A few days ago, a mini-controversy erupted when this vidcap from the sports network RDS started making the rounds. Here’s the Deadspin article. Two Montréal Canadiens fans {nicknamed Habitants or Habs} donned the jersey of a hot prospect, P. K. Subban, who happens to be Jamaican Canadian. They also painted their faces black and wore afro wigs.
Toronto Mike blogged about the incident and one of the Habs fans came on to comment. The words got pretty heated, but in the end, the fan apologized and Habs and Leafs fans once again could resume their hockey-based hatred of one another.
What struck me as interesting was how this drama played out. The French language cable network covering the 11 March game against the Edmonton Oilers chose to air 10 seconds of the two friends. Was the intent to be controversial? Was the intent to be a facepalm moment? The back-and-forth on Toronto Mike’s blog was interesting, as the polarizing effect of race brought up assumptions about the Habs fan and his intent by commenters. In the end, I thought the Habs fan handled himself well, given how people were responding and what was being said. Toronto Mike did a good job of not divulging the fan’s name. This was one of those rare moments where Web 2.0 seemed to actually foster a dialogue and didn’t degenerate into a protracted flame war. That said, it wasn’t always pretty, but a lot prettier than what one typically sees on news article comments on issues of race, which are often tantamount to text equivalent strangers yelling at each other at the top of their lungs in an open hall.
Here on ThickCulture, we have examined race in the post-racial era. Racism isn’t dead, it’s just gotten to a late stage where there is a consciousness about what is offensive and debates of this now enter into the public discourse space. I get a sense that race gets so intertwined with speech and knowledge structures that it often becomes a confusing and convoluted morass for many. This impinging upon liberties of speech, in terms of what one can and cannot say or should and should not say, creates a tension, which may result in a backlash.
Where are the lines in the post-racial era? Here in Toronto, last fall there was a party where a group of guys dressed up as the Jamaican bobsled team, depicted in the film, Cool Runnings {1993}. This story caused a stir and points were argued through social media comments on whether or not this was racist.
Four guys darkened their skin and one guy lightened his. The Torontoist chronicles how the story unfolded and offers a tutorial on what blackface is and its cultural significance. The students offered their explanation for their choice of costume:
First and foremost we would like to apologize if anyone was offended…Throughout our childhood, Cool Runnings was something we reflected on with fond memories and therefore in the process [of] choosing Halloween costumes, seemed to be a promising candidate. With this idea in mind, we took notice of how the primary cast, consisting of four black characters and one white character, coincided with our group ratio of four white and one black member. This sparked the idea to add another comedic element to the costume, and have the black student go as John Candy and the white students going as the four bobsledders. At this point, several of us was already of aware of what blackfacing was and therefore took out various means of investigation to further our knowledge of the topic and ensure that what we were doing be doing may not be considered similar in anyway. The conclusion that we came to that simply painting our faces dark brown would not be a portrayal of blackface….understand that we did not act in a negative or stereotypical manner [at the party]. We acted ourselves the whole night, and did not internalize the characters.
Here’s the theatrical trailer for Cool Runnings:
University of Toronto Sociology professor Rinaldo Walcott offered a different take:
I think that in particular [Cool Runnings] became a part of the popular culture imagination of [white] Canadians in a way that [they] took responsibility for that film as though it was somehow an extension of them. And one of the reasons that I think Canadians identified with that film so deeply is because that film weathered something that many white Canadians come to believe strongly—that black people don’t actually belong here. That we are an insertion into a landscape that is not actually an landscape where we naturally fit.
For black people who understand this history [of blackface], Cool Runnings was never a funny film; it in fact replicated all of the techniques of blackface. It is in fact one of the ways that we have come to see that blackface does not require painting of blackface anymore. Just look at the work of Marlon Riggs. We know that in North America there is a deep resonance around producing images of black people that make black people look disgusting. Cool Runnings is a milder version of that. So we should ask… why do they remember Cool Runnings so fondly?
Post-racial means navigating these choppy waters where intent collides head-on with history and its interpretations. Not to get all postmodern here, but while the metanarrative is dead, social media is a site where clashing mini-narratives that structure perceptions of the world, culture, society, etc. battle it out. I think the fellow Contexts blog Sociological Images is a social media site where clashing mini-narratives are de rigueur. I’m wondering if we will ever “get over” issues of race. I’m beginning to think we won’t, given globalization, etc., but perhaps it’s due to the fact that what this is really all about is identity.
