Earlier this week, musician, actor, and community activist Harry Connick Jr. was a guest judge on the Australian talent show Hey Hey It’s Saturday. One of the acts was a skit featuring a group of White men wearing blackface (using dark-colored makeup to appear racially Black), doing an impression of the Jackson Five. As ABC News reports and this video segment shows, Connick’s reaction to their performance was swift and sharp:
[Connick] was visibly shocked by the skit, in which [five] men with afro wigs and blackface sang and danced behind a Michael Jackson impersonator wearing white makeup. Connick, 42, gave the performance a zero score and told them that if it had been done in the United States it would have been pulled off the air.
Blackface was a traditional trope of minstrel shows in the U.S. that dates to the 19th century. Whites playing stock black characters — usually offensive stereotypes meant to demean — rubbed coal, grease or shoe polish on their faces. . . .
Public reaction to the “Hey Hey” performance in online forums was mixed. Some Australians said they were embarrassed such a racist sketch had been broadcast, while others said detractors were too politically correct and that the skit was funny. . . . Anand Deva, the frontman of the “Jackson Jive” act, said it was not meant to cause offense but added he would not have performed it in the United States.
There are two interesting sociological points to note here. The first is the apparent differences in racial attitudes between the U.S. and Australia. That is, even though many Americans still are rather ignorant of the racial significance and racist legacy of blackface and still wear it from time to time (especially around this time of year, Halloween, as seen in the photo on the right), for the most part, I will presume that most Americans understand that blackface is offensive (or at least the reactions and criticisms to it are much more intense).
With that in mind, it is notable to see that in Australia, this sensitivity and recognition of blackface do not exist to the same level. In fact, despite the Australian government’s recent official apology to the aborigine population for centuries of racism, in general the racial attitudes of the Australian public seem to be a few decades behind that of the U.S. in terms of racial understanding.
This diminished level of cultural knowledge comes through in the responses by Anand Deva in defending his group’s skit with the usual refrain, “It wasn’t meant to be offensive, it was just a joke.” What he and other Australians do defend the skit don’t understand is that whatever the intent, the result was that it definitely came across as racist and offensive.
Secondly, the reason why they don’t understand why it was offensive is because as Whites in a White majority society, they have the position of being able to make fun of non-Whites while claiming that they did not intend it to be offensive. That, my friends, is the quintessential definition of White privilege.
As it relates back to Harry Connick Jr., as the video segment notes, he has been accused of being hypocritical because he participated in a previous comedy skit (apparently from MadTV) in which he played some kind of witch or voodoo doctor that some argue also makes fun of Blacks, although Connick counters that his character in the skit was actually White.
Despite this criticism of Connick, I give him credit for speaking up in the moment and denouncing the skit as racist and offensive. It takes courage to recognize such racial ignorance first of all, and second, to speak up and stand in opposition to it, rather than just keeping quiet, as many Americans from any racial background but particularly Whites, are more likely to do.
I know that as a native of New Orleans, Connick was affected by how his city and particularly the Black community were both devastated after Hurricane Katrina. In the aftermath of the disaster, he organized several benefits and other activities to begin rebuilding the city and its inhabitants.
At this point, I can only speculate, but I suspect that as a result of Hurricane Katrina and perhaps after understanding the cultural consequences of such media portrayals as his MadTV skit, he “got it” — that as an affluent entertainer and as a White person, he is very privileged person and has a lot of power and influence that can be used to make fun of people, or to help uplift them.
In other words, Connick’s actions — in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and in regard to this blackface skit — are a great illustration of what I tell me students all the time: for racism to continue, individual Whites like you (referring to my students) do not have to commit racist acts yourself. Instead, for it to continue year after year, generation after generation, all you have to do is to sit by and accept the consequences of discrimination committed against others.
In other words, silence equals acceptance.
Comments 7
pocketlama — October 15, 2009
You said, "In other words, silence equals acceptance." As a white male my responsibility is even greater than that. If I keep quiet, my silence equals more than acceptance it indicates agreement. I must use the unasked for but very real power of my position to constantly and actively rebel against racism and sexism. With power comes responsibility.
mack — October 16, 2009
Ok. Hold up here. As an Australian, I’d like to put a few points to you.
Yes it was a stupid skit. Yes it could be construed as racist. Yes Harry did the right thing. Let's celebrate that. You've got all this right. But the story isn't as straight forward as you suggest, and you've misrepresented the facts in one important place.
