Remember when something as outrageously racist as a minstrel show was considered funny? Mainstream funny, not white supremacist funny? No, me neither. That kind of cruelty was a long, long time ago. Or so we thought.
Then this week a 1980s variety television show called Hey Hey It’s Saturday came back on air for a reunion. As part of the Hey Hey reunion they included their traditional amateur talent competition, judged by a couple of celebrity guests, where among other acts they brought back a ‘blackface’ skit, and as Fuck Politeness explains, it was startlingly awful..
Oh, the thigh slapping hilarity of ‘blackface’ humour, of ‘Michael Jackson – is he black or white??’, of ‘Haw haw how silly are those black performers with their comical and unwittingly homoerotic moves’ etc etc.
Or as the AWL puts it..
You know what never gets old for the folks on Prison Island? Blackface! Oh, how they chuckle!
The ‘blackface’ skit is so extraordinarily offensive that you wonder how, as Sophie Black in Crikey does…
.. the Jackson Jive idea managed to get the tick from several producers, a talent scout, the host of the show and the six guys who took the time to sit in front of a mirror and apply boot polish to their visages.”
Well, you just need a sense of humour! But no-one has thinner skin than us trying to justify our racism. We can dish it out alright, but we sure can’t take it in Australia. A shiny new coin observes that..
This is another occasion in which the response to the offensive material is actually as shocking (if not more than) as the material itself. I mean, a blackface skit? In 2009? It almost defies belief, but now we have the well educated people of the popular news sites expressing their outrage that anyone point out their stunning racism to them.
We might tell you we like to laugh at ourselves, but seems we much prefer laughing at others. And looking at the ‘blackface’ skit Crimitism notes..
It’s been defended as a tribute to the Jackson Five. It wasn’t. There is no attempt made to look like the Jackon Five actually looked; these are minstrels with pitch-black skin and funny wigs. When they talk to each other, they sound like Amos & Andy. They go to great lengths to get a laugh out of Michael being (very) white and the others being (very) black. These aren’t people, they’re golliwogs.
An apology followed on the show. But this is only because Harry Connick Jnr, an unfortunate guest on the program, makes his disgust so clear (particularly backstage, apparently) that something has to be done to keep him from leaving. As the NY Magazine explains..
Guest American judge Harry Connick Jr. took issue, thankfully, giving the Jive a “0″ and telling the tone-deaf host, “If they turned up like that in the United States, it’d be like Hey Hey There’s No More Show.”
But the apology from host, Daryl Somers is possibly even more dreadful than the ‘blackface’ skit itself. The Guardian is incredulous..
“I noticed that when we had the Jackson Jive on,” he says to Harry, “and it didn’t occur to me till afterwards, I think we may have offended you with that act … I know that to your countrymen, that’s an insult to have a blackface routine like that on the show, so I do apologise.”
Very good of him. In Australia, of course, it is perfectly acceptable, and we thank the nation for yet another important contribution to the annals of human culture.
Shame on the host and the other judges for trying to act like this performance was acceptable in any part of the world.
and Gawker, also note how paltry Somers’ apology is.. and how misdirected (nope, no apology to black people for the racism)..
Sure, there are culture differences, but it’s not like they don’t have black folks in Australia who would get pissed off by this.
Because as the A.V Club says…
Harry Connick Jr is being generous when he says, “I know this was done humorously,” because what’s the joke in having six white guys put on blackface to play the Jackson 5?
Ha. Get it? It’s funny cause there’s something inherently ridiculous about being black.
As you may have surmised from this post this incident has gone global, and like DListed, everyone is now wondering..
THE FUCK IS THIS?!
Let me explain. There is a style of boorish behaviour in Australia that has thrived in insular unaccountability. Too loud and obnoxious to ever hear those around it who were tiring of the ridicule and abuse, it thought itself quite the funniest thing.
But times have really changed, as Crikey observes …
Once upon a time an outrageous piece of live, prime-time television would have had no more publicly conspicuous consequence than an invisible stream of complaint calls to the Channel Nine switchboard.