What troubles me more than this is when the “right” language is used by individuals doing so strategically. The talk is talked, but the walk isn’t walked. That’s a topic for another blog.
—————————
Kenneth M. Kambara interests and expertise include social media, innovation strategy, environmental sustainability, business and marketing, sociology, urbanism, critical theory and economic sociology. His insights (and unexpected pop culture segues) can be found on the fellow Contexts blog, ThickCulture, and on his own blog at rhizomicon. Like every good social media guru, he also tweets.
If you would like to write a post for Sociological Images, please see our Guidelines for Guest Bloggers.
Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.
Comments 19
Anonymous — March 27, 2010
The first image is appauling. They look like golliwogs, and not a bit like P. K. Subban (I googled him to find out what he looks like) so I can see where the racial insensitivity arises there.
But I don't really understand the commotion around the second image. It was a costume, they didn't mean offense by it, and they acted like themselves, just with brown paint and (bad) costumes on (unlike the blackface of vandeville, who acted 'black'). If they'd put black shoe polish on and acted 'black' I could maybe see where the issue was, but at the moment I can't. What you're kind of saying is white people can't dress up as anyone who happens to have darker skin than them, ever, because it's automatically offensive? Even though one of their team painted himself white?
It also occurs to me that an awful lot of (white) people (women, generally) paint themselves brown-er quite frequently. With fake tan. Is that considered offensive too? Am genuinely curious...
Anonymous — March 28, 2010
As a Canadian, I've never noticed the "And one of the reasons that I think Canadians identified with that film so deeply is because that film weathered something that many white Canadians come to believe strongly—that black people don’t actually belong here."
And the movie itself, based on the commercial (I never saw it), seemed to be a 'fish out of water' story about a culture clash, rather than it being about race. Perhaps the movie itself is different.
maggie — March 28, 2010
I'm definitely confused about apparently "identifying" with Cool Runnings. I suppose maybe I saw it way back when it came out (maybe), but...I don't know any other Canadian who would do anything but look confused if you told them they "identify strongly" with it.
I can well believe that the movie is racially craptastic, but I would also suspect none of the boys in question noticed that bit at all. Which isn't to say "oh that's okay then", just that when you're young you may enjoy movies that suck. ("You" in a general sense)
Otogizoshi — March 28, 2010
I (also Canadian) saw this as a child. I don't agree with the statement about ('white')Canadians "identifying" with it (a film saying that 'black' people don't belong in Canada.)I certainly did not and do not identify with anything past living in Alberta. Have you lived here? I have never felt the same level of or even identified with/ understood what my American friends define as "Black" and "White" culture. Perhaps it is just the location that I am living in. Maybe this is an issue in Toronto?
I don't like (on any level) using terms like 'black' and 'white', either. These terms (in my mind) lump groups of people with various cultural backgrounds together on totally arbitrary terms. What else can we use? I wish I could say. Either way, blanketing anyone/ culture/ nation in such terms (even in order to discuss issues surrounding us) is somewhat counterproductive.
shale — March 29, 2010
As another Canadian that saw the film in their childhood, I also think that Walcott totally misses the boat in his analysis, but not just because I don't think Canadians identified that strongly with the film.
To the extent that Canadians would or might have identified with it, I think this would have more to do with the way it shows Caribbean-black people engaged in winter sports (something Canadians do identify with) competing at the Calgary winter Olympics (another thing Canadians identify with). The movie also preaches an idealized notion about accepting differences, tolerance, and multiculturalism (and yet something else that Canadians identify with).
On the other hand, Canadians are often so proud of how accepting their country is that they tend to overlook the fact that they really aren't as accepting as they could be. Anyways, to the extent that the film encourages this kind of ignorance is bliss, fine, it's bad, but to claim that a vast chunk of Canadians are all secretly thinking that black people don't belong up here, and responding to subtle cues in films like Cool Runnings, is kind of silly.
Miss M — March 29, 2010
When I was growing up, about an hour outside of Toronto, I lived in almost an exclusively white town. There was hardly any diversity. But I was always taught, in school and by others I knew, that diversity was a good thing and that's what made Canada great. That we had many other cultures and people that come to Canada, and that we should encourage the differences between us, because difference doesn't mean bad.