First, did you not notice that the leader of the skit, one Anand Deva, is hardly the picture of the stereotypical white man you seem to be painting. He is in fact an Australian of Indian origin. And thus is actually rather black: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/08/2708125.htm. This doesn’t make it any more acceptable, but I think you might need to revisit your theory that "...the reason why they don’t understand why it was offensive is because as Whites in a White majority society, they have the position of being able to make fun of non-Whites while claiming that they did not intend it to be offensive. That, my friends, is the quintessential definition of White privilege". I can't see much white in this privilege. Though his does seem to be privileged- he and those other guys are doctors.
Now to the misrepresentation. You state that "In fact, despite the Australian government’s recent official apology to the aborigine population for centuries of racism*, in general the racial attitudes of the Australian public seem to be a few decades behind that of the U.S. in terms of racial understanding". However, if one goes on to the site you've linked to the author of the study actually says "...it does not look like the data on racial attitudes in Australia is that much different than that in the U.S". After reading his post I can't possibly see how you use this link to support your claim?
People are racist for a whole range of reasons, social identity, ingroup/outgroup, conflict etc. But I am yet to see any evidence suggesting that it is causally related to being white and/or privileged. Sadly, I think you’ve missed the bigger picture on this one.
*It might be worth noting that the US Senate passed a similar motion apologising for slavery and discrimination about a year after their Australian brethren: http://www.theroot.com/views/senate-apologizes-slavery
mack — October 18, 2009
Thanks for the reply CN.
To clarify: A non-white person saying "don't get so offended, it was a joke" is an example of white privilege? Or are you arguing that white privilege frames the way that all actors in the society react to such an incident and thus the race of the individuals here are unimportant?
Does such a reaction also hold within other societies where whites are not the majority? I suspect the whiteness of the country is a much less important criterion than the ethnic distribution of the population of interest. Two Asian examples spring to mind: Taiwan and Malaysia. In Taiwan there is a minority indigenous population that was discriminated against for many years. Malaysia had minority ethnic Indian and Chinese populations. If we could expect a similar situation unfolding within either of these societies then it be more productive to reframe this idea of "white privilege" as "majority privilege"? We would be able to examine the complete spectrum of cultural and institutional settings that this dynamic plays out in. This might be more empirically productive approach as it would encourage us to focus on the causal mechanisms driving the process instead of getting distracted by colour etc.
If you would prefer to rely on the anecdotal evidence of your friends/colleagues instead of systematic empirical data, collected over almost ten years and drawn from over 12,500 people, that’s your call. But I think it’s only prudent that you remove the link to the study. Otherwise you are clearly misrepresenting the evidence. It might also be, in fairness to the authors of the quoted study, useful to make it clear that the scientific data conflicts with your experience.
I find this whole thing even stranger now that I’ve realised that this other blog post you link as summarising this racism study is actually written by…you. In this other blog post you state that “it does not look like the data on racial attitudes in Australia is that much different than that in the U.S.” but in this Contexts post you seem to have changed you mind by claiming that these attitudes “...seem to be a few decades behind that of the U.S. in terms of racial understanding”. In the year that’s gone by since you wrote the original piece maybe you’ve changed your opinion though?
I’ve travelled and lived in the US, Australia, Europe and Asia. My anecdotal experience doesn’t suggest that Australia is any more racist than these other places. But it’s hard to conclusively say one way or the other. At the end of the day my experience is only one small sample of the population and that’s why I’d prefer to rely on the large scale empirical work.
Thanks for sharing your ideas and experiences.
Kate — April 30, 2013
What you fail to realise are the FACTS! The first FACT is that blackfacing is only offensive in American culture. In Australia we do NOT have a history of the Klu Klux Klan nor enslavement of our black civilians! Australians are NOT PC and we do poke fun at a lot of people, including ourselves. Secondly, the blackface act was NOT performed by white Australians but by a group of (black) INDIANS from India!!! I have travelled all over the world and have lived in America, the UK, France and Germany. Australia is the best and most egalitarian country in the world. It is one of the most racially tolerant, multicultural societies on earth where 80% of people have parents born overseas or are born overseas themselves. People .. black, white or purple .. are welcomed to our shores (provided they don't bring their hatreds with them). Unlike America where you have "African Americans" or "Greek Americans", in Australia EVERYONE assimilates and becomes AUSTRALIAN and part of our huge family. Stop making judgements about this great land as it is obvious you know very little about it. There are so many people from all over the world who have made this wonderful country their own and so many more who want to live here.