Open thread

19 Responses to Open thread

1. E says:

   April 29, 2010 at 12:47 pm

   I thought I’d get some opinions from the non-archival world on a question posted to a professional listserv:

   “I need your advice regarding the publication of a transcription I am in the process of working on, letters of a World War I soldier in the US Army, stationed in France and Germany.

   This soldier, in one place in his letters, uses a racial epithet, the “n word”, when referring to a group of musicians he saw perform at a camp function (this was after the armistice). As an archivist, I would not dream of censoring or changing his words for publication; offensive though the term is, it is nevertheless a true reflection of cultural norms and race bias at the time. My question is *not* about inclusion of that term; my question is, should it be annotated in some way? I am annotating a great deal in general, providing historical research and context, and partly because I want to make this publication accessible to and useful for students. Should I let the term stand on its own, or should I say something, and if so – what? Something regarding the fact that the term was used far more casually then that it is today (one would hope, in any case)? Or is that offensive to even need to say?

   Thank you for assistance with this sensitive issue – I just want to handle it correctly.”

   Any thoughts, suggestions? If you were reading these published transcriptions of WWI letters, how would you want or expect that word to be handled?
2. Julia says:

   April 29, 2010 at 12:57 pm

   I guess my fear is that annotating it may give the appearance of offering an excuse for it. For that reason, I’d be tempted to let it stand as is. But I’ll be interested to hear others’ thoughts.
3. Rita says:

   April 29, 2010 at 4:15 pm

   I think it would be a good idea to annotate it: a brief history of the origin, meaning, and use of the word at those times – and today.

   A couple of years ago it came to my attention that many people today don’t know what the word “miscegenation” means. They go to the dictionary, which says, “interracial dating,” and think hey, it’s a good thing! I was suprised how few people – even those I consider to be well-informed about racism issues – had any clue that it was an inherently racist concept. I realized that the dictionary defintion really should read, “The belief that the purity of the white race is diluted by black men having sex with white women.”

   When we leave out those ugly realities, we literally whitewash history – and leave folks unaware not only of true history, but of a full understanding of the present as well.
4. S's mom says:

   April 29, 2010 at 4:50 pm

   On this site or maybe racalicious, there was a post making fun of “Black” gifts.

   So I am wondering: I have a friend. She is African-American. Is it offensive to buy her daughter only books with black characters (like “Amazing Grace” and the John Kurtz “Cinderella” both of which I bought her.) Or is it better to buy books of various ethnicities?
5. Andrea says:

   April 29, 2010 at 8:27 pm

   What’s the intended audience? It would be different if the work is intended for a grade school or high school audience who need instruction as opposed to a general adult audience or college students who probably don’t need to be taught the obvious. How are you writing the other annotations? Do you include your own opinion or do you cite other sources in the annotations? Can you find something in print to back up the annotation stating that this word was used more casually in this historical period? I would not provide an annotation if it is only your particular opinion, though you’re obviously right that the word was used more frequently and casually then. I would seek out some other scholarly source to back up your interpretation of use of the language in that period. But that depends on how you’re doing the other annotations as well.

   I definitely don’t think it’s your place to censor this fellow. That era was what it was, good and bad, including language use.
6. Montclair Mommy says:

   April 30, 2010 at 9:45 am

   Is anyone else disappointed by the Democrat’s proposed immigration blueprint. To me, it seems harsh and too conciliatory to conservatives opponents of immigration.
7. Janine deManda says:

   April 30, 2010 at 2:07 pm

   Um, wow. Mrs. Whelan, I don’t have the emotional energy at the moment to respond to all of the aspects of your posts that I found troubling, and especially troubling since they were blithely posted here on an anti-racist parenting site that also addresses intersectionalities of oppression.

   Here are a few highlights of the problematics accompanied by some suggested resources. Please take some time to reconsider the inconsistency of deriding the BNP while assuring us that your husband “enjoys diversity” but doesn’t want the UK to get too brown. While you’re at it, maybe do a search on http://www.racialicious.com on burqas, bans, and feminism. Oh, and hey, how about going over to http://www.classism.org and poking around a bit before deriding “welfare culture” so casually again. Also, given your baldly stated anti-Romany/Traveller bias, maybe you could take some time to ponder the depths or lack thereof of your understanding of what “anti-racist” actually means. Oh, and England is decidedly not “less racist and backwards than the US”, it’s just differently racist and backwards. It’s the bloody CRADLE of white supremacy, for fuck’s sake.

   That is not nearly all, but I was already exhausted when I clicked on this link. Seriously, though, if you care at all about being anti-oppression{s}, please take some time with those resources and any others that they link to, as well.
8. Janine deManda says:

   April 30, 2010 at 2:13 pm

   Also, moderators, how is this in keeping with the recently restated commitment to maintaining the relative safety of this site? I’m not being flip – I’d really like to know what I’m missing that made those posts postable in the first place. I come here for respite and resources, and I have just had a couple of demoralizing days on the anti-racism front, so to encounter Mrs. Whelan’s posts here was another straw on an already broken camel’s back. If I’m missing something that would make my back hurt less, I’d really like to know what it is.
9. E says:

   April 30, 2010 at 2:14 pm

   Update:
   After receiving several suggestions from fellow archivists, which followed the same lines as the comments here, my colleague concluded that the term needed to be addressed in some way, but not as an annotation. The book is intended for students and a general audience, and will contain scholarly annotations for persons, places, and events. To address the n word and other archaic and/or offensive language, she has decided to include a statement in the forward along these lines:

   “This book contains as exact a transcription as possible. That means that misspellings, incorrect grammar, improper punctuation, slang, and terminology that would be deemed offensive today have all been retained as written. It is our intention to preserve the historical record, and therefore leave his original words unchanged.”