It’s not so easy to manage complaints in the online world. Hey Hey is now a subject of international discussion and heated rebuke, thanks to the meme spreading rapidity and the all-encompassing involvability of the internet. That’s what has really changed since Big Media first thought it was funny to use the outraging of minority sensibilities or even the broad sweep of taste for their shock value and ratings. You just can’t do that today and hope to get away with it.
Similar Posts:
- Fat acceptance and Oppression Olympics fail on The Gruen Transfer by Lauredhel
- Missing The Point Awards, Manchester poster edition by Lauredhel
- Moving from thieving money from children into casual racism by Guest Hoyden
- Shame file: Haven Backpackers Resort Hostel, Alice Springs by tigtog
- Oh, the hilarity by tigtog
{ 1 trackback }
{ 75 comments }
← Previous Comments
As I understand the performers in blackface were doctors, how are they plebeian? As far as Australia can be said to have a patrician class, I think doctors and wealthy media types are more correctly seen as part of that class than as plebeians. And as Rebekka has pointed out, they are deliberately and cynically appealing to the very worst instincts of their more plebeian target audience. No doubt there is a huge market for implicit or overt racism, but lets be clear that Nine is trying to remove the stigma from expressing that racism, just as Howard did by fearmongering about refugees.
I don’t think we should underestimate the lengths to which vested interests will go to protect their brand and their investments – mobilizing people to do their dirty work by shouting down any attempts to transform the vilest most exclusionary parts of our culture, seems to me to be one of the tricks of the trade. In fact that was one of the things that disturbed me about Razer’s piece* about the Sandilands furore. By framing the criticism as part of a moral conservative backlash, she did Austereo a huge favour. There was a big difference between the Chaser skit and the Sandilands episode in that a real child’s rights were violated. Interesting then that Sandilands is back on the radio while an ABC staffer lost her job and the Chaser ended in ignominy. Both responses seem to me to be completely wrong. If something is a matter of questionable taste or comedic value the very last thing you should do is end someone’s career over it and take the show off air, even for one week. Violating the rights of a minor is an entirely different matter, as is trading in explicitly racist tropes for cheap laughs and financial gain for a privileged few.
*I don’t think I really understood her point, so if anyone can explain it to me I would be grateful.
@David
In retrospect, my response to the Tracey piece could be read as responding to you as though you linked approvingly. I didn’t think that; it was a response to the article on its own, and I apologise for not being clear that I didn’t think you approved of her piece. Honestly, I think the irony of her piece is that she makes the very point – that this sort of stuff targeted at groups that have a history of systemic oppression is not okay, and targeting privilege is a different kettle of fish and actually a much better illustration of humour-as-coping-mechanism (which is part of her argument) – as though it’s the problem.
@Rebekkah & David
The reason I find all the concern about the condemnations and objections being used to support the very continuation of the problem (ie, what you both mention about the objections being twisted and/or used to support the PtB’s notions that they’re hitting their target) problematic is because, I dunno, perhaps it’s not what either of you mean to imply, but for me it carries the implication that there’s an ‘appropriate’ level of objection/condemnation that isn’t going to trigger that reaction when, in most folk I know’s experience of this sort of thing, the very act of objecting is enough of a trigger for the ‘PC killjoy’ type response.
@Rebekkah:
“I don’t believe simply calling it out as racist will have any effect whatsoever. ”
Okay, from your other comments you may mean that you don’t think it will have any effect on the producers and related people associated with HeyHey, so perhaps it’s just poor phrasing, but ‘any effect whatsoever period’? That’s a pretty big call, and a pretty problematic one.
@Linda, I’m sorry you think I have an issue with you; I don’t. Disagreeing with someone doesn’t mean you have an issue with them.
@Jennifer
I’m sorry if you didn’t get this from the context, but to clarify, by
“I don’t believe simply calling it out as racist will have any effect whatsoever. ”
I meant I don’t believe simply calling it out as racist will have any effect whatsoever on the producers/tv station, not on the world in general.
Nor do I think we should all keep it down to a dull roar – just that we need to take some other action as well as condeming if we want to be effective.
By the way, there is no h on the end of my name.
