If you come from the position that any form of othering is by definition racist then it’s unlikely there will the sort of proof you’re looking for. Assigning modern attitudes to previous societies is not an academically honest approach.
we’re not discussing historic Morris performance, though, are we? What’s of concern is that the face-blackening is happening today.
How are Morris Dancers offensive to someone from India? I don’t understand why this tradition’s existence is some sort of personal affront.
+1
And you know what? People, living in the UK, right now, are saying this is racist. The article linked by the OP is about people, in the UK, thinking this is racist. This whole discussion about racism in the US is a form of derailing. I don’t even have to reference the US, because you’ve got plenty of people in the UK who agree with me.
BTW, B&S, I’m with Mangetout in not understanding why you can’t see the difference between “We don’t know if this is racist in origin” versus “There are no obvious race parodies incorporated in the performance.” The latter says to me that while the performers have corked faces, they don’t use exaggerated racial mannerisms or distort their features. I mean, do you consider Dick Van Dyke to be in Blackface in Mary Poppins?
Racism (if it is racism) should be offensive to everyone.
Oh, come on. Stop. I never said that. And I’m not even going to explain why I brought up the fact that I’m of Indian descent, since it’s apparent from the thread. This is simply an attempt to derail.
You’ve all but said anyone who is OK with this tradition is a Klan member and dismissed pretty much everything anyone has said in disagreement with you as being racist. That’s a very strong stance to take on a relatively minor cultural activity from a different country which doesn’t impact on you in any way, as far as I can tell. That’s why I’m trying to work out why you have such strong feelings on Morris Dancers with blackened faces.
Right, that’s enough Bright & Shiny. I’m giving you a warning for insulting other posters. It is possible to debate without implying that others are klan members and I expect you to do so.
You know what? I am going to answer this, because it’s a pretty decent question. Now, this is interesting. Do I consider van Dyke in Mary Poppins to be racist because he’s covered in chimney dust? No, I don’t, because he had just come up the chimney. Note: I do consider the movie to be classist and sexist and racist as a whole, but the fact that he’s covered in chimney dust, I don’t consider per-se racist.
But, there’s a whole lead up to him getting covered in chimney dust. There’s a real-world explanation. And to tell you the truth, if by some miracle, someone were to give me money to re-shoot Mary Poppins in this day and age, I’d probably avoid covering his entire face.
But we don’t have a similar lead-up and context to these dancers. They are asking us to take context from wider society and history. But they’re telling us we can’t look at the uglier side of the wider context of English society and history. They’re telling us we should only look at English context and history through a very selective lens. But that lens is othering and erases a lot of people who suffered. I don’t think it’s right.
If you actually thought this was a minor issue, then you wouldn’t care either way whether or not someone objected to it. This is another form of derailing. If you think the issue is unimportant, then find a thread which deals with issues you think are more important.
On this specific point I think the fact you are not in the UK is significant.
There is a context behind these dances… in fact, as a rule the people who take part in Morris dancing spend an awful lot of time digging into the cultural and historical background to their art. It’s an integral part of the whole scene in the UK, not something done without thought or consideration. The morris dancers I’ve met are probably more acutely aware of the wider context to these dances than 99% of those who are complaining about them.
Viewing the dance as an external observer is like watching a youtube clip of Mary Poppins at the point where DvD is already covered in soot… there is an obligation on the viewer to become informed before flinging around claims of racism.
You’re asking me to prove a negative. It is your assertion that it’s racist. The burden of proof is yours. If it’s racist, you should have no trouble demonstrating this.
It is already acknowledged that the origins of this tradition are unclear - and obviously I’m not going to uncover startling new insight from my armchair this evening.
What I probably can do is to provide evidence that the manner in which these dances are performed does not include any obvious racist behaviours or intent.
You don’t seem terribly inclined to listen, regardless.
Please take a look at thisthread - analogous to this one in some ways, although it involves a quite different context.
It contains a scenario where something regarded as horribly racist from one viewpoint, turns out to be completely benign from another.
I entered that thread with the pretty firm conviction that the term ‘Paki’ was universally offensive, racist and unacceptable.
As it turned out, I had to wind my neck right in (and in retrospect, I did not do so very gracefully - such was my shock and surprise at having been proven wrong).
Well, I think the issue of people crying “Racism! Ban the ostensibly harmless tradition that doesn’t affect me personally in any way!” has significant impacts from a cultural heritage and even freedom of speech point of view, so in that respect it is an important discussion.
And how is telling me to go away not simply you trying to derail my attempts at engaging in a serious discussion on the issue?
You’ve agreed in this thread that these dancers are referencing Moors and that references to Moors are othering. This is what you’ve said.
As for the context, I’m well aware of the context of these dances. I’m just not going to dig up my books to post the cites, because I know it’s a waste of time. After all, you don’t even recognize your own statements.
If you want to go into the ether thinking that I’m nuts for thinking it’s racist, go right ahead. Believe me, I’ve had plenty of people casually dismiss racism in my life, and I’m not going to be worried about one more dismissal. That’s par for the course, and there are a long line of people who go out of their way to casually dismiss racism.
But if you want to convince me this isn’t racist, you’re doing a pretty piss-poor job.
Did I ever use the word “ban” here? This is the most obvious derail yet. I’m not going to debate statements I haven’t actually made.
Bullshit. You don’t get to assume your choice of motive and reason for something just because it has unclear origins.
There are a great many traditions like this in the UK that have been performed for years and years after their real meanings fell away or were lost (here’s another, quite similar example).
In the absence of information, you cannot reasonably just connect it to anything you like, cherry-picked from Britain’s (admittedly sometimes ugly) history.
So, let’s pretend for a moment that the tradition of Morris Dancers in blackface is absolutely, irrefutably proven to be a racist 16th century version of a Black & White minstrel show.
Are you really saying your comments on that eventuality would not involve a call for the traditional dances to end because they were racist?
I said it might be linked to the Moors, but it could be linked to all sorts of other things… miners covered in dirt, farm workers covered in soil etc. There’s no such thing as “morris dancing” in the UK, there are hundreds of local interpretations. You’ve just decided it’s racist and are unable to take a step back to look at the wider context.
And I also said that othering is not racist per se, it’s the context and intent behind the action that matters not *just *how it’s perceived (although that’s part of it).
I’ve got no expectation of convincing you of anything… you’ve already made up your mind and are clearly not interested in debate, just in hurling accusations at other posters. I do think you’re wrong in your interpretation, and I accept you’ll hide behind the “that’s racist” cry, but meanwhile the rest of us might be able to debate this issue properly without your attempts to filter this discussion through your own narrow prejudices.
You won’t share your cites, and you’re unwilling to engage with any respect, so what exactly are you in this thread for??