Toronto is about 55% white. It doesn't make much sense, to me, that racism is a huge problem in a place where almost half of the city is composed of a 'visible minority.'
Further to that, some of the outskirts of Toronto, like Brampton, are composed of 37% white and the rest are a 'minority'. They're 33% South Asian there, which I'm assuming to mean they're from India.
Yes, I believe we can be more accepting. We can always be better, and do more, and the way we treat our native population is disgusting. But growing up in Canada, I have never felt for a moment that someone of a different colour or culture or religion did not belong in Canada because I was always taught that it was a good thing.
Another aside; I'm currently living in St. John's, Newfoundland. I am really, really loving Republic of Doyle. It shows a very, very unrealistic St. John's - our homicide rate, in all of Newfoundland, is about 2-5 a year for the entire province, and that's including all levels of homicide (like manslaughter), not just first degree murder. The show doesn't show St. John's in a terrible light, but it certainly shows it in a 'grittier' light that isn't realistic.
If I was younger, growing up in Newfoundland, and I saw this show on that showed my home town, my province... it would likely be something that I would reflect upon with fond memories. Because it's nice to see, in popular culture, that yes, Canada does exist and it's a beautiful and diverse and interesting place and 'oh my God, I was at this place before!'
It's just nice to have something in mainstream media show something with a Canadian view or setting or cast because it is fairly rare.
Ella — March 29, 2010
As a black Canadian why am I not surprised to find an entire thread of white Canadians denying their own racism?
And of course, even as they deny racism, they dismiss out of hand that a black Canadian might possibly have a sharper perspective than they do on racism, or valid observations to make about how people of colour are marginalized and alienated within Canada. Keep telling people of colour how to think about or understand racism, white people, because I'm sure you know so much more about experiencing it than people who are actually victimized by racism on a daily basis.
Otogizoshi — March 29, 2010
Begging your pardon, but how do you even know that all of the above posts are written by 'white' people? Of course there is racism, and of course there is white privilege (which is terrible), but I have seen friends of ALL colour experience racism, which is not to say that the white friends can even compare to the daily marginalisation that exists. However, for the sweeping generalisation of that professor to claim that all 'white' Canadians don't think 'black' people ought to be in Canada is very unfortunate. That is not to say that he didn't have personal grounds on which to make that assumption, but it is just as wrong to assume that this type of racism exists in the mind of every 'white' Canadian. I too, have been marginalised, and know how it feels to be a minority, and have felt frustrated enough at times to want to think ill of the whole majority, but the fact of the matter is, regardless of situation, any sweeping generalisation is not going to truly answer any questions. It is good to discuss these things, though, because it is easy to fall into the meta-narrative that is "Canadian culture".
Caravelle — March 29, 2010
I'm not Canadian so I can't speak to the racism there or to white Canadians' identification with Cool Runnings but the claim that they identify with it because it shows how black people don't belong in Canada seems off to me. The whole point of the movie is that everyone tries to exclude the Jamaican team and they all get proven wrong and end up cheerleading for them.
I understand people that are sensitive to the whole "fish out of water" storyline and see it as racist; I'm also sure that a lot of Canadians don't think black people belong there, if only subconsciously. I just don't see why those Canadians would identify with Cool Runnings.
Is there a link to Rinaldo Walcott's statement that gives more detail ? Or maybe evidence ?
Katie — March 31, 2010
There was another blog post here about an increase of black-face costumes, particularly in college parties. Here in Ireland where we do not have US race dynamics, something similar is happening with chav-parties, where middle to upper class students dress and act like lower-class stereotypes.
I think this trend of being knowingly offensive is not exclusive to race, but rather a growing trend towards breaking norms on what is vulgar or bad in society primarily for the sake of breaking the norm.
South Park summarises this nicely. They choose to insult the sensibilities of everyone, including whites, lower/upper class groups, various nationalities and races; the list is long. I am not saying South Park is responsible, but rather it is reflective of a growing hunger to reject what is broadly described as political correctness (a term which is increasingly used as a slur). This desire to be entirely insensitive is also visible in the majority of anonymous internet comments, which usually degrade to outrageous flaming.
Im not entirely sure though, I'd love to hear peoples thoughts on this
Lemmons998 — April 2, 2010
A little late on the commenting here, but from my (white American) perspective of loving the movie as a kid, I definitely formed stereotypes of Jamaican people rather than a generic "black people."