(no subject)

[neadods]

skywardprodigal had this link: four articles on Black Beauty and White Beauty.

Read. Know that #3, "Black Beauty," is going to gut you.



(This reminds me - I'm going to have to suck up to my favorite reference librarian to find a very old Post article about the addition of slave characters and slavery storylines to Colonial Williamsburg, which led, among other things, to the only time that all the actors broke character in public to remind the crowd that they were actors, because the visitors were turning into a mob, which was turning on the slave catchers.)

ETA: And she comes through! In Williamsburg, the Painful Reality of Slavery

This edgy new representation of Colonial life casts costumed actors as slave leaders and slave owners while paying tourists find themselves in the roles of slaves.

The reenactments are so realistic that some audience members have attacked the white actors in the slave patrol, who have had to fight to keep their decorative muskets. And when some early performances drove young children to tears, Williamsburg added "debriefing" sessions afterward to help calm them.

One visitor even attempted to lead his own revolt against the slave handlers. "There are only three of them and a hundred of us!" he yelled. The actors had to step out of character to restrain him.

At an attraction that historically has appealed almost exclusively to whites, the skits have stoked particularly strong emotions among African Americans, some of whom welcome frank discussion of a topic often given short shrift, even as they and others are discomfited by repeated images of subjugation. Several black actors have refused to portray slaves because they find it demeaning and emotionally wrenching.

Comments

[tamnonlinear.livejournal.com]

Thank you for that link, it was a fascinating read.

There's a certain value in the stomach punch of 'I had no idea'.

I'm glad I do now.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

There's a certain value in the stomach punch of 'I had no idea'.

That was pretty much my reaction. I've heard of Madame Walker making money. I did not know the rest of the reality surrounding her.

PS - the Williamsburg article has been found! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/daily/july99/williamsburg7.htm

[bana05.livejournal.com]

Thank you for linking that. I do find it notable that the majority of the women on that page were of a lighter hue as well, and at least three of them were biracial (Tracee Ellis Ross, Persia White, Halle Berry). Also, there wasn't a wealth of variety among Black models they could use. Although they probably could've flipped through an Ebony Fashion Fair program if they had had any for more Black women to use. But I digress, because I should stop now before I can't :-P.

[skywardprodigal.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I'm so used to that, I don't even think about it.

If you're looking for a bit more diversity in terms of just how different we are from each other, while being beautiful, you might want to check out soulstyle forum and my the dailies. Now I'm going to go see if Ebony fashion fair's archives are online.

[bana05.livejournal.com]

Cool! I'll check those links out as well.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

Breaking the color barrier is one hurdle. Breaking the paper bag test is going to be a whole different hurdle, unfortunately.

[bana05.livejournal.com]

It's part of the same race . . .

[stoplookingup.livejournal.com]

I have this theory about the breakthrough of black women in the beauty biz: it follows on the heels of the breakthrough of black (women and men) in athletics. I think white culture (in the US at least) has been forced to confront the fact that, physically, many POC are spectacular -- both in terms of athletic ability and beauty. But in a strange way, that's OK -- because it fits comfortably with white culture's belief that blacks "make up in physical prowess what they lack in mental ability." So, yeah, it's an improvement when white people don't think black=ugly. But the harder breakthrough will be when white people don't think black=dumber.

[bana05.livejournal.com]

Yeah . . . or, it's either or, but not both. You cannot be Black, athletically talented, academically talented, and beautiful simultaneously. That's . . . impossible. One of the three, two of the three--fine--but three of three? If you do, you obviously have "some white" or whatever other race involved in your genealogy somewhere to counteract those African genes . . .

[neadods.livejournal.com]

I'm trying to think of anyone who gets the beauty/brains/brawn package all in one. Beauty=stupid is, I think, unfortunately ingrained all across the board.

[stoplookingup.livejournal.com]

You cannot be Black, athletically talented, academically talented, and beautiful simultaneously.

And then along come the Williams sisters and bust that myth all to hell, right? :)

My father-in-law is a big tennis fan, and when the Williams sisters first came on the scene, he just couldn't stand them -- especially Venus. You could tell he thought she was uppity. My in-laws are the kind of white people who think black people can do anything -- as long as they're perfectly well-behaved. But the minute they get mouthy or rowdy -- well, that's really their nature, isn't it?

[neadods.livejournal.com]

Physical prowess certainly, but beauty? Wouldn't that mean there would be more black models than there are now?

(PS - the link to the Williamsburg article is now on the original post)

[neadods.livejournal.com]

the harder breakthrough will be when white people don't think black=dumber.

Were you on my f-list when I put up that article by the black British journalist who came to America? They told him at home that if Americans heard an English accent they'd add 10 points to his IQ, but black skin= -5. He figured he'd be 5 points ahead.

It's... somewhere in the middle of the Martha thing. I don't have a racism tag, so it's either under "link" or "drwho." (I think I may need a racism tag fairly soon.)

