought us to this point in the first place.
And on top of all of this, freaking BRAVO took "West Wing" off in favor of airing more lame reality shows! DAYUM!
The most recent disappointment comes in the form of the tax deal that was agreed to by the White House that would extend tax cuts for everyone for another two years. Some other concessions were made to ensure that unemployment benefits continue for those who would have lost them and there appears to be a Social Security reprieve of sorts, but this overall, this kind of sucks. The President can claim that he acted in the best interests of the Nation, and I honestly believe him. And perhaps the GOP can make the same claim (although they, I don't believe). But our national deficit, which has supposedly the reason why the country voted to change course last month, is going to increase, so I fail to see how this deal was anything less than Faustian.
But that is the unabashed partisan Ayanna talking. I hate this and I think the President should have resisted the urge to negotiate with people who will just as soon hold hearings about the authenticity of his Hawaiian birth certificate in the same breath as they applaud themselves for being so bipartisan...
The Ayanna who is striving to be more patient believes that there is a plan underway. President Obama is not an idiot. He may take a few losses, but he will get up and stay in the fight. I have to believe that this man is astute enough to recognize that if long term change is what he was elected to deliver, then that must mean some short term same-old same-old politics as usual.
As I mentioned to the husand this morning, this is the same GOP that impeached President Clinton after he struck a deal with them to balance the budget and to reform welfare. So the current POTUS is smart enough to recognize that these same people are going to smile in his face and lie to their constituents about how much they care when the truth is that they only care about remaining in power. And if your opponent only cares about winning at all costs, then you sometimes have to let them...
I remember feeling this way when George W. Bush won reelection in 2004. It was devastating, but soon enough he proved that he was nothing Great about this Decider...he was in over his head. In their lust for absolute power, the GOP propped up a man whose legacy will include two mangled war efforts, massive national debt, the destruction of a major American city by a natural disaster, two recessions, the near collapse of the auto, housing and banking industries; yet he believes that his worst Presidential moment was being called a racist by Kanye West.
So my faith may be a little shaken, but if I took to heart everything that the President said throughout the campaign, that yes we can, then I need to be prepared to take a few hits. No victory worth winning is easy, and that includes those battles that are not worth the fight. I have faith that things will work out in the end because it was faith that brought us to this point in the first place.
Tuesday, December 07, 2010
Through the Storms of Life
I am beyond stunned...it was just announced yesterday that Elizabeth Edwards had weeks to live. Turns out it was mere hours...
Life is so uncertain. It is so random. It is cruel; yet also wonderful!
I did not know Mrs. Edwards and I was never a fan of her husband (thought he had about as much substance as a marshmallow puff). Still I admired her courage. Who else could have the decency to accept the fact that she was dying and have the fortitude to maintain her composure, all while watching your life implode around you? Instead of beating the living hell out of the mistress and her philandering husband, she wrote a book, became a health care advocate, joined a think tank and kept it moving.
As I go through my own storms, I often lament my situation and ask "why me". It is human to wonder why bad things happen when you perceive yourself to be a decent person. Then I read stories like Mrs. Edwards' and I wonder if I could face the world with the same strength that she did. How many days of her life did she sit and wonder "why me": When her son was killed? When she aged and gained weight while the husband remained boyish and handsome? When she underwent fertility to have two more children? When the Democrats lost the 2004 election? When she was first diagnosed with breast cancer? When the husband dropped out of the 2008 election? When she learned that her cancer had returned and was incurable? When she found out about the mistress? When she learned there was also a love child? When her husband lied about the child's paternity? When the mistress was photographed in her underwear and refered to herself as the husband's soulmate? When she lost her hair? While she vomitted through chemo treatments? When she posted that farewell Facebook message?
When the Good Lord decided to end her earthly suffering, I bet she asked why again...hopefully He told her that she had borne everything else with such grace that it was time for her to get some rest.
My heart-felt sympathy goes out to her entire family, friends and especially her estranged husband. He must be suffering the worst of this because he will forever bear the shame of his actions. His wife may have forgiven him, but no one else will let him forget his caddish behavior. I also feel a little bad for the mistress...she will always live in Elizabeth's shadow and nothing she will ever do will help her escape it.
What I hope will come of Elizabeth's transition? That people look internally to push a little harder to endure life's challenges. Too many of us give up when things get rough or become immobilized by fear. Fear and adversity are what make us strong. So Elizabeth Edwards should not be memorialized as someone who lost her battles--the Lord simply decided to stop the fight. RIP.
Life is so uncertain. It is so random. It is cruel; yet also wonderful!
I did not know Mrs. Edwards and I was never a fan of her husband (thought he had about as much substance as a marshmallow puff). Still I admired her courage. Who else could have the decency to accept the fact that she was dying and have the fortitude to maintain her composure, all while watching your life implode around you? Instead of beating the living hell out of the mistress and her philandering husband, she wrote a book, became a health care advocate, joined a think tank and kept it moving.
As I go through my own storms, I often lament my situation and ask "why me". It is human to wonder why bad things happen when you perceive yourself to be a decent person. Then I read stories like Mrs. Edwards' and I wonder if I could face the world with the same strength that she did. How many days of her life did she sit and wonder "why me": When her son was killed? When she aged and gained weight while the husband remained boyish and handsome? When she underwent fertility to have two more children? When the Democrats lost the 2004 election? When she was first diagnosed with breast cancer? When the husband dropped out of the 2008 election? When she learned that her cancer had returned and was incurable? When she found out about the mistress? When she learned there was also a love child? When her husband lied about the child's paternity? When the mistress was photographed in her underwear and refered to herself as the husband's soulmate? When she lost her hair? While she vomitted through chemo treatments? When she posted that farewell Facebook message?
When the Good Lord decided to end her earthly suffering, I bet she asked why again...hopefully He told her that she had borne everything else with such grace that it was time for her to get some rest.
My heart-felt sympathy goes out to her entire family, friends and especially her estranged husband. He must be suffering the worst of this because he will forever bear the shame of his actions. His wife may have forgiven him, but no one else will let him forget his caddish behavior. I also feel a little bad for the mistress...she will always live in Elizabeth's shadow and nothing she will ever do will help her escape it.
What I hope will come of Elizabeth's transition? That people look internally to push a little harder to endure life's challenges. Too many of us give up when things get rough or become immobilized by fear. Fear and adversity are what make us strong. So Elizabeth Edwards should not be memorialized as someone who lost her battles--the Lord simply decided to stop the fight. RIP.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Million Man March
(This is one of those blog posts I started a while back and never completed. In revisiting it, I have a few additional points that I want to address in a subsequent piece about the film "for colored girls")
I just read an article that commemorated the Million Man March from fifteen years ago. Wow, cannot believe it has been that long! But I am dismayed by the conclusion reached by the author...some of the same old tired complaints that pit black women against black men and the uselessness of massive social movements:
1. The Massive Exhale C-O-N-spiracy: So yet again, another disgruntled black man refers to the work of black women produced between 1985 and 1995 as anti-male. This is so tired. And so untrue. I am not sure why black men get so sensitive about less-than flattering, yet realistic portrayals of some male characters. As if to suggest that there not any men that are abusive, destructive, unfaithful and absent because everyone is loving, steadfast, supportive and honest. Are you for real?
Can we put to rest the myth that there is some nefarious conspiracy by black women to bruise the collective black male ego? When white TV writers can only seem to fashion stories about troubled drug dealers (i.e., The Wire), I don't read any major complaints. I mean, isn't that negative as well?
I spent half of my college years engaged in this debate and I always found it ironic that whenever a black woman gets celebrated for telling her truth through artistic expression, she gets accused of male-bashing. Yet that was also the era that gave rise to gangsta rap and the video vixen, and I do not recall that those artists received the same level of condemnation...
(Except, there was condemnation against gangsta rap, led by frightened white people. When C. Delores Tucker, a black woman, railed against misogyny in hip hop, she got ridiculed. Other black critics were dismissed as disconnected and prudish. And given the state of hip hop these days, maybe we should have listened.)
And now the most prolific producer of black art is Tyler Perry--a man whose most celebrated character is Madea the drag grandma. I am not hating on Perry, but it seems odd that in the search for so-called positive black representations, we have settled for live-action cartoon characters and superficial morality plays. Whatever...
(And this is where I will direct you to my upcoming review of "for colored girls", directed by none other than Mr. Perry).
2. Million Man March #fail: OK, so I am going to debunk my own skepticism about this march and proclaim that yes, in fact, it was a good thing. At the time, I disagreed with the call for men to come to the Mall alone to atone for their collective sins because I felt that it reinforced the sexist idea that men controlled the destiny of the black community (I was a bit over-the-top with my feminist rhetoric back then). I felt that in an age where women had more options, the salvation of the black family and the community as a whole would come from equal effort--and that quite frankly it was a sad state of affairs to acknowledge that men had been missing in action for so long.
In revising my view of the MMM, I was wrong. Black men did need to be summoned to the Mall because they were not getting the message in church, at home, the barbershop or in any other institution that they needed to stand up to take care of their responsibilities. And that call to come forth on behalf of a community plagued by social ills ignited some of those brothers to return to their communities with a renewed sense of purpose.
Some black men went back to create businesses. Some black men went into the classroom and began to teach. Some black men went to school and got degrees. And though he has not said so directly, I believe the MMM planted the seed in the mind of a certain POTUS that yes he could...
Anyone who thinks that this effort was a failure was not paying close enough attention to the results. No, it did not produce whole-scale change, but it was a start and sometimes a start is all that is needed. Sure, the momentum and emphasis of that day was misplaced on the leadership of Louis Farrakhan, but that is only because he was the sensational aspect of it all. In much the same way that Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck draw the attention of the media to the Tea Party, larger than life media personalities tend to obscure the layer of real work that goes on beneath the surface of a movement. The success of the MMM is that a million men got together in order to take a stand. And then at least half a million of them went back into their communities to do the really hard work of becoming better fathers and husbands, workers and doers--better men.
I just read an article that commemorated the Million Man March from fifteen years ago. Wow, cannot believe it has been that long! But I am dismayed by the conclusion reached by the author...some of the same old tired complaints that pit black women against black men and the uselessness of massive social movements:
1. The Massive Exhale C-O-N-spiracy: So yet again, another disgruntled black man refers to the work of black women produced between 1985 and 1995 as anti-male. This is so tired. And so untrue. I am not sure why black men get so sensitive about less-than flattering, yet realistic portrayals of some male characters. As if to suggest that there not any men that are abusive, destructive, unfaithful and absent because everyone is loving, steadfast, supportive and honest. Are you for real?
Can we put to rest the myth that there is some nefarious conspiracy by black women to bruise the collective black male ego? When white TV writers can only seem to fashion stories about troubled drug dealers (i.e., The Wire), I don't read any major complaints. I mean, isn't that negative as well?
I spent half of my college years engaged in this debate and I always found it ironic that whenever a black woman gets celebrated for telling her truth through artistic expression, she gets accused of male-bashing. Yet that was also the era that gave rise to gangsta rap and the video vixen, and I do not recall that those artists received the same level of condemnation...
(Except, there was condemnation against gangsta rap, led by frightened white people. When C. Delores Tucker, a black woman, railed against misogyny in hip hop, she got ridiculed. Other black critics were dismissed as disconnected and prudish. And given the state of hip hop these days, maybe we should have listened.)
And now the most prolific producer of black art is Tyler Perry--a man whose most celebrated character is Madea the drag grandma. I am not hating on Perry, but it seems odd that in the search for so-called positive black representations, we have settled for live-action cartoon characters and superficial morality plays. Whatever...
(And this is where I will direct you to my upcoming review of "for colored girls", directed by none other than Mr. Perry).
2. Million Man March #fail: OK, so I am going to debunk my own skepticism about this march and proclaim that yes, in fact, it was a good thing. At the time, I disagreed with the call for men to come to the Mall alone to atone for their collective sins because I felt that it reinforced the sexist idea that men controlled the destiny of the black community (I was a bit over-the-top with my feminist rhetoric back then). I felt that in an age where women had more options, the salvation of the black family and the community as a whole would come from equal effort--and that quite frankly it was a sad state of affairs to acknowledge that men had been missing in action for so long.
In revising my view of the MMM, I was wrong. Black men did need to be summoned to the Mall because they were not getting the message in church, at home, the barbershop or in any other institution that they needed to stand up to take care of their responsibilities. And that call to come forth on behalf of a community plagued by social ills ignited some of those brothers to return to their communities with a renewed sense of purpose.
Some black men went back to create businesses. Some black men went into the classroom and began to teach. Some black men went to school and got degrees. And though he has not said so directly, I believe the MMM planted the seed in the mind of a certain POTUS that yes he could...
Anyone who thinks that this effort was a failure was not paying close enough attention to the results. No, it did not produce whole-scale change, but it was a start and sometimes a start is all that is needed. Sure, the momentum and emphasis of that day was misplaced on the leadership of Louis Farrakhan, but that is only because he was the sensational aspect of it all. In much the same way that Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck draw the attention of the media to the Tea Party, larger than life media personalities tend to obscure the layer of real work that goes on beneath the surface of a movement. The success of the MMM is that a million men got together in order to take a stand. And then at least half a million of them went back into their communities to do the really hard work of becoming better fathers and husbands, workers and doers--better men.
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Lost or Found Ground?
I am not happy with the election results, but eh, it is 2010 and most people only vote when there is a Presidency at stake. No need to worry because many of the folks who stayed home yesterday will probably go to the polls in two years...
Yeah right.
I don't know how else to say this without seeming so monumentally pissed, but if my generation does not wake up and get serious about something, we will continue to fail at everything. EVERYTHING!
We failed because I read a statistic (and I am still looking for verification) that said only 4.7% of African Americans voted yesterday. Only 10% of young people under 30 voted yesterday. And these are the main groups of people who complain about getting screwed all the time. Well, yeah, that happens when the people in power have your permission to screw you when you don't show up to vote.
I read an article about three interesting newcomers to the political stage (two others were not mentioned, but I will mention them here): Susanna Martinez (R), governor-elect of New Mexico; Tim Scott (R), elected to Congress from South Carolina; Alan West (R), elected to Congress from Florida; Nikki Haley (R), governor-elect from South Carolina; and Marco Rubio (R), senator-elect from Florida. See a pattern here folks? These are all brown Republicans...guess we can't make the argument that the GOP is full of racists especially when the Democrats were trying as hard as they could to disavow their brown candidates. And guess what, each of these folks were elected from the SOUTH (ok, so New Mexico is the Southwest).