“As I understand the performers in blackface were doctors, how are they plebeian? ”
Good call, su. Attempting to fool ourselves that the upper-middle and upper classes are somehow “above” racism, using terms like “plebeian”, is a mug’s game. If what we mean is “racist”, “problematic”, “insensitive”, or “assholish”, let’s say it straight out, and not deflect the blame onto people with any particular economic group.
“Plebeian” may have started to come to mean, in some circles, “bigoted”, but that meaning change is happening because of classism, just as words for disabilities are used as generalised pejoratives in the mouths and minds of people uninterested in challenging their own ableism.
@Rebbeka – My apologies for the misspelling. Don’t know what made me think there was an ‘h’.
Also, thanks for the clarification, there.
I think there’s something kind of condescending and problematic about the idea that you’re in the comments *here* telling folks that “we need to do something else as well as just condemning”, not least of which because doing something as well as still doesn’t address this concern you seem to have about the impact of the condemnation on the production/network/etc. (ie, the twisting, making them think they’ve hit target, etc. I mentioned above), but I’ve not processed all my thoughts about it yet, so I may come back to that point later.
Actually, I think doing something else *does* address the concern I otherwise have that just condemning can have the effect of making them think they’ve hit the target, because it makes the objections concrete and tangible for the producers/tv channel and is a whole different kettle of fish from just condemning.
I also think that I will be writing to Julia Gillard to express my disappointment about her comments – something that if enough people did it could have a very tangible effect.
“@Linda, I’m sorry you think I have an issue with you; I don’t. Disagreeing with someone doesn’t mean you have an issue with them.”
No, but forming a habit of hostility toward someone usually does mean you have an issue with them.
I don’t buy the idea that people blogging about a racist skit, or talking about it to their neighbours or colleagues or whatever, is simply “condemning”. It’s more than that, it’s adding alternative voices to the discourse, and reshaping discourses about social issues is important. It creates incremental changes in human thought. When citizens start thinking differently about things then they will demand that their socal institutions do as well. This is the great thing about blogging, people with power are paying attention to it these days.
So if writing a letter to the deputy PM is more your thing, ok, it can’t hurt. My personal experience is that JG doesn’t answer letters and you have no way of knowing if she’s even read them. Writing to ACMA would in this case probably be a good thing because there shoud be no doubt that the code was breached, unlike with the Sandilands thing where for the average person, the offense was harder to see.
But at the same time, don’t dismiss challenges to discursive power, just because they’re less tangible. They matter.
@Linda, it’s not “more my thing” to write a letter to JG – I did point out that I blog, frequently, about issues that I don’t think my blogging will directly affect. What I’ve been trying to get across is that condemnation and concrete action need to be two sides of a coin.
I’m sorry that you’ve got the impression I’m being hostile – I honestly can’t see how, because I don’t see disagreement and hostility as being the same thing, and because I can’t see why you would think I have some sort of personal issue with you – I don’t know you. But I’m still sorry that you’ve felt I’ve been hostile.
I am of multi-racial and multi-religious background. I’m writing to object to the term ‘ POC’. It took me a full 5 minutes to figure out what that meant and I THINK it’s an acronym for Person Of Colour. And there I was all my life thinking that I was a PERSON. I do understand that no offense is intended by those of you who use that term, but you don’t seem to understand that all this ‘political correctness’ actually ENHANCES the false impression of differences between people.
I think it was Melissa who posted a shot of the Hey Hey audience and asserted that there was not a ‘POC’ in sight. What on earth makes you think you can tell? I know families where some siblings are blonde with blue eyes and fair skin and others are dark of hair and skin and eyes. If we’re talking genetics here I think they’re all technically ‘persons of colour’.
Australia is one of the most successful multi-cultural societies in the world and, thankfully, in recent years bloodlines have become so intermingled that it’s become more and more difficult to ‘label’ anyone. I’m not saying there are not still improvements to be made, but by and large we are doing pretty well. Any of you who are old enough to remember back 40 years will know that we’re on the right track.