[skywardprodigal.livejournal.com]

I hope you dig up that story real soon. :)

[neadods.livejournal.com]

She came through! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/daily/july99/williamsburg7.htm Post edited to reflect new content.

[hildy.livejournal.com]

Do you remember how old the Post story was? 1987 or earlier or more recent? I'm looking through what online resources I have access to.

[hildy.livejournal.com]

I think I might have found it, archived on the great awful Usenet of all things. The article was on alt.tasteless just for warning. Was this it?

Slavery Re-enactment

[neadods.livejournal.com]

T found it - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/daily/july99/williamsburg7.htm

(frozen)

[flaviarassen.livejournal.com]

I was at Colonial Williamsburg more than 6 years ago, and saw a bit of this. I took one cast member aside to tell her how wonderful I thought it all was and yes, how viscerally I reacted to it. That I had to stop myself from reacting like I would like to think I would have back then. For once, I don't think I'm too different than other people: I know I'm not the only one who would love to step into a time machine & fix the past.

I was sorry to see 2 things in the article: one that they said Jefferson "likely fathered" a child on Sally Hemings - DNA has PROVEN that he DID (yes, I am shouting). The other is that black people found it too demeaning to play slaves. Now, whether this is a stupid problem they have (how can there be any shame in portraying a truth that does them no dishonor?), or a reaction to modern-day racism (they don't want to feed into it by playacting a lesser status), I don't know, but it is sad. You must not whitewash the past, it erases progress and negates the human spirit.

(frozen)

[skywardprodigal.livejournal.com]

I very much doubt that a black actor or actress that refuses to play a slave is engaging in whitewashing.

(frozen)

[neadods.livejournal.com]

I can understand a black actor not wanting to play a slave character, particularly one of the Williamsburg re-enactors. That's beyond remembering your lines and hitting your marks, it's being immersed in the role. (Another article in that series talked about the Jefferson actor. He's the world's foremost scholar on Jefferson... but he also has buried himself in the part to the point that he apparently can't entirely drop it anymore.)

It's one thing to be semi-stuck as a founding father. It's quite another to take the risk of being mentally/emotionally stuck as a slave. And I could imagine that some actors, particularly activist ones in their private life, would feel that they're betraying the civil rights movement by volunteering to be in a slave auction... which was one of the REALLY controversial additions. (I think that's back out, but I'm not sure. It just hit too many buttons.)

(frozen)

[silverthorne.livejournal.com]

Here fom elsewhere.

1) It's not a 'stupid' problem blackfolk have. For many of them, slavery is still a wide-open wound that's not so far in the past. Remember, even up into the 1950's and 60's (and even to this day in some places in America), blacks were considered 'second class', 'stupid', 'fit only for menial tasks'...the list goes on. Add to that things like the Klan (which is still active), the racial baiting in Jena, and so forth, I can see where many, many black people would rather distance themselves from a role that puts them right back where their ancestors, great grandparents, even parents have been.

2) They don't need to 'add to modern day racism'...it adds to itself all by itself, including in ways such as this--white people going "I don't get it, it's over, let it go and quit letting it bug you".

It isn't 'over' for them, you see. We, as white people, just have the luxury of thinking it is, and basing our opinions from that view point, which also downplays and tries to hide what they're still going through. You and I are just lucky enough to never get to see it happen for whatever reason.

(frozen)

[flaviarassen.livejournal.com]

(As I re-read this, I see that I made an incredibly stupid word -
to wit, the word "stupid". What the &^%$ was I thinking?
Maybe I got distracted by the kids? I have no idea. But that was
a totally wrong word. Unfortunate is better. Disappointing even
better. But the rest is right.)

[silverthorne.livejournal.com]

To OP.

First, an apology for whatever shit gets stirred from me opening my mouth further up in the thread. It wasn't my intention to turn this into a debate with another poster on your turf.

Second, thank you for posting this! I grew up in New Jersey, and every fall, our grade-school history classes would go to Williamsburg for a 3-5 day long field trip. It was back in the 70's though, and I remember that there was a distinct lack of addressing the entire slavery issue at all during that time. I'm glad they're doing so now, and in a way that will actually bring the point home to folks that don't normally get exposed to that side of history except in the most sterile and distant of ways, if at all.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

I appreciate that. (I'd've frozen the thread, but it looks like it's dying out.)

I always loved Williamsburg - also from school trips in the 70s :> - but I think they really have the responsibility to talk about *everything,* not just the tidy family-friendly bits. History is neither tidy nor family-friendly, and what is supposed to distinguish Williamsburg from Disney is that it was actually doing history.

(That said? I'm really sorry that the quilt festival I like to go to has moved from Williamsburg to somewhere south. I enjoyed walking through the town after I'd seen the craft exhibits, and picking up some of the finest chocolate I've ever eaten. There isn't a bit historical about the chocolate bars, but damn!)