This is a bit stream of conscious, so bear with me...but I see the ground that we lost yesterday as typical. The fact that the GOP got to reclaim the House is not that upsetting, although it is for me personally because I really like and respect Nancy Pelosi for her balls (I wish I had a third of her guts). I am upset that the Democrats got beat again because they were playing checkers when the game is chess. Are we going to learn?
a. Apparently, the Tea Party is not as racist as you claimed since at least 5 Tea Party candidates who won yesterday were people of color. Yes, there was Sharron Angle, but it seems in all of the attention that was paid to her stupidity, these five snuck in under the radar.
b. Running away from Obama didn't help. Embracing Obama didn't help. So maybe you need to grow a spine and stand up for what YOU believe and not worry about Obama. Maybe this election really was about you.
c. But since we are on the subject of Obama, please clean house. NOW.
d. And as for those folks who stayed home, well what can I say? You disappoint me. I hope the next two years work well for you. As for me, the next two years have offered me a challenge--how to convince you never to sit out another election again.
Yeah right.
I don't know how else to say this without seeming so monumentally pissed, but if my generation does not wake up and get serious about something, we will continue to fail at everything. EVERYTHING!
We failed because I read a statistic (and I am still looking for verification) that said only 4.7% of African Americans voted yesterday. Only 10% of young people under 30 voted yesterday. And these are the main groups of people who complain about getting screwed all the time. Well, yeah, that happens when the people in power have your permission to screw you when you don't show up to vote.
I read an article about three interesting newcomers to the political stage (two others were not mentioned, but I will mention them here): Susanna Martinez (R), governor-elect of New Mexico; Tim Scott (R), elected to Congress from South Carolina; Alan West (R), elected to Congress from Florida; Nikki Haley (R), governor-elect from South Carolina; and Marco Rubio (R), senator-elect from Florida. See a pattern here folks? These are all brown Republicans...guess we can't make the argument that the GOP is full of racists especially when the Democrats were trying as hard as they could to disavow their brown candidates. And guess what, each of these folks were elected from the SOUTH (ok, so New Mexico is the Southwest).
This is a bit stream of conscious, so bear with me...but I see the ground that we lost yesterday as typical. The fact that the GOP got to reclaim the House is not that upsetting, although it is for me personally because I really like and respect Nancy Pelosi for her balls (I wish I had a third of her guts). I am upset that the Democrats got beat again because they were playing checkers when the game is chess. Are we going to learn?
a. Apparently, the Tea Party is not as racist as you claimed since at least 5 Tea Party candidates who won yesterday were people of color. Yes, there was Sharron Angle, but it seems in all of the attention that was paid to her stupidity, these five snuck in under the radar.
b. Running away from Obama didn't help. Embracing Obama didn't help. So maybe you need to grow a spine and stand up for what YOU believe and not worry about Obama. Maybe this election really was about you.
c. But since we are on the subject of Obama, please clean house. NOW.
d. And as for those folks who stayed home, well what can I say? You disappoint me. I hope the next two years work well for you. As for me, the next two years have offered me a challenge--how to convince you never to sit out another election again.
Monday, October 25, 2010
The Devil and Mr. Williams
When I was a struggling out of work lawyer (the first time around), my then-boyfriend (now husband), got Juan Williams to sign a copy of his biography on Thurgood Marshall. The inscription included words of encouragement to me and a reminder that everyone stumbles sometimes, even someone as great as Justice Marshall. I reflected on that inscription in the wee hours of the morning when I first read the tweet that announced Williams' dismissal from NPR, and here is my take on this whole incident:
So a couple of nights ago I woke up to turn off my computer and saw a random tweet that Juan Williams had been fired from NPR for comments he had made on the O'Reilly Factor. It seemed odd that the tweet had been posted at midnight and that it linked to afull-page article attached to a full-sized photo of Williams. Seemed like someone was really angry and needed to prove a point...
Now curious and wide awake, I clicked to the New York Times and Washington Post websites to read if there were any additional details, and sure enough, my hunch was correct--Williams had apparently pissed off a few folks at NPR and his recent comments were the final straw that resulted in his dismissal.
The real story is not that Williams got canned, but what happened next. The next day, he got the ultimate payback in the form of a $2 million multi-year contract from FOX. And that is when things really got interesting because this is an election year, Juan Williams is black, the controversial subject of his remarks were Muslims on airplanes, and NPR is perceived to be a snooty liberal government welfare recipient whose hand just happened to be out all last week soliciting listener donations. This was all a perfect storm...
A perfect storm that began with NPR attempting to justify a personal decision as a personnel decision based on the elusive conceit of journalistic integrity (which is about as transparent as Williams' fortuitous job offer from FOX...) Perhaps two recent firings provide instructive analogies here: Williams was (Shirley) Sherroded by NPR; then he went over to FOX and (Rick) Sanchezed them.
The Sherrod-ing was in firing him without really listening to the entire interview. Taken out of context, Williams suggested that he gets nervous when he sees passengers in Muslim garb aboard an airplane. But in its full context, Williams was really saying that we all have moments when it might be easier to make a snap judgment, but it takes more courage to truly analyze a situation in order to move beyond our gut feelings. After taking that next step, we have the power to decide whether to succumb to fear, ignorance, racism or personal animous. Ironically, NPR's management made a snap judgment and foolishly stuck with it.
And then Williams turned around and Sanchezed NPR by burning that bridge. I have no illusions that Juan Williams did not see the handwriting on the wall with respect to his dual career as a senior news analyst at NPR and as a liberal commentator at FOX. He could not continue to do both and it was clear that his expanding role at FOX had more to offer than did his diminishing role at NPR. He certainly could have left NPR to join FOX full-time, but it was far more lucrative for him to get sacked, especially since he has recovered quite nicely and no longer has to operate under the constraints of "journalistic integrity". Now I am not suggesting that he intentionally made provocative statements to get fired, but he certainly had to have known that he was teetering so close to going over the line that if he breathed too hard that would have been enough. Juan Williams is nobody's fool...or victim.
And now NPR's government funding is an election-year issue and we're debating Islam again. Juan Williams gets another shot at relevance and FOX News gets to pretend that it really is 'fair and balanced' for swooping in at just the right moment to defend the First Amendment and for hiring a self-proclaimed (yet disgruntled) liberal. Not bad in a week when the real story should have been the reignited Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill saga, brought to us by his embittered wife and his long-lost ex-girlfriend.
The other issue that simmers just below the surface of all of this is the fact that Juan Williams was one of a handful of black or brown voices on the air at NPR. Not that his presence ever provided me with any compelling reasons to become a supporter of my local station, but I wonder how many other people of color had given NPR a pass for allowing diverse content to make up for a quantifiable lack of diversity in its on-air talent.
Hopefully, this distraction will blow over by mid-week and attentions will shift to real issues again. On Facebook I commented to one of my friends that I hope Juan Williams will enjoy stepping into the "Colmes" role for Bill O'Reilly because that is about all his $2 million contract is worth at face value. Regardless of the outcome of this election, I am sure that enough liberal elites will band together to save NPR just as we did back in the 90s to save Big Bird and Barney the Dinosaur. We really will not come to any conclusions about Islam in one news cycle and I am sure that NPR will find another senior black correspondent or two. And I will join my local station.
So a couple of nights ago I woke up to turn off my computer and saw a random tweet that Juan Williams had been fired from NPR for comments he had made on the O'Reilly Factor. It seemed odd that the tweet had been posted at midnight and that it linked to afull-page article attached to a full-sized photo of Williams. Seemed like someone was really angry and needed to prove a point...
Now curious and wide awake, I clicked to the New York Times and Washington Post websites to read if there were any additional details, and sure enough, my hunch was correct--Williams had apparently pissed off a few folks at NPR and his recent comments were the final straw that resulted in his dismissal.
The real story is not that Williams got canned, but what happened next. The next day, he got the ultimate payback in the form of a $2 million multi-year contract from FOX. And that is when things really got interesting because this is an election year, Juan Williams is black, the controversial subject of his remarks were Muslims on airplanes, and NPR is perceived to be a snooty liberal government welfare recipient whose hand just happened to be out all last week soliciting listener donations. This was all a perfect storm...
A perfect storm that began with NPR attempting to justify a personal decision as a personnel decision based on the elusive conceit of journalistic integrity (which is about as transparent as Williams' fortuitous job offer from FOX...) Perhaps two recent firings provide instructive analogies here: Williams was (Shirley) Sherroded by NPR; then he went over to FOX and (Rick) Sanchezed them.
The Sherrod-ing was in firing him without really listening to the entire interview. Taken out of context, Williams suggested that he gets nervous when he sees passengers in Muslim garb aboard an airplane. But in its full context, Williams was really saying that we all have moments when it might be easier to make a snap judgment, but it takes more courage to truly analyze a situation in order to move beyond our gut feelings. After taking that next step, we have the power to decide whether to succumb to fear, ignorance, racism or personal animous. Ironically, NPR's management made a snap judgment and foolishly stuck with it.
And then Williams turned around and Sanchezed NPR by burning that bridge. I have no illusions that Juan Williams did not see the handwriting on the wall with respect to his dual career as a senior news analyst at NPR and as a liberal commentator at FOX. He could not continue to do both and it was clear that his expanding role at FOX had more to offer than did his diminishing role at NPR. He certainly could have left NPR to join FOX full-time, but it was far more lucrative for him to get sacked, especially since he has recovered quite nicely and no longer has to operate under the constraints of "journalistic integrity". Now I am not suggesting that he intentionally made provocative statements to get fired, but he certainly had to have known that he was teetering so close to going over the line that if he breathed too hard that would have been enough. Juan Williams is nobody's fool...or victim.
And now NPR's government funding is an election-year issue and we're debating Islam again. Juan Williams gets another shot at relevance and FOX News gets to pretend that it really is 'fair and balanced' for swooping in at just the right moment to defend the First Amendment and for hiring a self-proclaimed (yet disgruntled) liberal. Not bad in a week when the real story should have been the reignited Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill saga, brought to us by his embittered wife and his long-lost ex-girlfriend.
The other issue that simmers just below the surface of all of this is the fact that Juan Williams was one of a handful of black or brown voices on the air at NPR. Not that his presence ever provided me with any compelling reasons to become a supporter of my local station, but I wonder how many other people of color had given NPR a pass for allowing diverse content to make up for a quantifiable lack of diversity in its on-air talent.
Hopefully, this distraction will blow over by mid-week and attentions will shift to real issues again. On Facebook I commented to one of my friends that I hope Juan Williams will enjoy stepping into the "Colmes" role for Bill O'Reilly because that is about all his $2 million contract is worth at face value. Regardless of the outcome of this election, I am sure that enough liberal elites will band together to save NPR just as we did back in the 90s to save Big Bird and Barney the Dinosaur. We really will not come to any conclusions about Islam in one news cycle and I am sure that NPR will find another senior black correspondent or two. And I will join my local station.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Finishing What I Start
The husband is off on a work-related trip and I am here at the house that may never get as clean as I would like for it to be. This was the source of some tension prior to his departure, but the point is that I am trying to reform my ways.
I am a chronic starter. I am not always a polished finisher. In some cases, I don't finish. My house is a testament to all of the undone things that I once had hoped to accomplish. I have a blog that I long ago abandoned when it became clear that I did not have the right stuff to really tackle my own landscaping and yard maintenance. A few weeks ago, I deleted a bunch of unfinished blog pieces because it was evident that something I never finished four years ago was unlikely to be finished now.
But because I am serious about getting my life together, here is my TO-DO list for now until Christmas:
I am a chronic starter. I am not always a polished finisher. In some cases, I don't finish. My house is a testament to all of the undone things that I once had hoped to accomplish. I have a blog that I long ago abandoned when it became clear that I did not have the right stuff to really tackle my own landscaping and yard maintenance. A few weeks ago, I deleted a bunch of unfinished blog pieces because it was evident that something I never finished four years ago was unlikely to be finished now.
But because I am serious about getting my life together, here is my TO-DO list for now until Christmas:
- Two pending blog posts that I am determined to finish
- A massive pile of unsorted laundry that needs to be washed, folded and put away
- Summer clothes to store
- Clothes that need to be dry-cleaned
- Meeting minutes that need to be distributed to the committee members
- Committee reports that need to be drafted
- A meeting agenda to draft
- A fellowship application to download and complete
- Paperwork to file for a client
- Preparation for various meetings
- Dances to learn
- Reservations for travel
- Appointments with various doctors
- Old paperwork that needs to be recycled
- Purchase a new computer
- Networking
- Emails and cards to send
- Volunteering for GOTV efforts
- Plantlings to re-pot
- Breathe
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Relentless
My husband calls me Dorothy, but not because of my childhood love for all things related to "The Wiz" (or less so to "The Wizard of Oz"). He calls me that because of my shero, the late Dorothy I. Height. And it is not meant in an enduring way...
But screw him and his ability to compartmentalize and shift focus to the less important things in life (like professional baseball and new restaurants). I am happy for anyone who can live in wonderful mindless bliss. I cannot.
I am a political junkie. I have causes that drive me. I was watching Roland Martin on TV One this morning at 11am instead of sitting in a church somewhere. Almost every decision I make has some kind of political, global or social consequence to it--I shop at Target instead of Wal-Mart because of how the latter mistreats its employees. In fact, on a friend's Facebook inquiry about where to buy a club membership, I suggested Costco because I happen to know that Costco is a better employer. I have waged a boycott against Kraft Foods for years because I think their synthetic ingredients and reliance on high fructose corn syrup explain why half of America has diabetes and high cholesterol. I recycle even when none of my neighbors do. I am trying to wean myself off of products that harm the environment.
Whew!
This week, in an effort to wage an online GOTV effort, I am trying to rally the troops with daily email messages. I will work someone's nerve before all is said and done, but I just want us to wake up and face the reality of what might happen in less than two weeks! So if someone defriends me or adds my name to their email spam filter, so what. I am going to be me and even if I annoy the hell out of folks, no one will doubt my passion and perseverance. I remember how passion, perseverance and idealism convinced the country that it could elect a black president. At some point, I will sway someone to act.