Finally, I’d like to suggest that it’s all very well to chat on the internet about all types of issues, but if you all actually want to do some good in the world, how about harnessing all that energy you have used to argue your points here and ‘put your money where your mouths are’. There has been alot in the media lately about animosity towards our Indian students. Both of my boys work part-time with Indian students and have witnessed many rude and unjustified comments. If you all feel so strongly about racial prejudice in this country how about lending your physical support to them? It would be lovely to see some white faces at the next PEACEFUL demonstration.
Peace and Love, Julia
Julia, good point about spelling out abbreviations. POC is one that takes a little extra google-fu to figure out, thought it’s very standard in the antiracist blogosphere. When a term doesn’t pop up on a google for “What does x mean?” without us adding a term or two to refine (in this case, “racism”), it’s worth a reminder to spell it out for those who are new to this kind of blogging.
Your last paragraph, however, I disagree with. What makes you think it’s an either/or? You have no idea from this page what others here do in terms of antiracism. I can’t attend public rallies because of my disability, but cheers for telling me that I therefore am be a lazy slacktivist. I always find that to be a happyfuntimes experience. I try to put my money where my mouth is in other ways.
Whoever talked about the Hey Hey audience can respond to your comments there. I absolutely agree that you can’t tell the race of an individual person just by looking at them. In a sea of faces, a general impression might be made, but not a determination that there was not a single person there who wasn’t white.
On a bit of a tangent, blackface was historically in use in Australian theatres during the various gold rush eras (NSW, Victoria, Western Australia) by black USAlien performers as a way of distancing themselves from the Indigenous Australian peoples – thus making it firstly, racist in use in any other Australian context; secondly, another example of racism used as a way of defining relative privilege among various “out” groups (as well as being a way of defining who the “in” group is); and thirdly, in bad taste no matter who damn well uses it.
Lauredhel,
I did NOT call you a “lazy slacktivist”. I was trying to make the point that all the sheer ENERGY being used here to argue/debate/discuss this issue could be put to more constructive use. The fact that you have taken offense when there was certainly none intended and that I have taken offense at the term ‘POC’ has just illustrated to me that this blogging business is not a good idea for me. I’ve not been on a page like this before and, frankly, I’ve found the whole experience exhausting. Some of you may find it empowering and if you do that’s great. I shall seek elsewhere. Perhaps I’ll see some of you in the soup sometime.
Peace, Julia
I … Okay, after the last spat around here about the use of the term PoC, I’m really not going to get into it too much here, because I still maintain that discussions about its utility in an Australian context need to happen in a different kind of space. I will ask (note, ask) upfront that whitefolks don’t ask me to explain stuff to them, because I don’t have the energy or the inclination.
However, Julia, your objections to PoC (and no, you’re not the only multi-racial person here, just so you know) seem to be the same old tired “but noticing race is the REAL RACISM” or whatever, which is often indicative of some pretty obvious internalised racism. What you seem to be missing is that PoC is not a genetic term; it’s a term used to broadly describe folks who have a history of past and ongoing racial injustice/oppression. It’s not a perfect term (eg., I understand many folks in the UK tend to use non-white, whereas folks in the US tend to see non-white as a term that still centers whiteness), but I tire really quickly of this “but if we delineate ourselves from those with white privilege we further racism”, as though the delineation is what’s furthering racism, rather than a myriad of social systems based on delineations we as PoC don’t control.
Also, Julia, you obviously have a set idea about what’s ‘constructive’, and the notion that online discussion isn’t part of it, and attending rallies/etc. is. Lauredhel has mentioned why she doesn’t attend rallies, and more to the point, you don’t know what other people here DO, and it’s pretty presumptuous to tell folks what they “should” be doing as though your standards are The Way To Address Racism. Also, you don’t know how much energy people are using. People have different energy requirements; commenting on a blog may require a lot of energy for some, not a lot for others. You don’t know how much energy I’m using; your assumptions about how much energy it is for everyone here suggests that it takes more energy for you, but I could be wrong.
Jennifer,
Note my use of the word “suggest”. It was a suggestion not a “should”. And you APPEAR to have just told me that if i see all people as being equal rather than as divided into different races and colours and treat them accordingly that is “indicative of some pretty obvious internalised racism”. PLEASE tell me that i misunderstood you.
