Yeah, they just painted their faces in the darkest paint possible because it was the cheapest. Sure. Here, you win a golliwogg! It’s ok, it comes from a country that has no inkling of the racist overtones of black caricature.
Unless you are a person of color, I don’t believe that you are qualified to make that judgment.
So the Indian lead singer of the group is the one who gets to decide it?
It was almost certainly shoe polish.
We do have a tradition of accidentally offending American racial sensibilities.
At a 1970s awards show Muhammad Ali was famously called ‘boy’ by the host (Bert Newton). Here it is (at about 2:10). You can infer from the crowd reaction that a minority understood the insult, but the majority didn’t and the host was clearly oblivious.
For the record, the first time I ever heard about the black-face taboo was regarding Tropic Thunder last year.
Why would they use shoe polish? The stuff smells absolutely awful, with a strong chemical scent, and I’m fairly certain it’s also toxic in large doses. I would think they would just use regular non-toxic paint, like the kind that people at sporting events decorate their bodies with.
I have yet to see the clip (just reading on my blackberry), but I am referring to black folk, I don’t think that it’s right (or possible, for that matter) for a person who isn’t black to speak with any authority over whether or not something is racist (or racially offensive).
Wow - the stupid, it burns. So a Chinese guy can’t comment on racism? Or a white guy living as a minority?
Ok, that didn’t come out right; sorry for the burning. What I mean to say is that it is wrong for a person who isn’t black state that a something such as a minstrel show isn’t racist. I am talking about this particular incident and I did not mean to make such a sweeping statement. Forgive my stupidity.
I saw nothing wrong with it. Its an attempt to portray the Jackson 5, not blacks as such.
QFT.
That’s OK, the burning stopped after someone punched me out and peed in my mouth. 
I see what you’re saying but if that’s true then how do average white guys manage to live their lives without being racist - trial and error?
In any case I think USA has a unique history and relationahip with racism, which doesn’t equate with my experience in any way, so it’s dificult for me to understand. I haven’t seen the vid, but I probably saw the original many years ago, I don’t think that it would be racist in an Australian context.
I think that many of the American posters in this thread, who are calling the skit racist, honestly believe they are not letting American racial cultural biases influence their opinion on this Australian skit, but they are failing.
I don’t see how this is any different to some hypothetical english speaking country using the term “nigger” defined as an extremely affectionate term for a black person, or, a term used by white people to denote a black person they hold in very high regard. Then an American turns up in the country and starts calling everyone who uses the term a racist. If no historical link exists between the word “nigger” and racism, the accusation is nothing but a failure to understand the proper context.
Given that Australia has absolutely no historical connection between black face paint and racism, the link between black face paint and racism simply can not be made. We would consider it equally non-racist for black performers to come out with white face paint to imitate, say, The Beatles.
King Billy Cokebottle is an australian standup comedian from far north queensland who puts on blackface and makes jokes about Aboriginals. He’s had many claims of racism, although he does have some aboriginal defenders.
So clearly we do have a cultural association with racism and blackface, but yeah it’s different to the US one.
Sure. I didn’t suspect that the Jackson Jive were the first people in Australia to paint their faces black and be accused of racism, just like I’m sure the performers in the minstrel shows weren’t the first in America, either. I think I said it best when I wrote;
I guess I am a little biased, in that I am Australian, but have spent time in the US. I am very familiar with minstrel shows, and I do see that this was an entirely inappropriate act to have resurrected 25 years later.
But it’s not true that Australians don’t have any familiarity with the sort of racism meant by black-face performance - the beloved Golliwog (which my 37 year old brother was given as a child, but would in no way be appropriate as a gift to a child now) was inspired by a black face minstrel.
25 years ago, both would have been acceptable - now, we should know better.
Because Og knows a kids’ doll that looks vaguely* like a black person and that children like and cuddle up to is so damaging to race relations, right?
Honestly the whole kneejerk “racism” thing reaches the point where you can’t actually present anything, no matter how uninsulting or derogatory, from which it is apparent that some people have curly black hair and dark skin without it being racist.
*As much as any kids doll is an accurate representation of anything
I am not American.
Have you seen any commentary about the reaction by black Australians to the skit?
I feel that it’s generally the reaction by the target of potentially racist remarks that determines whether something is racist or not, not the intention of the person who made the remarks. I’ve seen lots of analogous arguments within the US (and on these boards) concerning the term “Jap”. A number of white Americans use the term with absolutely no racist intentions, merely as a convenient shorthand term for Japan. But I feel that the word should be avoided since most Asian-Americans (IME) find its use distasteful.
So if black Australians have no problem with blackface (as the blacks in your hypothetical country presumably have no problem with the word “nigger”) then the opinions of Americans are irrelevant. It’s hard enough to avoid cultural land mines within your own community/culture without being expected to worry about everyone else.*
*though I do think the presence of an American as a guest on the program does muddy the waters a bit in this particular case.
It seems at least one black Australian was upset by the sketch - Kamahl not happy.
Hey, Hey has always been on the cutting edge for 1951, and it’s good to see that some things don’t change.