Back to my nickname-sake, she represents why I cannot give up. She was a woman at the helm of a civil rights organization in the 60s when such things were unheard of. People may not remember much of what she and the National Council of Negro Women did, but because she was there in the trenches fighting against Jim Crow, people do remember what she and the NCNW represented: dignity, strength, perseverance, and fortitude.
So I carry on and will keep being me. A relentless, driven, true-believing busy black woman.
But screw him and his ability to compartmentalize and shift focus to the less important things in life (like professional baseball and new restaurants). I am happy for anyone who can live in wonderful mindless bliss. I cannot.
I am a political junkie. I have causes that drive me. I was watching Roland Martin on TV One this morning at 11am instead of sitting in a church somewhere. Almost every decision I make has some kind of political, global or social consequence to it--I shop at Target instead of Wal-Mart because of how the latter mistreats its employees. In fact, on a friend's Facebook inquiry about where to buy a club membership, I suggested Costco because I happen to know that Costco is a better employer. I have waged a boycott against Kraft Foods for years because I think their synthetic ingredients and reliance on high fructose corn syrup explain why half of America has diabetes and high cholesterol. I recycle even when none of my neighbors do. I am trying to wean myself off of products that harm the environment.
Whew!
This week, in an effort to wage an online GOTV effort, I am trying to rally the troops with daily email messages. I will work someone's nerve before all is said and done, but I just want us to wake up and face the reality of what might happen in less than two weeks! So if someone defriends me or adds my name to their email spam filter, so what. I am going to be me and even if I annoy the hell out of folks, no one will doubt my passion and perseverance. I remember how passion, perseverance and idealism convinced the country that it could elect a black president. At some point, I will sway someone to act.
Back to my nickname-sake, she represents why I cannot give up. She was a woman at the helm of a civil rights organization in the 60s when such things were unheard of. People may not remember much of what she and the National Council of Negro Women did, but because she was there in the trenches fighting against Jim Crow, people do remember what she and the NCNW represented: dignity, strength, perseverance, and fortitude.
So I carry on and will keep being me. A relentless, driven, true-believing busy black woman.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Clothes and the Modern Man
One of the blog postings that I needed to complete.
I am wading into tricky waters here, but I feel compelled to speak up in defense of Morehouse College, the target of an article recently published in Vibe magazine, "The Mean Girls of Morehouse". When I first read the title, my eyes rolled in trepidation...there have been several articles written lately that have attacked HBCUs in general or specific institutions, and unfortunately, here was the recently resurrected Vibe magazine joining the fray.
To offer some background, a decade ago when my brother was a student at Morehouse, he complained that the campus culture had become too permissive of overt homosexuality. We debated the issue, with me often taking the position that he was unnecessarily sensitive, and even if what he alleged was true, it was a sign of the times. Furthermore, as the only private, all-male HBCU, Morehouse College had to embrace the spectrum of black manhood that accommodated both Malcolm X and James Baldwin. An institution that prides itself on nurturing great black leaders has the same urgent charge to nurture great gay black leaders to stand against the injustices and inherent danger of unchecked homophobia. Not surprisingly, I did not win those arguments; my brother demanded to move off campus and my parents (father) acquiesced.
When a Morehouse student nearly beat another student to death with a baseball bat, the school was forced to finally confront the culture of homophobia that pervaded the campus. Since then, Morehouse has come to terms with its allure as a magnet for the best and brightest young black men--straight and gay. However, tolerance does not mean that anything goes, and a dress code was enacted a couple of year ago. At most institutions, such a move would be deemed unnecessary, but I doubt most other institutions have a campus cross-dressing problem...
Yes, a problem. Would cross-dressing be considered a problem across town at Georgia Tech or Emory? Probably not (but then again this is the south...) Nevertheless because Morehouse is the only private, all-male HBCU, it seeks to promote a standard of conduct in its students that runs counter to certain forms of behavior and expression that might be acceptable on other campuses. Therefore, a dress code that bans doo-rags, sagging jeans and women's attire such as dresses, skirts, high heels, and purses is consistent with the Morehouse "brand" of producing respectable black men. To outsiders who believe the College is being reactionary or discriminatory, this current controversy centers on whether the attire policy infringes on the students' freedom of expression. To others, the policy asserts the right of a private institution to determine the limits of that free expression.
The Vibe article, under the guise of questioning the legitimacy of the dress code, calls into question whether Morehouse is merely acting to protect its brand or whether it is singling out a few campus eccentrics. Conveniently for a publication that is struggling to remain relevant, this story breaks in the wake of several highly publicized incidents involving bullying of and suicides by gay teenagers. Inconveniently for Morehouse, this is yet another attempt to diminish its reputation (and again, it is a sucker punch to the jaw of one of the more prominent HBCUs).
Morehouse has made tremendous progress in navigating the rapidly changing societal attitudes towards homosexuality. A generation ago when I was a Spelman student, traditional ideas about masculinity kept many young men in the closet; a decade later when my brother was in college, the atmosphere had changed, but not without a lot of discomfort (to put it mildly). It is not surprising that an institution founded as a training ground for black preachers would have struggled to make this uneasy, yet inevitable transition towards tolerance.
And this is where the Eddie Long/Catholic priest/Ted Haggard scandals become instructive--a LOT of people have been taught to regard homosexuality as an issue of conduct and not an issue of identity, which is usually grounded in one's reading of the Bible. This article conflates identity with conduct and casts Morehouse as both a haven for bigots (another common refrain against black folks lately) and as a microcosm of how nearly every community outside of Atlanta, New York, DC, San Francisco, etc. is evolving towards varying degrees of tolerance.
The most cynical aspects of this article are the profiles of the students who felt victimized by the policy. Sadly, their naivete about the world they expected to encounter at Morehouse explains a bit why they allowed themselves to be caricatured by Vibe, which made it clear from the tongue-in-cheek title of the article that the "mean girls" of Morehouse are actually the main attractions at a freakshow.
My opinion? Biased, as expected, in favor of the dress code. It is also biased in favor of private institutions to set policy that will govern its charges. Do the students in this piece earn my sympathy? Yes, both for the humiliation they suffered and for the confusion they endure as young people seeking to define themselves. And, that is all.
I am wading into tricky waters here, but I feel compelled to speak up in defense of Morehouse College, the target of an article recently published in Vibe magazine, "The Mean Girls of Morehouse". When I first read the title, my eyes rolled in trepidation...there have been several articles written lately that have attacked HBCUs in general or specific institutions, and unfortunately, here was the recently resurrected Vibe magazine joining the fray.
To offer some background, a decade ago when my brother was a student at Morehouse, he complained that the campus culture had become too permissive of overt homosexuality. We debated the issue, with me often taking the position that he was unnecessarily sensitive, and even if what he alleged was true, it was a sign of the times. Furthermore, as the only private, all-male HBCU, Morehouse College had to embrace the spectrum of black manhood that accommodated both Malcolm X and James Baldwin. An institution that prides itself on nurturing great black leaders has the same urgent charge to nurture great gay black leaders to stand against the injustices and inherent danger of unchecked homophobia. Not surprisingly, I did not win those arguments; my brother demanded to move off campus and my parents (father) acquiesced.
When a Morehouse student nearly beat another student to death with a baseball bat, the school was forced to finally confront the culture of homophobia that pervaded the campus. Since then, Morehouse has come to terms with its allure as a magnet for the best and brightest young black men--straight and gay. However, tolerance does not mean that anything goes, and a dress code was enacted a couple of year ago. At most institutions, such a move would be deemed unnecessary, but I doubt most other institutions have a campus cross-dressing problem...
Yes, a problem. Would cross-dressing be considered a problem across town at Georgia Tech or Emory? Probably not (but then again this is the south...) Nevertheless because Morehouse is the only private, all-male HBCU, it seeks to promote a standard of conduct in its students that runs counter to certain forms of behavior and expression that might be acceptable on other campuses. Therefore, a dress code that bans doo-rags, sagging jeans and women's attire such as dresses, skirts, high heels, and purses is consistent with the Morehouse "brand" of producing respectable black men. To outsiders who believe the College is being reactionary or discriminatory, this current controversy centers on whether the attire policy infringes on the students' freedom of expression. To others, the policy asserts the right of a private institution to determine the limits of that free expression.
The Vibe article, under the guise of questioning the legitimacy of the dress code, calls into question whether Morehouse is merely acting to protect its brand or whether it is singling out a few campus eccentrics. Conveniently for a publication that is struggling to remain relevant, this story breaks in the wake of several highly publicized incidents involving bullying of and suicides by gay teenagers. Inconveniently for Morehouse, this is yet another attempt to diminish its reputation (and again, it is a sucker punch to the jaw of one of the more prominent HBCUs).
Morehouse has made tremendous progress in navigating the rapidly changing societal attitudes towards homosexuality. A generation ago when I was a Spelman student, traditional ideas about masculinity kept many young men in the closet; a decade later when my brother was in college, the atmosphere had changed, but not without a lot of discomfort (to put it mildly). It is not surprising that an institution founded as a training ground for black preachers would have struggled to make this uneasy, yet inevitable transition towards tolerance.
And this is where the Eddie Long/Catholic priest/Ted Haggard scandals become instructive--a LOT of people have been taught to regard homosexuality as an issue of conduct and not an issue of identity, which is usually grounded in one's reading of the Bible. This article conflates identity with conduct and casts Morehouse as both a haven for bigots (another common refrain against black folks lately) and as a microcosm of how nearly every community outside of Atlanta, New York, DC, San Francisco, etc. is evolving towards varying degrees of tolerance.
The most cynical aspects of this article are the profiles of the students who felt victimized by the policy. Sadly, their naivete about the world they expected to encounter at Morehouse explains a bit why they allowed themselves to be caricatured by Vibe, which made it clear from the tongue-in-cheek title of the article that the "mean girls" of Morehouse are actually the main attractions at a freakshow.
My opinion? Biased, as expected, in favor of the dress code. It is also biased in favor of private institutions to set policy that will govern its charges. Do the students in this piece earn my sympathy? Yes, both for the humiliation they suffered and for the confusion they endure as young people seeking to define themselves. And, that is all.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
It Gets Better
I intended to edit the piece I had already written, but Blogger was not cooperating. Andy Cohen from Bravo made this video in response to the suicides and gay bullying incidents:
It Gets Better
Mazel to Andy! Ellen DeGeneris weighed in last week with her plea to end bullying:
Something Must Be Done
And while I am sure that the mean-spirited among us--those who believe that sensitivity to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion and other facets of human identity will not get it, someone will. It will make a difference to the kid who is awake right now in his room anguished about school in a few hours. Or to the girl who cuts herself. Andy and Ellen are right--it will get better.
It Gets Better
Mazel to Andy! Ellen DeGeneris weighed in last week with her plea to end bullying:
Something Must Be Done
And while I am sure that the mean-spirited among us--those who believe that sensitivity to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion and other facets of human identity will not get it, someone will. It will make a difference to the kid who is awake right now in his room anguished about school in a few hours. Or to the girl who cuts herself. Andy and Ellen are right--it will get better.
Monday, October 04, 2010
Love Potion #9
Tomorrow is my ninth wedding anniversary, and God willing and the creek don't rise...we'll be around to celebrate many more in the years to come.
My husband does not read this blog, so there is no danger that he would ever find out about any gushing...he gets me. Ladies, the best man you will ever find is a man that gets you and loves you anyway. I have the worst house, barely cook anymore, and don't bring hardly a dime into this household, but he still loves me. If he ever thought the grass would be greener somewhere else, he might be right...
But he gets me. I fuss, but I let him toss his dirty socks into places that they should not go. I get annoyed, but I support his shouts at the TV during Yankee games. I do the best that I can, and so does he and together, WE keep traveling together on this road called Life.
Some of the folks around us are going through all kinds of hell and we do our best to encourage them. We don't tell others to do what we do, because what works for us probably would not work for a lot of other people. But we get by.
I had a glass of wine earlier (so I am probably sharing too much), but I am about to eat dinner that I cooked with my husband. Tomorrow, I will figure out what to do with my hair, put on some make-up, and meet him at some restaurant where he is likely to pull out a Groupon and brag about how cheap it all was. We'll enjoy a nice glass or two and probably talk about whatever. And then we'll head home still thankful that in this cruel world, we have each other.
I have been opening up about how much of a weirdo I think I am, and I guess tomorrow is affirmation that either he is also a weirdo, or maybe both of us are just fine.
My husband does not read this blog, so there is no danger that he would ever find out about any gushing...he gets me. Ladies, the best man you will ever find is a man that gets you and loves you anyway. I have the worst house, barely cook anymore, and don't bring hardly a dime into this household, but he still loves me. If he ever thought the grass would be greener somewhere else, he might be right...
But he gets me. I fuss, but I let him toss his dirty socks into places that they should not go. I get annoyed, but I support his shouts at the TV during Yankee games. I do the best that I can, and so does he and together, WE keep traveling together on this road called Life.
Some of the folks around us are going through all kinds of hell and we do our best to encourage them. We don't tell others to do what we do, because what works for us probably would not work for a lot of other people. But we get by.
I had a glass of wine earlier (so I am probably sharing too much), but I am about to eat dinner that I cooked with my husband. Tomorrow, I will figure out what to do with my hair, put on some make-up, and meet him at some restaurant where he is likely to pull out a Groupon and brag about how cheap it all was. We'll enjoy a nice glass or two and probably talk about whatever. And then we'll head home still thankful that in this cruel world, we have each other.
I have been opening up about how much of a weirdo I think I am, and I guess tomorrow is affirmation that either he is also a weirdo, or maybe both of us are just fine.
Inside the Mind
I have been thinking a lot about the Rutgers student who jumped off the George Washington Bridge a couple of weeks ago. His name was Tyler Clementi. A lot of media attention has been focused on the fact that Clementi's roommate had been secretly taping and broadcasting video of his homosexual encounters. A lot of people have focused on the role of technology, the apathy and possible culpability of the roommate...but what about the suicide?
I was thinking today about how difficult it must be for the family to understand how humiliation or embarassment led to this since there is no indication that anything else contributed to Clementi's decision to jump off that bridge. I believe the humiliation was not the catalyst, but it was the tipping point...unfortunately, no one knew how deeply hurt this kid was.