   Thanks for your comments. It’s something archivists and curators often have to consider – such words are part of the historical record, and (I think) should be left in transcripts, direct quotes, displays, etc. Professionally, I look at items like that as great artifacts, because they do essentially slap people in the face and make them think (hopefully). Personally, they make me cringe. And since including such items in an exhibit can open us up for complaints, I always run racially controversial content by one of the African-American history faculty members who work closely with us.
10. jm says:

    April 30, 2010 at 4:44 pm

    As to E’s question, I would skip the annotation, mainly because you simply don’t know why that soldier used that word. I think you have to think of this in terms of, what is the goal of your publication? It sounds like the goal is to give an unfiltered look at this man’s experiences through his correspondence. Annotations are great where you have facts that fill in the context (for example, if he later in his life was known to have spoken about his feelings regarding that word, an annotation might be appropriate). But, an annotation to describe the social reference point seems both unnecessarily condescending and bound to miss its mark – you could write VOLUMES on the meaning of the “n word” at that particular time in history and it would be impossible to sum it up and offer all possible connections between that meaning and the soldier’s use of the word in a concise annotation – better to let it stand on its own. Skipping the annotation in no way implies that you didn’t notice it, don’t have anything to say about it, or endorse it yourself.

    For S’s Mom: I can’t speak for your friend, but as the mother of a black child myself, I love (and honestly prefer) presents that offer my child representations of her race. I do think it’s important for all children to see diversity and my daughter does have dolls and books with characters of all colors. BUT, we can’t forget that we live in a society where whiteness is everywhere and a black child can easily feel quite out of place. Often times, a book with black characters on a particular issue can’t even easily be found! So, you can never make too much of an effort to seek out books, etc with black images and their importance and value is immeasurable. I always appreciate when that effort is made on my daughter’s behalf.
11. Moth says:

    May 1, 2010 at 11:40 pm

    @Amanda, maybe I’m confused – are you being ironic or quoting somebody or alluding to something – because those comments about Romani people (G*psy is a racial slur) and the burqa are prejudiced.
12. Andrea in Vermont says:

    May 2, 2010 at 9:02 pm

    I echo Janine deManda’s comment asking the moderators about screening comments that contain racist and classist statements. What gives?
13. Elizabeth says:

    May 2, 2010 at 11:08 pm

    PLEASE tell me that Amanda Whelan’s comments are sarcastic, or that there is some kind of an explanation by following the links?!?!?!

    I am disturbed, and upset. That was not what I was expecting when I clicked on the open thread. I just hope it was some kind of a joke.
14. dersk says:

    May 3, 2010 at 10:28 am

    FWIW – the last two times I’ve heard personally heard people spitting out racist ephithets, it’s been English people (one older, one kid). Wanker at the weekend party I went to managed to use the word in question and ‘queer’ (not in a positive way) within about two minutes.
15. dersk says:

    May 3, 2010 at 10:32 am

    Oh, this is interesting: “black people represent 25% of Twitter users, roughly twice their share of the population in general.”

    The article speculates that it’s because blacks and other PoC are more likely to connect to the Internet via mobile devices.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-study-results-2010-4
16. Tami Winfrey Harris says:

    May 3, 2010 at 12:48 pm

    To the commenters here:

    I apologize that some offensive comments have made it through moderation in the past few days. I have deleted the entries in question. Please let me know if I have missed anything.
17. Montclair Mommy says:

    May 3, 2010 at 5:27 pm

    @S’s Mom: I guess it depends on the parent–I would ask your friend what she prefers. I would love for one of my friends or family members to ask me which types of books I prefer for my son. I LOVE non-religious books with main characters of color. Water, Water is a great one and my son loves books by Rachel Isadora (Peekaboo, Morning and Peekaboo, Bedtime are great ones). He also loves books that show faces of different kinds — we just checked out Shades of People from the library and he LOVES it. I really think he already notices when a main character looks like him or like the members of his family. Personally, I prefer books that feature children that look like him and/or children of color BUT, that’s my preference. Ask your friend–I bet she’d appreciate and respect you asking!
18. S's mom says:

    May 4, 2010 at 5:23 pm

    Thanks….I actually have other people I am thinking of too. Whether to give gifts that reflect their heritage or whether that looks like I am being patronizing or trying to hard.
19. E says:

    May 6, 2010 at 11:17 am

    @S’sMom

    I’ve found that some of the Usborne Books have a wonderful mix of races and people with physical disabilities. My son loves his Noisy Town book, and there are some others like Tessa the Teacher and Going to School that feature non-whites as lead characters. And they have some Spanish language story books too.