Your use of “suggest” is somewhat outweighed by your use of phrases like “if you all actually want to do some good in the world” and “If you all feel so strongly about racial prejudice in this country”, which carries the implication that if we don’t follow your “suggestions”, our desire to do some good and our strong feelings about racial prejudice are false. If that doesn’t sit more on the side of “should” than “suggest”, I don’t know what does.
I’m really not up for a 101-level discussion of why “I don’t see race/colour” is problematic and yes, supports racist systems in ways that are often (note, often) indicative of internalised racism. You may want to look at this collection of links, many of which go into why “I don’t see race/colour” is a problem. And in particular this post from a woman of colour talking about why it doesn’t actually work on an individual level. ***
Basically, you seem to be missing that “equal” =/= “same” and thus there are ways that you may interact with someone of (X) race/ethnicity/background that won’t work for someone of a different background. If you can’t understand that, then I don’t even know what to say to you.
***Note for everyone, potentially problematic use of ‘colo(u)rblindness’ as the shortening of this phenomenon used in the links above.
Jennifer, a heads-up that your second link in the comment above seems to have got lost in the HTML wilderness.
Thanks, tigtog. That second link should be http://shewhohashope.livejournal.com/62154.html
Jennifer,
Our last round of communication only went further to confirm to me that blogging is not for me. Misunderstandings all round – again. Thank you for your links. I WILL read them all later in the day when I have more time. Although it would be wonderful if I could, I don’t think I have enough time in this life-time to make an in depth study of every culture in the world, so I’ll have to rely on those of other cultures that I meet in person FEELING my goodwill towards them to understand that I mean no offense.
I’ d like to try to get a better handle on your views in your own words, and to that end, I’ll ask you this : If I had the power to change the world to one that you saw as perfect how would it look? What would your perfect world be like? What would you like to see happen?
I don’t think I have enough time in this life-time to make an in depth study of every culture in the world, so I’ll have to rely on those of other cultures that I meet in person FEELING my goodwill towards them to understand that I mean no offense.
Wow. So you’re not prepared to make the effort yourself, but you’re still going to demand that other people just somehow believe that you are a person of good will i.e. they’re the ones who have to make the effort, not you.
I’ll ask you this : If I had the power to change the world to one that you saw as perfect how would it look? What would your perfect world be like? What would you like to see happen?
And hey! I’m going to come here and criticise people and tell them what they should do, and then when they raise some issue with what I say, I’m going to throw it all back at them, and tell them that it’s their job to educate me, even though I can’t be bothered making an effort in this forum myself.
Julia, it’s fantastic that you are doing your activism in a way that works for you. But you have been damnably rude and patronising in this forum.
Deborah,
Wow! I don’t remember when, if ever, I’ve been misunderstood by so many.
It was actually an honest question. I’m honestly trying to figure out what it is that Jennifer would like to see happen and I thought the fastest way to find that out would be to ask her. It seems that whatever i write I’m offending someone.
It’s really interesting that in this forum I appear to you to be someone who ‘ can’t be bothered making an effort’. The truth is that I have been off work sick for the past 3 years because I have made what I have been told was TOO MUCH of an effort on behalf of others to the detriment of my own health and well being. Someone commented to me the other day that the majority of people don’t believe that altruism exists so they will usually interpret the actions of an altruistic person to suit their view of their world. I wonder what you think about that statement?
What I meant about FEELING is that electronic communication is all very well, but by using it we don’t get to use all the communication tools we have at our disposal. It’s missing body language, tone of voice and the general feeling you get from a person when you’re standing face to face. In the real world I’ve been involved with people of various cultures and socio-economic groups all my life and we have all generally gotten on very well. In the cyber world I can’t seem to put a foot right. Interesting. I’m sure I’ve just offended someone else, however unintentionally, so I think I’d better leave it here. I obviously don’t know how to communicate in this way so I think I’d better stick with what I’m better at in that regard. And before someone misinterprets me again I’M NOT TRYING TO HAVE A GO AT ANYBODY.