I've been there. Not suicidal, but deeply hurt enough to believe that if I just disappeared, life would go on just fine without me. I felt that way a lot in high school--the cruelest time of my life (actually, middle school was the cruelest, but I hadn't developed the ability to brood about it yet). In high school I was invisible to most of my peers. Actually, they saw me quite clearly, but they determined that I was too young, too weird, too awkward, too unattractive, too eager, too talkative, etc. to be bothered with me.
And that awkwardness followed me to college where I fell into pretty much the same pattern of disconnectedness. I made friends, but we were not close and while they were off dating, I was in my room listening to Prince and Sade. The difference about being away from home was that I did not have a family around to distract me from my peer isolation. Luckily because there is a clique for everyone in college, my loneliness was temporary and I eventually found other friends with whom I connected. But as an adult, I have had recurrent struggles with feeling alone, and I often think that people don't notice.
I feel badly for Tyler Clementi because instead of finding his niche in college, he encountered yet another predator who mocked him at his most vulnerable state. Without knowing more about him, I am sure that Clementi was bullied in high school, but because he had his music and a family to counteract the toxic deluge of teenage ridicule, he built up a fragile immunity to his pain. But once he went away to school, the protective cocoon of family was gone and he just could not see a way out other than to take his life.
What I hope will happen in the aftermath of this tragedy is that other people see and intervene before the darkness obscures the light of living. In my experience, teenage depression is written off as moodiness, but there is an intensity to the darkness that is anything but typical. Teenage angst feeds on insecurity and it is inside that darkness that a person can become vulnerable to the temptation to give up.
-----------------------------------------
As I think about the darkness that overcame Tyler Clementi, I also thought about the other relevant fact about this tragedy which is the closet. How hard must it be to live a lie because the light of the truth might place a bullseye on your back? Of course, the LGBT folks totally understand that angle of the tragedy, but how much hatred and intolerance we can accept before someone else gets killed? How many people shrugged this incident off because their belief system condones ridicule of homosexuality? I thought about the standing ovation Bishop Eddie Long received when he addressed his congregation and how his extreme stance against homosexuality was essentially defended even as he stands accused of sexual abusing young men. Or how the ridicule and harassment heaped upon another college student in Michigan gets defended as free speech by his boss. Or how a group of protesters will get to argue the indefensible act of protesting homosexuality at the funerals of American soldiers at the Supreme Court.
I am afraid that I know what was in Tyler's head when he jumped...but what about the rest of us when we do not speak up to the bullies of intolerance? Are we just watching more kids like Tyler take the plunge?
I was thinking today about how difficult it must be for the family to understand how humiliation or embarassment led to this since there is no indication that anything else contributed to Clementi's decision to jump off that bridge. I believe the humiliation was not the catalyst, but it was the tipping point...unfortunately, no one knew how deeply hurt this kid was.
I've been there. Not suicidal, but deeply hurt enough to believe that if I just disappeared, life would go on just fine without me. I felt that way a lot in high school--the cruelest time of my life (actually, middle school was the cruelest, but I hadn't developed the ability to brood about it yet). In high school I was invisible to most of my peers. Actually, they saw me quite clearly, but they determined that I was too young, too weird, too awkward, too unattractive, too eager, too talkative, etc. to be bothered with me.
And that awkwardness followed me to college where I fell into pretty much the same pattern of disconnectedness. I made friends, but we were not close and while they were off dating, I was in my room listening to Prince and Sade. The difference about being away from home was that I did not have a family around to distract me from my peer isolation. Luckily because there is a clique for everyone in college, my loneliness was temporary and I eventually found other friends with whom I connected. But as an adult, I have had recurrent struggles with feeling alone, and I often think that people don't notice.
I feel badly for Tyler Clementi because instead of finding his niche in college, he encountered yet another predator who mocked him at his most vulnerable state. Without knowing more about him, I am sure that Clementi was bullied in high school, but because he had his music and a family to counteract the toxic deluge of teenage ridicule, he built up a fragile immunity to his pain. But once he went away to school, the protective cocoon of family was gone and he just could not see a way out other than to take his life.
What I hope will happen in the aftermath of this tragedy is that other people see and intervene before the darkness obscures the light of living. In my experience, teenage depression is written off as moodiness, but there is an intensity to the darkness that is anything but typical. Teenage angst feeds on insecurity and it is inside that darkness that a person can become vulnerable to the temptation to give up.
-----------------------------------------
As I think about the darkness that overcame Tyler Clementi, I also thought about the other relevant fact about this tragedy which is the closet. How hard must it be to live a lie because the light of the truth might place a bullseye on your back? Of course, the LGBT folks totally understand that angle of the tragedy, but how much hatred and intolerance we can accept before someone else gets killed? How many people shrugged this incident off because their belief system condones ridicule of homosexuality? I thought about the standing ovation Bishop Eddie Long received when he addressed his congregation and how his extreme stance against homosexuality was essentially defended even as he stands accused of sexual abusing young men. Or how the ridicule and harassment heaped upon another college student in Michigan gets defended as free speech by his boss. Or how a group of protesters will get to argue the indefensible act of protesting homosexuality at the funerals of American soldiers at the Supreme Court.
I am afraid that I know what was in Tyler's head when he jumped...but what about the rest of us when we do not speak up to the bullies of intolerance? Are we just watching more kids like Tyler take the plunge?
Friday, October 01, 2010
Why Do Some People Have Jobs?
I just watched a video that featured an assistant attorney general in the state of Michigan who is waging a campaign against the first openly-gay student body president at the University of Michigan. This 21 year old student is the object of a blog and periodic protests in front of his home by a grown a$$ man with a law degree. The attorney claims that he is speaking out against the student's radical fascist agenda, and as an alum of UMich, he is exercising his First Amendment rights.
Anderson Cooper, who interviewed this twit, was so thoroughly annoyed by this guy that he kind of got stuck on the fact that this guy is a state employee. And after consulting with the elected Attorney General of the state, the guy won't be fired, even though his actions are clearly insane.
So that we are all clear...people who are employed by the government can say whatever they want about someone else as long as they do so on their own time. They can post inflammatory blogs and protest in front of someone's house even. OK.
Shirley Sherrod was asked to resign over a doctored video tape of her giving a speech to the NAACP on her own time, but this loser who admits that he has both set up the website and maintained a vigil of harassment against a college student, HAS A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN HATE SPEECH ON HIS OWN TIME.
Got it...
Anderson Cooper, who interviewed this twit, was so thoroughly annoyed by this guy that he kind of got stuck on the fact that this guy is a state employee. And after consulting with the elected Attorney General of the state, the guy won't be fired, even though his actions are clearly insane.
So that we are all clear...people who are employed by the government can say whatever they want about someone else as long as they do so on their own time. They can post inflammatory blogs and protest in front of someone's house even. OK.
Shirley Sherrod was asked to resign over a doctored video tape of her giving a speech to the NAACP on her own time, but this loser who admits that he has both set up the website and maintained a vigil of harassment against a college student, HAS A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN HATE SPEECH ON HIS OWN TIME.
Got it...
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Crazy Is as Crazy Does
White America Has Lost Its Mind - Village Voice
Man, I wish I had written this article, but I'm sure that because I am black, it never would have been published and would have been cited as evidence of my inate racism (angry black women are now even scarier than men these days). And I would have been a lot more diplomatic because I don't think that "White America" is insane; I think the people who are invested in the idea that there still is a "White America" under attack are the insane folks.
So here is my take...the people who are stirring up all of this anger have been using race as their spoon. The stuff in the bowl might be based on legitimate gripes about the way the country is being run, but if you use race as an implement to incite people's fears, then it should not be surprising that the folks who are whining about wanting their country back all happen to look a certain way. And as such, get painted with a broad crazy brush...
Yes, there are brown folks who are joining them at these Tea Party/Restore Honor Rallies and it all looks very Kumba Ya on Faux Noise. And yes, 95% of black voters pulled the lever for the black guy in 2008...but none of this proves anything, does it? If the real reason why people are upset is because they hate the President's policies, then fine. Just say that and dispense with the white Joker-face posters, witch/voodoo doctors, Hitler references, requests for birth certificates, professions of Christian faith, monkey-watermelon-fried chicken jokes, and all other race-tainted stupidity that only seems to send the message that you are really mad that there is a black family in the White House.
See, I still want to believe that Americans, on the whole, are good people who occasionally disagree. I can believe what I want and you can believe what you want and if they match up, fine. If our opinions diverge, then that is cool too. But I refuse to believe that all of our opinions are always informed by skin color.
Man, I wish I had written this article, but I'm sure that because I am black, it never would have been published and would have been cited as evidence of my inate racism (angry black women are now even scarier than men these days). And I would have been a lot more diplomatic because I don't think that "White America" is insane; I think the people who are invested in the idea that there still is a "White America" under attack are the insane folks.
So here is my take...the people who are stirring up all of this anger have been using race as their spoon. The stuff in the bowl might be based on legitimate gripes about the way the country is being run, but if you use race as an implement to incite people's fears, then it should not be surprising that the folks who are whining about wanting their country back all happen to look a certain way. And as such, get painted with a broad crazy brush...
Yes, there are brown folks who are joining them at these Tea Party/Restore Honor Rallies and it all looks very Kumba Ya on Faux Noise. And yes, 95% of black voters pulled the lever for the black guy in 2008...but none of this proves anything, does it? If the real reason why people are upset is because they hate the President's policies, then fine. Just say that and dispense with the white Joker-face posters, witch/voodoo doctors, Hitler references, requests for birth certificates, professions of Christian faith, monkey-watermelon-fried chicken jokes, and all other race-tainted stupidity that only seems to send the message that you are really mad that there is a black family in the White House.
See, I still want to believe that Americans, on the whole, are good people who occasionally disagree. I can believe what I want and you can believe what you want and if they match up, fine. If our opinions diverge, then that is cool too. But I refuse to believe that all of our opinions are always informed by skin color.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Allegations, Accusations
I had written something totally different a few days ago when this Eddie Long thing was just an allegation...before he went before his congregation (ON TV) to defend himself.
I am not weighing in on whether Long is guilty because it really does not matter since his image is forever tarnished by the mere suggestion that he abused his position as pastor. My take on his position as the self-appointed Bishop is actually where this piece is headed--how do-it-yourself theology is going to ruin more lives if it isn't exposed for what is really is.
A few years ago, I helped a very good friend of mine start his own church. We had both left our home church where symptoms of malaise had begun to set in. Our former pastor had some health issues that many in the congregation had noticed but few were willing to confront as problematic. For me, it was an issue of future survival--institutions are supposed to be built to withstand almost anything, even the loss of a great leader. Our pastor had been a great leader, but instead of recognizing his limitations, he was allowed to trudge on and in the process, we were bleeding members. I left because going felt more like an obligation to him than it did to my own soul.
So when my friend asked me to assist him with the set up of his church, I was estatic. And for a year, I was a faithful member...until he affiliated with a self-appointed Bishop whose views about the role of church leadership conflicted with mine. Not that I needed to agree with the Bishop, but I felt that his influence meant that he would counsel my friend to pursue a path that would tie the rise and fall of our little church to him...and not to God.
Thus, as I watch the Bishop Long saga prepare to engulf his church, I cannot help but to think that this is exactly what happens when the men (or women) in the pulpit replace God as the center of our joys. There is no immunity, even in the church, from the saying 'absolute power corrupts absolutely'. Or from that other saying 'there is a sucker born every minute'.
The cult of personality is a real problem in the church. If institutions are supposed to be built strong enough to outlast or to withstand anything, then churches should not be built as monuments to charismatic preachers. Plenty of companies bear the names of long-dead founders; our country was built on principles that transcended the lives of the Founding Fathers; and clearly, Christianity was built to last far beyond the natural life of Jesus.
My hope is that no matter what happens to Eddie Long, New Birth survives. Apparently, this is a church that has done a lot of good and even if its founder is a man beset by personal demons, and it ought to be strong enough to endure. Should this scandal bring the Bishop back down to earth, it should not cause New Birth to implode as well. Just like the Catholic Church had to make changes in the wake of the priest sex abuse cases, so will New Birth have to address some of its excesses.
So help them God.
I am not weighing in on whether Long is guilty because it really does not matter since his image is forever tarnished by the mere suggestion that he abused his position as pastor. My take on his position as the self-appointed Bishop is actually where this piece is headed--how do-it-yourself theology is going to ruin more lives if it isn't exposed for what is really is.
A few years ago, I helped a very good friend of mine start his own church. We had both left our home church where symptoms of malaise had begun to set in. Our former pastor had some health issues that many in the congregation had noticed but few were willing to confront as problematic. For me, it was an issue of future survival--institutions are supposed to be built to withstand almost anything, even the loss of a great leader. Our pastor had been a great leader, but instead of recognizing his limitations, he was allowed to trudge on and in the process, we were bleeding members. I left because going felt more like an obligation to him than it did to my own soul.
So when my friend asked me to assist him with the set up of his church, I was estatic. And for a year, I was a faithful member...until he affiliated with a self-appointed Bishop whose views about the role of church leadership conflicted with mine. Not that I needed to agree with the Bishop, but I felt that his influence meant that he would counsel my friend to pursue a path that would tie the rise and fall of our little church to him...and not to God.
Thus, as I watch the Bishop Long saga prepare to engulf his church, I cannot help but to think that this is exactly what happens when the men (or women) in the pulpit replace God as the center of our joys. There is no immunity, even in the church, from the saying 'absolute power corrupts absolutely'. Or from that other saying 'there is a sucker born every minute'.
The cult of personality is a real problem in the church. If institutions are supposed to be built strong enough to outlast or to withstand anything, then churches should not be built as monuments to charismatic preachers. Plenty of companies bear the names of long-dead founders; our country was built on principles that transcended the lives of the Founding Fathers; and clearly, Christianity was built to last far beyond the natural life of Jesus.
My hope is that no matter what happens to Eddie Long, New Birth survives. Apparently, this is a church that has done a lot of good and even if its founder is a man beset by personal demons, and it ought to be strong enough to endure. Should this scandal bring the Bishop back down to earth, it should not cause New Birth to implode as well. Just like the Catholic Church had to make changes in the wake of the priest sex abuse cases, so will New Birth have to address some of its excesses.
So help them God.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Lots of Random Stuff
I wanted to write about bliss, President Obama, and my birthmark. I have a feeling it will all come together in some odd way, so bear with me please...
This weekend I spent time with the baby niece. If it is even possible, I love this child in a way that scares me. Yesterday I got to watch her for a couple of hours by myself, and I had a moment of what I determined was pure bliss. She had been fussy which meant she was tired so I was trying to figure out how to get her to go to sleep. In yoga the previous week, the teacher mentioned how the sound that comes from saying "Ommm" is very calming and relaxing to the body. So as we made our way from one part of the house to another, I just hummed Ommm to her and she fell asleep in less than a minute. I settled onto the sofa and continued to hum Ommm until I also nodded off. It was probably less than a twenty minute nap, but I was startled by the air conditioner and woke up to discover that my little darling was just as content as she could be. It was the best feeling in the world and I think that whenever I feel depressed or overwhelmed or anxious, I am going to remember that moment in time when I felt so at peace and grateful for the blessing that I was holding in my arms.
To President Obama, I have been worried about you. I think you need to find that same place at some point very soon or else this job is going to kill you. These people are hell-bent on destroying you and I am afraid that you are allowing them to get to you. Since I kind of get you and understand why you are having issues right now, my advice is to dispatch the detached Mr. Spock demeanor for something far more effective...try Captain Jean Luc Picard instead. As much as I like Spock, he was a terrible leader (remember the "Galileo Seven" episode when Spock served as the CO of the away team?), so you need a better role model. I know Biden does a great Leonard McKoy impression, but no, Star Trek: TNG is much better.
But in all seriousness, Mr. President, please get to the point where your moves are not dictated by the need to appease Fox News and their audience. These people did not and never will give you any credit, so can you give the country the Administration that they voted for? Meaning, can you be the Obama that we believe you are? I know that Democrats are never satisfied, but that should not deter you. I am going to attempt a sports analogy here--the mid terms are in five weeks and we need a leader who can take the ball down the field. Run, Mr. President, even if they sack you, take the hit and try again until there is no more time left on the clock.
As for my birthmark, I saw this photo of a woman whose birthmark resembles mine in pretty startling ways:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/15/who-is-the-ultimate-game-_2_n_678753.html#s125970
She is beautiful. Not because of her birthmark, but in spite of it. That might seem like a horrible thing to say, but it is an acknowledgment of what I have come to embrace about my own birthmark. A few weeks ago I called it freakish because I had a bad experience with a homeless man on the street whom I felt was picking on me (on the basis that the birthmark makes me an easy target for riducule). I was upset and had a temporary relapse to the self-pity that once haunted me about my outward appearance. Seeing this woman, I can only imagine that our stories are similar, that she also was taunted about her birthmark. We are not freaks...we are chosen.
How all of this ties together...bliss can be found in a moment. I need to find that moment more often. I have been all worked up this entire month about my imperfections, but in that one moment with my niece, I found peace. I then put my troubles in perspective and look on President Obama. I have issues...he has problems. I hope that he can find a moment of bliss that will center him so that he can resolve to face each subsequent day. Oya, the woman whose face is like mine is considered a game-changer. I don't know what other challenges she faced before this very moment, but I know what she had to endure with respect to that beautiful strange face. She is a warrior. President Obama, you are not what your critics say you are--you are what you say you are. Back to my nerdy TNG references, Captain Picard faced annihilation by the Borg and was assimilated--yet he triumphed in the end. President Obama, YES you can.
Ayanna, yes you can too.
This weekend I spent time with the baby niece. If it is even possible, I love this child in a way that scares me. Yesterday I got to watch her for a couple of hours by myself, and I had a moment of what I determined was pure bliss. She had been fussy which meant she was tired so I was trying to figure out how to get her to go to sleep. In yoga the previous week, the teacher mentioned how the sound that comes from saying "Ommm" is very calming and relaxing to the body. So as we made our way from one part of the house to another, I just hummed Ommm to her and she fell asleep in less than a minute. I settled onto the sofa and continued to hum Ommm until I also nodded off. It was probably less than a twenty minute nap, but I was startled by the air conditioner and woke up to discover that my little darling was just as content as she could be. It was the best feeling in the world and I think that whenever I feel depressed or overwhelmed or anxious, I am going to remember that moment in time when I felt so at peace and grateful for the blessing that I was holding in my arms.
To President Obama, I have been worried about you. I think you need to find that same place at some point very soon or else this job is going to kill you. These people are hell-bent on destroying you and I am afraid that you are allowing them to get to you. Since I kind of get you and understand why you are having issues right now, my advice is to dispatch the detached Mr. Spock demeanor for something far more effective...try Captain Jean Luc Picard instead. As much as I like Spock, he was a terrible leader (remember the "Galileo Seven" episode when Spock served as the CO of the away team?), so you need a better role model. I know Biden does a great Leonard McKoy impression, but no, Star Trek: TNG is much better.
But in all seriousness, Mr. President, please get to the point where your moves are not dictated by the need to appease Fox News and their audience. These people did not and never will give you any credit, so can you give the country the Administration that they voted for? Meaning, can you be the Obama that we believe you are? I know that Democrats are never satisfied, but that should not deter you. I am going to attempt a sports analogy here--the mid terms are in five weeks and we need a leader who can take the ball down the field. Run, Mr. President, even if they sack you, take the hit and try again until there is no more time left on the clock.
As for my birthmark, I saw this photo of a woman whose birthmark resembles mine in pretty startling ways:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/15/who-is-the-ultimate-game-_2_n_678753.html#s125970
She is beautiful. Not because of her birthmark, but in spite of it. That might seem like a horrible thing to say, but it is an acknowledgment of what I have come to embrace about my own birthmark. A few weeks ago I called it freakish because I had a bad experience with a homeless man on the street whom I felt was picking on me (on the basis that the birthmark makes me an easy target for riducule). I was upset and had a temporary relapse to the self-pity that once haunted me about my outward appearance. Seeing this woman, I can only imagine that our stories are similar, that she also was taunted about her birthmark. We are not freaks...we are chosen.
How all of this ties together...bliss can be found in a moment. I need to find that moment more often. I have been all worked up this entire month about my imperfections, but in that one moment with my niece, I found peace. I then put my troubles in perspective and look on President Obama. I have issues...he has problems. I hope that he can find a moment of bliss that will center him so that he can resolve to face each subsequent day. Oya, the woman whose face is like mine is considered a game-changer. I don't know what other challenges she faced before this very moment, but I know what she had to endure with respect to that beautiful strange face. She is a warrior. President Obama, you are not what your critics say you are--you are what you say you are. Back to my nerdy TNG references, Captain Picard faced annihilation by the Borg and was assimilated--yet he triumphed in the end. President Obama, YES you can.
Ayanna, yes you can too.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Misunderestimate at Your Peril
There are people who get on TV and say stupid things, but these are not necessarily stupid people. Lately, there have been a lot of instances of acting stupid and I am beginning to realize that that is exactly what it is...an act.
I could cite numerous examples, but I'll start with Sister Sarah. A lot of people dismiss her as an airhead, but we keep talking about her and her popularity continues to astound. Her name gets mentioned on the cable news daily and despite the obvious questions about her credibility as a leader, all of this negative attention has had just the opposite effect. In addition to her endorsements of candidates who really could go to Washington to screw stuff up, her daughter is now on Dancing with the Stars! Why would she want to be President when she can flit around the country like some derainged fairy godmother turning mice into credible candidates. Just wait until that Pumpkin carriage arrives in DC this November...
And earlier today I was watching Showbiz Tonight and the focus was all on Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton and their apparent drug problems. Like rehab is a bad thing? For Lindsay, this is just the set up for her big comeback in a year or two (it worked for Britney Spears and Robert Downey, Jr...not so well for Corey Haim) and for Paris, well, I'm sure she'll get to host Saturday Night Live again or do another half-naked commercial for Carl Jr's.
Nadya Sulemon, the "Octomom" gets offered a deal to star in a porno and I swear the hosts of Showbiz Tonight seemed to be suggesting that her priorities were out of whack for not giving it serious consideration. Think about that for a second--she is a MOTHER to 14 children under the age of ten...does it matter that such an offer is totally inappropriate? Montana Fishbourne uses her real name in her porn film debut to piss off her father and he called her stupid for not combining the name of her first pet and street name like everybody else. But who is the dumb one, Big Daddy--you for not keeping her off the pole! The Housewives of Wherever manufacture drama but want us to believe that these shows are really about advertising their charity work (uh huh)...
And the King of Huxters was the guy in Florida who threatened to burn Qu'rans. He had everybody from Fox News to President Obama begging him not to light that bonfire two weeks ago--I must have been the only person who thought he should have gone ahead with it. Not because I don't care about the repercussions, but because I sensed that it was a hoax all along. Like, who burns books anymore? What he really wanted was attention for his little church and I'm afraid everyone fell for his wild-eyed zealot act.
Is stupid the new newsworthy? Who are the real fools--the folks who are parading around in meat dresses or those of us who watch and comment on their behavior?
I could cite numerous examples, but I'll start with Sister Sarah. A lot of people dismiss her as an airhead, but we keep talking about her and her popularity continues to astound. Her name gets mentioned on the cable news daily and despite the obvious questions about her credibility as a leader, all of this negative attention has had just the opposite effect. In addition to her endorsements of candidates who really could go to Washington to screw stuff up, her daughter is now on Dancing with the Stars! Why would she want to be President when she can flit around the country like some derainged fairy godmother turning mice into credible candidates. Just wait until that Pumpkin carriage arrives in DC this November...
And earlier today I was watching Showbiz Tonight and the focus was all on Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton and their apparent drug problems. Like rehab is a bad thing? For Lindsay, this is just the set up for her big comeback in a year or two (it worked for Britney Spears and Robert Downey, Jr...not so well for Corey Haim) and for Paris, well, I'm sure she'll get to host Saturday Night Live again or do another half-naked commercial for Carl Jr's.
Nadya Sulemon, the "Octomom" gets offered a deal to star in a porno and I swear the hosts of Showbiz Tonight seemed to be suggesting that her priorities were out of whack for not giving it serious consideration. Think about that for a second--she is a MOTHER to 14 children under the age of ten...does it matter that such an offer is totally inappropriate? Montana Fishbourne uses her real name in her porn film debut to piss off her father and he called her stupid for not combining the name of her first pet and street name like everybody else. But who is the dumb one, Big Daddy--you for not keeping her off the pole! The Housewives of Wherever manufacture drama but want us to believe that these shows are really about advertising their charity work (uh huh)...
And the King of Huxters was the guy in Florida who threatened to burn Qu'rans. He had everybody from Fox News to President Obama begging him not to light that bonfire two weeks ago--I must have been the only person who thought he should have gone ahead with it. Not because I don't care about the repercussions, but because I sensed that it was a hoax all along. Like, who burns books anymore? What he really wanted was attention for his little church and I'm afraid everyone fell for his wild-eyed zealot act.
Is stupid the new newsworthy? Who are the real fools--the folks who are parading around in meat dresses or those of us who watch and comment on their behavior?
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Restoring Sanity
Just when I was asking for sanity, the good Lord told Jon Stewart to hold a rally.
Not that I want to take credit for this, but I feel that it is my duty to point out that I vented on this very topic three days before the big announcement. I know that Stewart had been hinting at something, but if I had the platform he does, I might have organized a march/rally/sit-in/festivus/whatever myself.
Anyway, the funny part about this is that I totally slept through the announcement! The Daily Show was on, but I had already sailed off to dreamland...found out about it the next day when a classmate sent me a link to the show on Facebook.
Now, since I attended the Reclaim the Dream rally and will probably have to get on board with the NAACP One Nation rally, I should be all rallied out. But if I am in town, I think I might have to attend this one if for no other reason than to see how short Jon Stewart is in real life. OK, the real reason would be to see if other people actually showed up. Of course this is a prank (Stephen Colbert's "Keep Fear Alive March" is planned for the same day), but it is deliciously clever to make fun of all the protesting that has been clogging up traffic in DC lately. What would happen if a few thousand people came to DC with a request that we collectively pipe down for a minute?
Not that I want to take credit for this, but I feel that it is my duty to point out that I vented on this very topic three days before the big announcement. I know that Stewart had been hinting at something, but if I had the platform he does, I might have organized a march/rally/sit-in/festivus/whatever myself.
Anyway, the funny part about this is that I totally slept through the announcement! The Daily Show was on, but I had already sailed off to dreamland...found out about it the next day when a classmate sent me a link to the show on Facebook.
Now, since I attended the Reclaim the Dream rally and will probably have to get on board with the NAACP One Nation rally, I should be all rallied out. But if I am in town, I think I might have to attend this one if for no other reason than to see how short Jon Stewart is in real life. OK, the real reason would be to see if other people actually showed up. Of course this is a prank (Stephen Colbert's "Keep Fear Alive March" is planned for the same day), but it is deliciously clever to make fun of all the protesting that has been clogging up traffic in DC lately. What would happen if a few thousand people came to DC with a request that we collectively pipe down for a minute?
Whose City Is It Anyway?
Last week DC ousted its controversial young mayor for an older one. Pundits point to a racial divide, but in my humle opinion, race only offers a superficial explanation of what happened. What really happened was that people decided they wanted a mayor and not a temperamental CEO.
This is not to say that for some voters, this election was a reclamation of sorts. There are a lot of people who hate the changes this city has undergone over the past 12 years. They look at how the complexion of the residents have changed and as such, there has been a shift in policy priorities that benefit those newcomers. Ground Zero of those changes are on display on the "Historic" U Street corridor, in the heart of what was once known as Black Broadway. These days, U Street is easily the most integrated section of the city.
But this piece is not about the things that divide the city, but about how the hotshot young mayor lost to the older guy. Adrian Fenty rode into office on a wave of good press that touted a new era of black leadership that would transform the racial terrain of politics. Because of his interracial pedigree and landslide victory in every ward of the city, he became the poster child of post-racialism...his victory essentially foretold the coming of Barack Obama.
In his run for office, Fenty assembled a coalition that united the interests of residents from all quadrants of the city. He knocked on doors and spoke to people. His person to person style contrasted with that of the establishment candidate who came across as jaded and out of touch. And she lost big. However once in office, Fenty the uniter became Fenty the divider. He engaged in petty disputes with his former colleagues on the City Council. He hired outsiders to head city agencies to clean house and to shake things up. Not that people objected to change, but the mayor and his surrogates had a bad habit of trashing the folks that were fired in the press (yes, I'm talking about you Michelle Rhee). He was oblivious that his choice to skip certain ceremonial stuff that mayors are supposed to attend in favor of competing in triathalons or taking family vacations irked people.