I’m hoping to study next year if I’m well enough. Maybe this experience will form the basis of a paper I’ll be asked to write – who knows. I’m sure there’s a reason for everything, and I don’t think the reason for this was to make me feel like shit. I haven’t intended to be rude or patronising of tell anyone how to live their lives. I’m sorry that so many of you have perceived me that way. My father said to me a very long time ago that it doesn’t matter how things really are – it’s how people PERCEIVE them to be that counts. Perhaps if we met in real life you would perceive me differently.
You’ve certainly cured me of blogging anyway, which is probably just as well. It’s bad for my health to sit at the computer for long. I really do wish you all well. I’m not out to get anybody and I’m sorry that you don’t seem to believe that. Julia
Julia – I am sorry you are feeling so misunderstood, especially if you’re not used to commenting on Internet discussions. You’re right that a lot of nuances get lost in written communication and misunderstandings happen fairly regularly.
I hear that you don’t like the term ‘POC’ and that while many people like the non-judgemental acknowledgement in that term that maybe you find it stigmatizing/’other’ing? Being white myself I probably am not entirely getting what you’re describing but I can certainly understand that being labelled can be kind of ‘othering’ and that white people like myself rarely need to label ourselves in order to be recognised because we get to be the status quo – which I would put down to it being a very racist world.
I think I am also hearing from you that you find Internet discussion and debate limiting, from the perspective of not getting the face-to-face contact with people that you like and also from the point of view that you believe it to be a less effective form of activism. There are some disadvantages to Internet discussion/activism but people here also feel that there are a great number of advantages: the Internet provides a degree of accessibility that might not always be achieved in off-line activities – egs. people with a disability who are excluded from some physical locations are able to participate in discussions, people with children and caring responsibilities that prohibits them from taking part in lots of activities, some incredible community organisation (eg. feminist parents) can happen relatively cheaply and easily across huge geographical distances on the Internet, you can gain access to a wide range of experts for questions/clarification who would otherwise be out of your loop etc.
I know long on-line debates can seem frivilous at times, however a lot of the people (probably the majority) who regularly comment here are involved in lots of off-line activism too, including myself and we regularly refer to it in our discussions. Also, sometimes the first step in off-line activism happens when you feel the sense of empowerment that comes from seeing lots of very clever, strong people with views just like your own being articulated so beautifully on-line.
I hope I have heard you right, that you feel less misunderstood, and that you have a better idea of where some of us are coming from.
Cheers.
Bluemilk,
THANK YOU!!! I actually prayed that someone out there would HEAR me – and here you are. I’m literally crying with relief right now. I’ve spent a very long time working on feeling safe in the world and trying to sort out alot of my own issues that I knew were limiting me and stopping me from being the best person I can be. At the same time I’ve been trying to raise my children to be confident happy broadminded people who will do their part to help bring about a more peaceful world. Being sick enough to be on a disability payment this last couple of years was at first TERRIFYING, but has actually turned out to be the best thing that could have happened for myself AND my children for lots and LOTS of reasons I won’t go into here.
When I first logged onto this page (my first time) I did it because I wanted to know what was being said about this particular incident. I THOUGHT I was going to find alot of people like you. Instead I was just blown away by the sheer ANGER coming off the page and my first thought was that the energy contained in that anger could be put to better use. What I didn’t realise at the time, but I do now, was that I got caught up in that anger too and was very clumsy and insensitive in my original comments. After that, I felt that anger being directed straight at me and it scared me in a way I haven’t been frightened for quite some time. I have learned that when any strong emotion comes up it means I have something to learn and I have been concentrating on figuring out what that is – it’s turned out to be lots of things, and I’m sure there’s more I haven’t thought of yet. But that feeling of fear was still lingering. Your message today, your understanding and your explanations are exactly the soothing balm I need to help me make this first blogging experience a positive rather negative thing for my longterm growth.
I still think this form of communication is not for me for the time being, but I understand that for others it can be great – horses for courses! Thank you again.
You did a good thing today – but then I’m sure you do lots of good things EVERY day. Bless you, Julia
Well done, Bluemilk.
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed. If you wish to re-open this discussion, please leave a comment on the latest Open Thread.