In other words, Fenty was an insensitive jerk.
For a large number of the residents who bothered to vote, Fenty being a jerk was fine as long as the trash was collected and the wait time at the DMV had been minimized. For the other group that despised him, I'm sure Fenty took comfort in the old political adage that if a lot of the people hate you, then you are probably on the right track. Insensitivity is a forgivable character flaw, but when it is coupled with arrogance, it can be fatal.
For example, when the Metro train crash killed nine people a year ago, the Mayor was criticized for missing some of the memorial services. Instead of apologizing, the mayor tersely suggested that he could not be everywhere--and this is from the man who knocked on every door in the city asking for votes. For those voters who insist that empathy from elected officials is overrated, imagine how it would have felt had one of those victims been one of their loved ones.
Another issue that determined how I would vote was the trail of former Fenty supporters. I found it odd that a lot of people who once backed the mayor had nothing positive to say about him and ultimately switched sides. Some would argue that the price of success is the shedding of dead weight, but these were not typical disgruntled ex-associates. Councilmembers whose campaign literature just two years ago prominently featured community photos of them cutting ribbons with the smiling mayor were publicly sparring with him over his autocratic management style. Others stayed conspicuously silent...perhaps keeping to that other adage that if you don't have anything nice to say, then say nothing.
So when Fenty supporters want to blame racial politics as usual, they are simply adding icing to an old cake. Conspiratorial minded folks always see racial animous lurking in the shadows of change. But this is not about "The Plan" or other misperceptions. This was about the real concern that the mayor's preference for competing in triathalons over greeting voters at church was symbolic of which constituent concerns got priority.
The other interesting development in the aftermath of this contest is the petulance of Fenty backers, some of whom are vowing to move to other jurisdictions in a I'll-take-my-stuff-and-go-bak-to-the-suburbs manner. Strange. All this time we thought your decision to live in the city was motivated by altruism for a brighter future. If progress is best measured by how well things work for the haves, then maybe the discontent of the others was spot on--that all of these social improvements came at their expense.
Is that what 'change' really means?
This is not to say that for some voters, this election was a reclamation of sorts. There are a lot of people who hate the changes this city has undergone over the past 12 years. They look at how the complexion of the residents have changed and as such, there has been a shift in policy priorities that benefit those newcomers. Ground Zero of those changes are on display on the "Historic" U Street corridor, in the heart of what was once known as Black Broadway. These days, U Street is easily the most integrated section of the city.
But this piece is not about the things that divide the city, but about how the hotshot young mayor lost to the older guy. Adrian Fenty rode into office on a wave of good press that touted a new era of black leadership that would transform the racial terrain of politics. Because of his interracial pedigree and landslide victory in every ward of the city, he became the poster child of post-racialism...his victory essentially foretold the coming of Barack Obama.
In his run for office, Fenty assembled a coalition that united the interests of residents from all quadrants of the city. He knocked on doors and spoke to people. His person to person style contrasted with that of the establishment candidate who came across as jaded and out of touch. And she lost big. However once in office, Fenty the uniter became Fenty the divider. He engaged in petty disputes with his former colleagues on the City Council. He hired outsiders to head city agencies to clean house and to shake things up. Not that people objected to change, but the mayor and his surrogates had a bad habit of trashing the folks that were fired in the press (yes, I'm talking about you Michelle Rhee). He was oblivious that his choice to skip certain ceremonial stuff that mayors are supposed to attend in favor of competing in triathalons or taking family vacations irked people.
In other words, Fenty was an insensitive jerk.
For a large number of the residents who bothered to vote, Fenty being a jerk was fine as long as the trash was collected and the wait time at the DMV had been minimized. For the other group that despised him, I'm sure Fenty took comfort in the old political adage that if a lot of the people hate you, then you are probably on the right track. Insensitivity is a forgivable character flaw, but when it is coupled with arrogance, it can be fatal.
For example, when the Metro train crash killed nine people a year ago, the Mayor was criticized for missing some of the memorial services. Instead of apologizing, the mayor tersely suggested that he could not be everywhere--and this is from the man who knocked on every door in the city asking for votes. For those voters who insist that empathy from elected officials is overrated, imagine how it would have felt had one of those victims been one of their loved ones.
Another issue that determined how I would vote was the trail of former Fenty supporters. I found it odd that a lot of people who once backed the mayor had nothing positive to say about him and ultimately switched sides. Some would argue that the price of success is the shedding of dead weight, but these were not typical disgruntled ex-associates. Councilmembers whose campaign literature just two years ago prominently featured community photos of them cutting ribbons with the smiling mayor were publicly sparring with him over his autocratic management style. Others stayed conspicuously silent...perhaps keeping to that other adage that if you don't have anything nice to say, then say nothing.
So when Fenty supporters want to blame racial politics as usual, they are simply adding icing to an old cake. Conspiratorial minded folks always see racial animous lurking in the shadows of change. But this is not about "The Plan" or other misperceptions. This was about the real concern that the mayor's preference for competing in triathalons over greeting voters at church was symbolic of which constituent concerns got priority.
The other interesting development in the aftermath of this contest is the petulance of Fenty backers, some of whom are vowing to move to other jurisdictions in a I'll-take-my-stuff-and-go-bak-to-the-suburbs manner. Strange. All this time we thought your decision to live in the city was motivated by altruism for a brighter future. If progress is best measured by how well things work for the haves, then maybe the discontent of the others was spot on--that all of these social improvements came at their expense.
Is that what 'change' really means?
Monday, September 13, 2010
Divided We Fail
This past weekend I attended part of a session that was planned to bring about healing in one of my organizations. In the past few years there has been a lot of strife that has prevented the organization from achieving many of its goals. So we decided to have a conversation about our feelings. At the end, I was not so convinced that the discussion had done any real good, but in retrospect, I believe that by just taking the time to have a conversation about the things that bother us, we have taken some important steps towards healing.
If I were to relate this experience to what I see happening in the country right now, it seems that we need a national time-out. We need a few days wherein we call a truce so that people can just calm down to see the damage that years of protracted bickering has wrought.
I worked on Capitol Hill in the aftermath of impeachment and it was frustrating to say the least. The Democrats were in the minority and the President was a lame duck. It was bad to be in both of these positions from a political standpoint, but it was much worse to be in this position because the level of residual anger that hung over the place was just so thick and impervious. There were attempts to bridge the chasm, but it was hard because there were a lot of bruised egos and hurt feelings. People wielded their individual grudges like machetes.
By the time George W. Bush was elected, things were not much better since he ascended to office under a cloud of suspicion. In hindsight, I still cannot say that his initial win was not the result of some dirty trickery, which sort of proves my point about how there has been no improvement in terms of the election of Barack Obama. We dogged Bush as illegitimate because of the voter purge shananigans so perhaps it is only fitting that Obama with his foreign-sounding name would be dogged by accusations of being everything from a terrorist sympathizer to a fascist dictator.
The opposition to President Obama has been stunning in its intensity. Folks who claim to be angry about his policies seem to also embrace the notion that his ideology comes from some unrecognizable, un-American place. Not that half of the folks who voted for him share this same perspective on the role of government (because they do and many are disappointed that he hasn't done much more), but there is something sinister about HIM that keeps them awake at night waiting for the end times.
I am baffled because I can't believe this is my country at times. Maybe that has a lot to do with the fact that I am not a Baby Boomer or part of the Greatest Generation. We never had to suffer indignities based on our skin color or gender. I thought I was a student of history and expected a certain amount of backlash, but I never expected this.
I am disillusioned. Can't we all just pretend to get along?
If I were to relate this experience to what I see happening in the country right now, it seems that we need a national time-out. We need a few days wherein we call a truce so that people can just calm down to see the damage that years of protracted bickering has wrought.
I worked on Capitol Hill in the aftermath of impeachment and it was frustrating to say the least. The Democrats were in the minority and the President was a lame duck. It was bad to be in both of these positions from a political standpoint, but it was much worse to be in this position because the level of residual anger that hung over the place was just so thick and impervious. There were attempts to bridge the chasm, but it was hard because there were a lot of bruised egos and hurt feelings. People wielded their individual grudges like machetes.
By the time George W. Bush was elected, things were not much better since he ascended to office under a cloud of suspicion. In hindsight, I still cannot say that his initial win was not the result of some dirty trickery, which sort of proves my point about how there has been no improvement in terms of the election of Barack Obama. We dogged Bush as illegitimate because of the voter purge shananigans so perhaps it is only fitting that Obama with his foreign-sounding name would be dogged by accusations of being everything from a terrorist sympathizer to a fascist dictator.
The opposition to President Obama has been stunning in its intensity. Folks who claim to be angry about his policies seem to also embrace the notion that his ideology comes from some unrecognizable, un-American place. Not that half of the folks who voted for him share this same perspective on the role of government (because they do and many are disappointed that he hasn't done much more), but there is something sinister about HIM that keeps them awake at night waiting for the end times.
I am baffled because I can't believe this is my country at times. Maybe that has a lot to do with the fact that I am not a Baby Boomer or part of the Greatest Generation. We never had to suffer indignities based on our skin color or gender. I thought I was a student of history and expected a certain amount of backlash, but I never expected this.
I am disillusioned. Can't we all just pretend to get along?
Thursday, September 09, 2010
The First Amendment on Steroids
Build your mosque in Lower Manhattan. Burn some Qu'rans on Saturday because you want to make a point. March on Washington to Reclaim the Dream or to Restore Honor (whichever fits). Say the n-word eleven times on the public airways. Call the Tea Party out for its racism. Brandish signs with the image of the President as a witch doctor.
Do whatever you have to do in order to affirm that this is a free country.
Because this is a free country. You can build a mosque anywhere you want to as long as you have the appropriate permits. And if I don't like the fact that you are building such an edifice, I can picket outside of it during your prayer services. You can burn Muslim holy books (or Bibles, Torahs, Books of Mormon, etc) because it is your right and the fact that some soldiers might get killed in retaliation isn't your fault since you were just exercising your rights. At least YOU aren't killing American soldiers abroad. March whenever and wherever you want in Washington because this is the Nation's Capitol, and that is what it is here for--your voice is important and we want people to participate in the democratic process. Sure, say offensive things because you can and if it is in your heart to do so (and if you have heard others whose skin color allows their free and unfettered use of certain words and phrases), then by all means, please continue. When you encounter a group of citizens who are exercising their rights, you can get offended, but that is also your right. They have the right to offend you too so it is of mutual benefit.
In honor of our unencumbered right to piss each other off as necessary, here is what I have to say:
Forgive me.
Do whatever you have to do in order to affirm that this is a free country.
Because this is a free country. You can build a mosque anywhere you want to as long as you have the appropriate permits. And if I don't like the fact that you are building such an edifice, I can picket outside of it during your prayer services. You can burn Muslim holy books (or Bibles, Torahs, Books of Mormon, etc) because it is your right and the fact that some soldiers might get killed in retaliation isn't your fault since you were just exercising your rights. At least YOU aren't killing American soldiers abroad. March whenever and wherever you want in Washington because this is the Nation's Capitol, and that is what it is here for--your voice is important and we want people to participate in the democratic process. Sure, say offensive things because you can and if it is in your heart to do so (and if you have heard others whose skin color allows their free and unfettered use of certain words and phrases), then by all means, please continue. When you encounter a group of citizens who are exercising their rights, you can get offended, but that is also your right. They have the right to offend you too so it is of mutual benefit.
In honor of our unencumbered right to piss each other off as necessary, here is what I have to say:
Forgive me.
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
Delayed Response to a Shocking Provocation
So the husband and I were in San Francisco for a few days and on our last night, we headed around the corner from our hotel to grab some dinner. To backtrack for just a bit, we were staying in Union Square where there are a lot of homeless people and high-end department stores (yes, strange juxtaposition of extremes, but I digress). On our daily walks to whatever destination was next on our vacation itinerary, it was depressing to pass by so many outstretched hands--not because they were annoying, but because it is sad to see so many people begging on the streets of what is probably the most affluent city in America.
So on our fateful last night in town, a man calls out to me and says, "You know what? You're with a white guy and that is what is killing us brothers!"
SCRATCH.......................................................Huh? You talking to me?
I continued across the street but was unnerved for the rest of the evening. I didn't address the issue at dinner and I didn't want to write about it at the time because I needed to process why what he said felt like a sucker punch.
So let's compare reactions. First, let's go back to the moment when this confrontation caused my blood to boil: I am on vacation in CALIFORNIA, which has to be the interracial couple capital of the freakin' USA! And on top of that, I am in San Freakin-cisco, of all places! And not that it matters, but my husband isn't white... And who the F&%$ are you anyway, random homeless guy?!?
And now, let's examine why this incident still makes me feel exposed and raw: Out of all the people you could have chosen to insult on crowded downtown street, you chose me. Me, the overly sympathetic sensitive gawky tall freak whose over-developed sense of Catholic guilt is probably what led to this encounter (because I turned around when you called out to me...one does not easily forget years of Sunday school lessons and religion classes on how to treat the least among us). Thanks a$$hole!
Notice that the common thread in both reaction is 'why me'...
Not because I owe anyone an explanation about my life. I did not betray anyone by marrying the man who loves me just as I am --the overly sympathetic sensitive gawky tall freak with an over-developed sense of Catholic guilt. In the nine years that I have been married, it is possible that I have been walking around in blinders regarding my husband's ethnicity and how others react when they see us together. Or it is more likely that no one in either of our social or familial circles has the balls to say anything blatantly offensive. Even when we meet new people, those awkward moments of first contact can be diffused with humor; perhaps, the moments aren't all that awkward anymore. After all, this is the 21st Century and this ain't rural Mississippi.
So again, why me? Is it because I am not conspicuous enough as it is: being taller than the average woman; having a birthmark on my forehead that resembles a third eyebrow (or crap, as someone recently pointed out); or for having an eczema discoloration right under my nose that makes me look like Charlie Chaplin? And you call me out for walking down the street with my husband? Is that the best you can do?
The funny thing about writing this is that the stinger has now been pulled from my skin and whatever discomfort I felt a couple of days ago has subsided. I don't need to be self-conscious about my choices or about being me. People who have issues with me are just like that random racist homeless guy. Just sad.
So on our fateful last night in town, a man calls out to me and says, "You know what? You're with a white guy and that is what is killing us brothers!"
SCRATCH.......................................................Huh? You talking to me?
I continued across the street but was unnerved for the rest of the evening. I didn't address the issue at dinner and I didn't want to write about it at the time because I needed to process why what he said felt like a sucker punch.
So let's compare reactions. First, let's go back to the moment when this confrontation caused my blood to boil: I am on vacation in CALIFORNIA, which has to be the interracial couple capital of the freakin' USA! And on top of that, I am in San Freakin-cisco, of all places! And not that it matters, but my husband isn't white... And who the F&%$ are you anyway, random homeless guy?!?
And now, let's examine why this incident still makes me feel exposed and raw: Out of all the people you could have chosen to insult on crowded downtown street, you chose me. Me, the overly sympathetic sensitive gawky tall freak whose over-developed sense of Catholic guilt is probably what led to this encounter (because I turned around when you called out to me...one does not easily forget years of Sunday school lessons and religion classes on how to treat the least among us). Thanks a$$hole!
Notice that the common thread in both reaction is 'why me'...
Not because I owe anyone an explanation about my life. I did not betray anyone by marrying the man who loves me just as I am --the overly sympathetic sensitive gawky tall freak with an over-developed sense of Catholic guilt. In the nine years that I have been married, it is possible that I have been walking around in blinders regarding my husband's ethnicity and how others react when they see us together. Or it is more likely that no one in either of our social or familial circles has the balls to say anything blatantly offensive. Even when we meet new people, those awkward moments of first contact can be diffused with humor; perhaps, the moments aren't all that awkward anymore. After all, this is the 21st Century and this ain't rural Mississippi.
So again, why me? Is it because I am not conspicuous enough as it is: being taller than the average woman; having a birthmark on my forehead that resembles a third eyebrow (or crap, as someone recently pointed out); or for having an eczema discoloration right under my nose that makes me look like Charlie Chaplin? And you call me out for walking down the street with my husband? Is that the best you can do?
The funny thing about writing this is that the stinger has now been pulled from my skin and whatever discomfort I felt a couple of days ago has subsided. I don't need to be self-conscious about my choices or about being me. People who have issues with me are just like that random racist homeless guy. Just sad.
Saturday, September 04, 2010
Regina King Proves My Point
I didn't watch the Emmy's because I don't watch a lot of network TV anymore. But this year, everyone raved about Jimmy Fallon as the host and I did enjoy a few of the clips from the telecast. I even looked at one of those lists of best and worst dressed.
Celebritology means that these award shows and the shows that endlessly deconstruct the meaning of award shows have subject matter for at least three weeks. A week later, actress Regina King penned this open letter that I found on Huffington Post.
Now I've been harping on this very topic for years! Not that the people who commented on her thoughts even remotely get the point, but finally, someone had the balls to call out the industry for its non-existent diversity. And this criticism comes from an insider like Regina King who has been in the industry for a long time, no less.
Of course, no one will get it and very little will change because too many people believe diversity is a cry for lowering standards. Because the nation that just elected a black man as its president has no more problems on the racial front (right Dr.Laura?). And because race is a card game...
Let's get a few things clear so that there is no more confusion about why King's article is so timely. There are many actors of every stripe in Hollywood, and most will never achieve any significant name recognition. Which is fine because that is part of the territory--not everyone can be a star. But must every star be white? And the alternative award shows that folks are fond of citing as examples? These shows were created by blacks and Latinos to offer the recognition that typically does NOT come from Hollywood. If given the choice between receiving a BET Award and an Emmy, I'm sure the Emmy would be much better appreciated because the Emmy has career currency that a BET or ALMA award does not. Please point to the winner of an alternative award whose career prospects improved after its receipt.
So, all we are saying is that this current Hollywood white-out needs to be recognized for what it is. Several new shows in the pipeline will feature people of color more prominently, so that is a start, but there needs to be a lot more opportunity all around. Black folks need to escape the ghetto of CW and TBS, Latinos need a similar get out of jail free card from Univision and Telemundo, and Asians need to get on TV period! Guest roles and buddy parts are nice, but you can do better than token walk-ons. (Yes, it worked for Betty White this year, but so what!)
And maybe next year Regina King will get a nomination.
Celebritology means that these award shows and the shows that endlessly deconstruct the meaning of award shows have subject matter for at least three weeks. A week later, actress Regina King penned this open letter that I found on Huffington Post.
Now I've been harping on this very topic for years! Not that the people who commented on her thoughts even remotely get the point, but finally, someone had the balls to call out the industry for its non-existent diversity. And this criticism comes from an insider like Regina King who has been in the industry for a long time, no less.
Of course, no one will get it and very little will change because too many people believe diversity is a cry for lowering standards. Because the nation that just elected a black man as its president has no more problems on the racial front (right Dr.Laura?). And because race is a card game...
Let's get a few things clear so that there is no more confusion about why King's article is so timely. There are many actors of every stripe in Hollywood, and most will never achieve any significant name recognition. Which is fine because that is part of the territory--not everyone can be a star. But must every star be white? And the alternative award shows that folks are fond of citing as examples? These shows were created by blacks and Latinos to offer the recognition that typically does NOT come from Hollywood. If given the choice between receiving a BET Award and an Emmy, I'm sure the Emmy would be much better appreciated because the Emmy has career currency that a BET or ALMA award does not. Please point to the winner of an alternative award whose career prospects improved after its receipt.
So, all we are saying is that this current Hollywood white-out needs to be recognized for what it is. Several new shows in the pipeline will feature people of color more prominently, so that is a start, but there needs to be a lot more opportunity all around. Black folks need to escape the ghetto of CW and TBS, Latinos need a similar get out of jail free card from Univision and Telemundo, and Asians need to get on TV period! Guest roles and buddy parts are nice, but you can do better than token walk-ons. (Yes, it worked for Betty White this year, but so what!)
And maybe next year Regina King will get a nomination.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
An Open Letter
This letter is addressed to the person(s) currently on my $hit list:
Dear Annoying Person,
I wish I could tell you how I really feel but by doing so, I would only reveal myself to be petty. And I am not petty; I am just annoyed by your existence right now.
But, I have prayed and asked the Lord to change my heart towards you because that is the only request I can make that will count. I could have asked for him to make a bus fall out of the sky onto your head, but that is selfish. I could have asked the Lord to open your eyes to see why you are wrong, but that suggests that my position is correct and that my judgment is even I know better. In truth, I don't know whether I am right or wrong in this situation.
So I asked the Lord to change the way that I am approaching this situation. That way, if there is an angle I am not fully appreciating, he can open my eyes to see more clearly. In case I am seeing everything, then asking for a full view means I can then see things from your skewed perspective, and then the Lord can give me compassion.
I am asking for the change to occur within me because my actions are the only ones that I control. My advice to you is that you pray for the same insight. That your eyes might be opened to see everything from all perspectives--not so that you can see your error in judgment, but more so that you can see this issue from my point of view.
If by chance you don't pray for the Lord's guidance to see more clearly, that is fine. Pray for whatever you need to make it through the day. If you need to pray for my downfall, go right ahead. I know that my prayers won't be impacted by yours. If it is meant for your prayer to be answered, then I am okay with that too because I also am praying for strength so that I can withstand whatever comes my way.
In other words, I am not worried about you anymore. And I am not worried about this situation anymore.
Sincerely, absolutely, and positively,
The Management
Dear Annoying Person,
I wish I could tell you how I really feel but by doing so, I would only reveal myself to be petty. And I am not petty; I am just annoyed by your existence right now.
But, I have prayed and asked the Lord to change my heart towards you because that is the only request I can make that will count. I could have asked for him to make a bus fall out of the sky onto your head, but that is selfish. I could have asked the Lord to open your eyes to see why you are wrong, but that suggests that my position is correct and that my judgment is even I know better. In truth, I don't know whether I am right or wrong in this situation.
So I asked the Lord to change the way that I am approaching this situation. That way, if there is an angle I am not fully appreciating, he can open my eyes to see more clearly. In case I am seeing everything, then asking for a full view means I can then see things from your skewed perspective, and then the Lord can give me compassion.
I am asking for the change to occur within me because my actions are the only ones that I control. My advice to you is that you pray for the same insight. That your eyes might be opened to see everything from all perspectives--not so that you can see your error in judgment, but more so that you can see this issue from my point of view.
If by chance you don't pray for the Lord's guidance to see more clearly, that is fine. Pray for whatever you need to make it through the day. If you need to pray for my downfall, go right ahead. I know that my prayers won't be impacted by yours. If it is meant for your prayer to be answered, then I am okay with that too because I also am praying for strength so that I can withstand whatever comes my way.
In other words, I am not worried about you anymore. And I am not worried about this situation anymore.
Sincerely, absolutely, and positively,
The Management
Monday, August 30, 2010
Weekends are for Wimps
I have had a weekend. It was great and terrible all at the same time. I rallied, I cried, I raged, I chanted, I marched, I rested, I ate, I drank, I strolled, I shopped, I listened, I watched, I heard, I read, I waited, I moved, and I slept.
I do more in one weekend than most people get done in a week.
I am not patting myself on the back, because this is actually a vent about how I took on too much this weekend. In all of that stuff I did, there is still a lot more that I need to get done. I am tired.
Mondays are rough, but the worse day of the week for me tends to be Saturday. So if I were to look at my week from that angle, Friday is truly my day of rest since that is the day when I generally relax and spend the evening gearing up for Saturday morning. Mondays are hump days...
My other vent is about my dogwood tree that appears to have given up the ghost. I am pissed because I paid more attention to this stupid tree by watering and caring for it and it still shriveled up and practically died on me for no good reason. I am most upset because this appears to be a sign--sometimes you give all you can and things still fall apart. Maybe this metaphor isn't about me (a few selected people I know need to get this), but if things don't work out, that is just life. I will simply call the landscaper and have him give me another damn tree.
Alright Tuesday, tell me what YOU got...
I do more in one weekend than most people get done in a week.
I am not patting myself on the back, because this is actually a vent about how I took on too much this weekend. In all of that stuff I did, there is still a lot more that I need to get done. I am tired.
Mondays are rough, but the worse day of the week for me tends to be Saturday. So if I were to look at my week from that angle, Friday is truly my day of rest since that is the day when I generally relax and spend the evening gearing up for Saturday morning. Mondays are hump days...
My other vent is about my dogwood tree that appears to have given up the ghost. I am pissed because I paid more attention to this stupid tree by watering and caring for it and it still shriveled up and practically died on me for no good reason. I am most upset because this appears to be a sign--sometimes you give all you can and things still fall apart. Maybe this metaphor isn't about me (a few selected people I know need to get this), but if things don't work out, that is just life. I will simply call the landscaper and have him give me another damn tree.
Alright Tuesday, tell me what YOU got...
Friday, August 27, 2010
Why I Went to an HBCU
My alma mater was named the #1 HBCU by U.S. News and World Reports, and of course, I am beaming from ear to ear. My brother's alma mater was named #1 by Washington Monthly, and while I don't know much about that magazine, I will allow them this one opportunity to bask in the glory of beating us on someone's list.
Since I graduated from college back in the 1990s, I have been made proud each time my school or any other HBCU lands at the top of some list of best buys, best liberal arts, best in the South, or best overall. I am proud because it reaffirms why I stand by my choice some 20-odd years ago.
Back then, college admissions had begun to open up for African American students and many of us had the opportunity to attend many more schools than our parents had. During my junior year when I was finally focused on life beyond the hell of high school, I visited my future alma mater and fell in LOVE with the campus, the students, and the city I would later call home. Some of my classmates challenged my decision by suggesting that life at an HBCU was not the real world.
I need to back up a little more to provide some context to my decision and the debates themselves...in the late 1980s, two big cultural phenomenons led to a resurgence of interest in HBCUs. On the one hand there was "A Different World", the spin-off to the "Cosby Show" which depicted life at the fictional Hillman College. Although that show began on somewhat shaky ground, the second big push came from Spike Lee's "School Daze", a film about Homecoming weekend at the fictional Mission College. That show and that movie are responsible for the bumper crop of HBCU graduates among the children of baby boomers and ignited the debate about those institutions that, to this day, still inflames passions on both sides of the issue.
This is not a debate about affirmative action and its role in creating opportunity for black students. This is a far more nuanced and internal debate about the future of institutions whose existence is in question because of affirmative action.
So back in my junior year, conversations about college among black students went a little like this:
Pro HBCU: It gives me a chance to attend an institution that was created for me.
Con HBCU: It is not the real world. How are you going to get along with people from different backgrounds once you graduate.
Pro HBCU: Just fine because I will probably attend a racially integrated grad or professional school.
Con HBCU: By then it might be too late. You won't be as prepared to attend those types of schools.
Pro HBCU: Not so. Many HBCU graduates have gone on to become successful at other institutions.
Con HBCU: But that was the past, what about the future?
And this went on and on...both sides had valid points and in the end, I went to my school and others made different choices.
Fast forward to the 21st Century and the factors that inform this debate now. Affirmative action has been under constant attack, but black students still attend majority institutions at greater rates than they attend HBCUs. Several HBCUs have closed or are on the brink of closure for any number of reasons. Students have even more choices with the rise of community and for-profit colleges that offer more choice and flexibility. A bachelor's degree is what a high school diploma was a generation ago.
Would I still make the same choice? Absolutely! For the same reasons? Another resounding YES.
But to be clear, this is not as much about my institution as it is about every HBCU that still stands as a legacy to how important education still is with respect to social and economic progress. I can look back at yearbooks that attest to what my school has produced, just like everyone else I know, but I have the additional blessing of seeing a lot of faces that look like mine--even in the worst of times. Looking ahead, I see an institution that produces women who want to take over the world...and one day, one of us will.
Since I graduated from college back in the 1990s, I have been made proud each time my school or any other HBCU lands at the top of some list of best buys, best liberal arts, best in the South, or best overall. I am proud because it reaffirms why I stand by my choice some 20-odd years ago.
Back then, college admissions had begun to open up for African American students and many of us had the opportunity to attend many more schools than our parents had. During my junior year when I was finally focused on life beyond the hell of high school, I visited my future alma mater and fell in LOVE with the campus, the students, and the city I would later call home. Some of my classmates challenged my decision by suggesting that life at an HBCU was not the real world.
I need to back up a little more to provide some context to my decision and the debates themselves...in the late 1980s, two big cultural phenomenons led to a resurgence of interest in HBCUs. On the one hand there was "A Different World", the spin-off to the "Cosby Show" which depicted life at the fictional Hillman College. Although that show began on somewhat shaky ground, the second big push came from Spike Lee's "School Daze", a film about Homecoming weekend at the fictional Mission College. That show and that movie are responsible for the bumper crop of HBCU graduates among the children of baby boomers and ignited the debate about those institutions that, to this day, still inflames passions on both sides of the issue.
This is not a debate about affirmative action and its role in creating opportunity for black students. This is a far more nuanced and internal debate about the future of institutions whose existence is in question because of affirmative action.
So back in my junior year, conversations about college among black students went a little like this:
Pro HBCU: It gives me a chance to attend an institution that was created for me.
Con HBCU: It is not the real world. How are you going to get along with people from different backgrounds once you graduate.
Pro HBCU: Just fine because I will probably attend a racially integrated grad or professional school.
Con HBCU: By then it might be too late. You won't be as prepared to attend those types of schools.
Pro HBCU: Not so. Many HBCU graduates have gone on to become successful at other institutions.
Con HBCU: But that was the past, what about the future?
And this went on and on...both sides had valid points and in the end, I went to my school and others made different choices.
Fast forward to the 21st Century and the factors that inform this debate now. Affirmative action has been under constant attack, but black students still attend majority institutions at greater rates than they attend HBCUs. Several HBCUs have closed or are on the brink of closure for any number of reasons. Students have even more choices with the rise of community and for-profit colleges that offer more choice and flexibility. A bachelor's degree is what a high school diploma was a generation ago.
Would I still make the same choice? Absolutely! For the same reasons? Another resounding YES.
But to be clear, this is not as much about my institution as it is about every HBCU that still stands as a legacy to how important education still is with respect to social and economic progress. I can look back at yearbooks that attest to what my school has produced, just like everyone else I know, but I have the additional blessing of seeing a lot of faces that look like mine--even in the worst of times. Looking ahead, I see an institution that produces women who want to take over the world...and one day, one of us will.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
This Land Was Made for You and Me
This morning I was listening to debate about the proposed plans for expanding an already existing mosque in Lower Manhattan that happens to be located two blocks from where the World Trade Towers stood. Because I have not done enough independent research on the imam who wants to develop the site, I cannot say whether his motivation is to heal or to hurt those who lost loved ones when the towers fell. Because I do not live in New York, I cannot imagine how such a project would make me feel if I had to pass it every day on my way to work. Because I am not a Muslim, I cannot say whether this project is wise or folly.
But because I am an American, I believe in the freedom of belief.
I remember September 11, 2001 vividly...I remember the sick feeling in the pit of my stomach as I watched the first tower fall. I remember the aftermath of frayed emotions and cultural misunderstandings aimed at other fellow Americans whose only crime was their foreign-looking appearance. I remember the day I went to the Home Depot to buy plastic sheeting and duct tape.
But then I remembered that if I called myself a person of faith, then I needed to act like it.
And here we are, in the ultimate gray area between belief and action. For the past nine years, we have debated what it means to be an American and how the values we espouse as Americans should serve as a beacon to the rest of the world. We declared then that the terrorists could hijack planes but not our beliefs; so now it appears God is calling our bluff...
Build the mosque in Lower Manhattan because our ideals are more than just empty rhetoric. If we succumb to the temptation to make exceptions based on our momentary fears, can we still call America the land of the free and the home of the brave?
But because I am an American, I believe in the freedom of belief.
I remember September 11, 2001 vividly...I remember the sick feeling in the pit of my stomach as I watched the first tower fall. I remember the aftermath of frayed emotions and cultural misunderstandings aimed at other fellow Americans whose only crime was their foreign-looking appearance. I remember the day I went to the Home Depot to buy plastic sheeting and duct tape.
But then I remembered that if I called myself a person of faith, then I needed to act like it.
And here we are, in the ultimate gray area between belief and action. For the past nine years, we have debated what it means to be an American and how the values we espouse as Americans should serve as a beacon to the rest of the world. We declared then that the terrorists could hijack planes but not our beliefs; so now it appears God is calling our bluff...
Build the mosque in Lower Manhattan because our ideals are more than just empty rhetoric. If we succumb to the temptation to make exceptions based on our momentary fears, can we still call America the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Friday, August 20, 2010
My Own Worst Enemy
I'd like to think that I am poised for greatness--that one day people will hear my name and offer a standing ovation simply because. I have dreams of myself shooting the breeze with Oprah, having tea with Maya Angelou, strategizing with Donna Brazille. Just generally being fabulous.
Is it just a dream?
My problem is that I want to be the person I see in my visions, but I possess none of the self-confidence that it takes to be that person. I want to be a writer, but I hide in the anomynity of the internet. I want to be a dancer, but I play it safe by staying in the background. I want to be a great lawyer, but I take small cases. I want to be an educator, but I quit just when I was starting to make a difference. I want to be a philanthropist, but I have no money.
I had a conversation with a friend today who knows about this blog, but hasn't read it because I won't share the link. Why am I so afraid of being discovered?
I know why...and it is tied to what I think is the mess my life really is. For a while I have felt that I live a lie--I am not what I appear to be and this is agonizing. I am not the perfect person I strive to be in public. In truth, I am a bit of a slob, am disorganized and I still have issues about my height and my outward appearance. I am socially awkward. I don't make friends easily and I don't do a very good job of keeping up with the ones I have. A few months ago, a friend was talking about how it feels to be the tallest person in the room and how the tendency is to slouch both figuratively and literally, and I could totally relate. I guess even as an adult, I am still slouching.
But as of today, I am going to stand tall. I am going to share the link to this blog so that my friends can tell me whether I have any talent. I will open myself to criticism. I am going to be my own boss and command every room I enter. I am going to make people listen/read/hear what I have to say just because. I will be enriched even if I don't have a lot of money. And I am going to dance like it does not matter that my arms are too long or that I am awkward like an ostrich or a dodo bird.
I want to fly...
Is it just a dream?
My problem is that I want to be the person I see in my visions, but I possess none of the self-confidence that it takes to be that person. I want to be a writer, but I hide in the anomynity of the internet. I want to be a dancer, but I play it safe by staying in the background. I want to be a great lawyer, but I take small cases. I want to be an educator, but I quit just when I was starting to make a difference. I want to be a philanthropist, but I have no money.
I had a conversation with a friend today who knows about this blog, but hasn't read it because I won't share the link. Why am I so afraid of being discovered?
I know why...and it is tied to what I think is the mess my life really is. For a while I have felt that I live a lie--I am not what I appear to be and this is agonizing. I am not the perfect person I strive to be in public. In truth, I am a bit of a slob, am disorganized and I still have issues about my height and my outward appearance. I am socially awkward. I don't make friends easily and I don't do a very good job of keeping up with the ones I have. A few months ago, a friend was talking about how it feels to be the tallest person in the room and how the tendency is to slouch both figuratively and literally, and I could totally relate. I guess even as an adult, I am still slouching.
But as of today, I am going to stand tall. I am going to share the link to this blog so that my friends can tell me whether I have any talent. I will open myself to criticism. I am going to be my own boss and command every room I enter. I am going to make people listen/read/hear what I have to say just because. I will be enriched even if I don't have a lot of money. And I am going to dance like it does not matter that my arms are too long or that I am awkward like an ostrich or a dodo bird.
I want to fly...
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Hollywood Fading
I saw this blog posting about the career of Chiwetel Ejiofor based on this article in the Guardian and after reading it, I have a broader question about the state of Hollywood in general with respect to actors of color. Why the fade out?
The Guardian author suggests that race is not a factor and cites the stuck-in-neutral careers of Naomi Watts and Eric Bana as evidence that the real culprit might be the American film audience (read: we aren't that sophisticated to know and appreciate talent when we see it). OK, that could be true, but Naomi Watts has been off having babies for the last couple of years and that is certain to slow down a film career. And Eric Bana regrettably starred in the first Hulk movie and I am sure that did him no favors. As for Ejiofor, who has consistently been great in every film I've seen with him in it, there are no alternative explanations why he has not become a star except that he is not: (a) under 25; (b) starring in vampire/werewolf teen flicks; or (c) white and waif-like.
(OK, Naomi nor Eric fit any of these either. But read on.)
Ejiofor just might not be star material at this point in his career. Some of the best actors are character actors who enjoyed long careers, so I am not knocking the fact that he might be attempting to build a solid Don Cheadle/DelRoy Lindo supporting "black guy" actor resume. Let's be honest--that is exactly how Morgan Freeman and Samuel L. Jackson got to be A-listers. When the casting calls went out for "a black guy" they always fit the bill. No, Cheadle, Lindo, and most of the others have not made it to Morgan Freeman status yet, but Freeman didn't actually get there until he was almost 70, so there is still time...
Not that the path for other actors of color is any easier. Among Latino actors, Jimmy Smits is probably the biggest TV star and Martin Sheen is definitely the biggest movie star--which would be great if Sheen didn't pass for white in most of his roles. But then again, the other supporting "Latino guy" actors, Edward James Olmos and Hector Elizondo, have had to pass now and then too in order to get regular work, so that might just be part of the deal. As for Asian actors, the best I can think of are John Cho and Kal Penn (Harold and Kumar).
Let's not even go there when it comes to actresses of color because it is even more obvious that there is not much for them. Women generally fare poorly in Hollywood regardless of ethnicity. And no, Madea does not count!
So now that the issue has identified and endlessly debated, what are the solutions? The biggest non-white star in Hollywood is Denzel Washington (who is still fine at 55), but dang someone needs to give that brother a break. Will Smith might be in contention, but let's be honest, Will chooses lousy projects and is more likely to have a career in the mold of Bruce Willis. (Not that there is anything wrong with being an action movie star, but Willis' last movie found him playing straight man to Tracy Morgan...Brian Fellow for goodness sakes!)
Perhaps the problem is that we keep looking for the next black/Latino/Asian superstar when we really just need more opportunity all around for leading and supporting actors (and writers, producers, directors, casting agents, etc.) of color period. Ejiofor gets solid suporting roles because in the mind of the casting directors, he is good enough for them to overlook his race, so he gets that next part--the anti-hero, the sidekick, the "also starring" credit. He is tall, charismatic, British (!) and that gets him work on both sides of the pond, which is miles ahead of just about every other up and coming Morgan Freeman in the business.
The thing about Hollywood is that certain actors have seasons and as such, actors of color are simply not in season at this point. Who ever thought that Mickey Rourke would ever be a star again, so it is possible that actors like Ejiofor, Idris Elba, Jeffrey Wright, Benico de Torro, and Russell Wong will get their chance. (And I'm sorry that I cannot even identify any other male actors of color who aren't black...kind of proves my point in a way).
The Guardian author suggests that race is not a factor and cites the stuck-in-neutral careers of Naomi Watts and Eric Bana as evidence that the real culprit might be the American film audience (read: we aren't that sophisticated to know and appreciate talent when we see it). OK, that could be true, but Naomi Watts has been off having babies for the last couple of years and that is certain to slow down a film career. And Eric Bana regrettably starred in the first Hulk movie and I am sure that did him no favors. As for Ejiofor, who has consistently been great in every film I've seen with him in it, there are no alternative explanations why he has not become a star except that he is not: (a) under 25; (b) starring in vampire/werewolf teen flicks; or (c) white and waif-like.
(OK, Naomi nor Eric fit any of these either. But read on.)
Ejiofor just might not be star material at this point in his career. Some of the best actors are character actors who enjoyed long careers, so I am not knocking the fact that he might be attempting to build a solid Don Cheadle/DelRoy Lindo supporting "black guy" actor resume. Let's be honest--that is exactly how Morgan Freeman and Samuel L. Jackson got to be A-listers. When the casting calls went out for "a black guy" they always fit the bill. No, Cheadle, Lindo, and most of the others have not made it to Morgan Freeman status yet, but Freeman didn't actually get there until he was almost 70, so there is still time...
Not that the path for other actors of color is any easier. Among Latino actors, Jimmy Smits is probably the biggest TV star and Martin Sheen is definitely the biggest movie star--which would be great if Sheen didn't pass for white in most of his roles. But then again, the other supporting "Latino guy" actors, Edward James Olmos and Hector Elizondo, have had to pass now and then too in order to get regular work, so that might just be part of the deal. As for Asian actors, the best I can think of are John Cho and Kal Penn (Harold and Kumar).
Let's not even go there when it comes to actresses of color because it is even more obvious that there is not much for them. Women generally fare poorly in Hollywood regardless of ethnicity. And no, Madea does not count!
So now that the issue has identified and endlessly debated, what are the solutions? The biggest non-white star in Hollywood is Denzel Washington (who is still fine at 55), but dang someone needs to give that brother a break. Will Smith might be in contention, but let's be honest, Will chooses lousy projects and is more likely to have a career in the mold of Bruce Willis. (Not that there is anything wrong with being an action movie star, but Willis' last movie found him playing straight man to Tracy Morgan...Brian Fellow for goodness sakes!)
Perhaps the problem is that we keep looking for the next black/Latino/Asian superstar when we really just need more opportunity all around for leading and supporting actors (and writers, producers, directors, casting agents, etc.) of color period. Ejiofor gets solid suporting roles because in the mind of the casting directors, he is good enough for them to overlook his race, so he gets that next part--the anti-hero, the sidekick, the "also starring" credit. He is tall, charismatic, British (!) and that gets him work on both sides of the pond, which is miles ahead of just about every other up and coming Morgan Freeman in the business.
The thing about Hollywood is that certain actors have seasons and as such, actors of color are simply not in season at this point. Who ever thought that Mickey Rourke would ever be a star again, so it is possible that actors like Ejiofor, Idris Elba, Jeffrey Wright, Benico de Torro, and Russell Wong will get their chance. (And I'm sorry that I cannot even identify any other male actors of color who aren't black...kind of proves my point in a way).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)