Oh for shame

SouthernN'Proud

SouthernN'Proud

Southern Discomfort
from tonguetied.us



A recently unveiled mural in a ballroom at the University of Tennessee is so racist and offensive that people are coming away from it ill and in need of counseling, according to the student paper there, The Beacon.

Marion Greenwood's 30-foot mural, recently unveiled after 30 years in mothballs, features a man in overalls and other images of happy African-American people that some say promotes racist ideology.

Speaking at a panel discussion convened by the university to address the topic of the mural, panelist P. Eric Abercrumbie, director of the Office of Ethnic Programs and Services and the African-American Culture and Research Center at the University of Cincinnati, said the imagery made him sick to his stomach.

"I went immediately to a headache and immediately to almost thinking that I'm going to need some counseling before this thing is over," Abercrumbie said. "To me it is racism ... to me it is no more than a continuation, if you leave it [uncovered], of a perpetuation of white supremacy. It doesn't need to be here."

WARNING: Not for the faint of heart, the easily offended, or the elderly!

**end**

Shotgun...shotgun...gotta get around to replacing that damn shotgun...
 
Happy black people ... working? Yup. Didn't you know, black culture involves gov't hand out cheques now. In a chocolate city, I hear.
 
so racist and offensive that people are coming away from it ill and in need of counseling
Click to expand...

:laugh4:

kill them now before they further weaken the gene pool.
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
from tonguetied.us
Click to expand...
Tonguetied seems to consistently either partially or completely leaves out the parts of the story that tells the other side. I guess that's their thing.

"I think the feeling by African-Americans was that the university was not a particularly congenial place for them, and this was a visible symbol of that,"

This is going on at a university. One that used to be for whites only.

I'm not sure what period is supposed to be represented in the picture but one person looks to be picking cotton.

I can understand some people could be a litle sensitive.
 
flavio said:
Tonguetied seems to consistently either partially or completely leaves out the parts of the story that tells the other side. I guess that's their thing.

"I think the feeling by African-Americans was that the university was not a particularly congenial place for them, and this was a visible symbol of that,"

This is going on at a university. One that used to be for whites only.

I'm not sure what period is supposed to be represented in the picture but one person looks to be picking cotton.

I can understand some people could be a litle sensitive.
Click to expand...


I'm a little sensitive to english lords having raped scotish wimmen on their wedding nights, but you don't hear me going on about it all the time, do ya?
 
Professur said:
I'm a little sensitive to english lords having raped scotish wimmen on their wedding nights, but you don't hear me going on about it all the time, do ya?
Click to expand...
Was there a painting of that where you went to school.

SnP said:
Damn near every university in America USED to be for whites only.
Click to expand...
Irrevelant
 
flavio said:
Irrevelant
Click to expand...

If him stating that almost every university in the US was for whites only is irrelevant, then your argument about the university in question being white-only in the past is also irrelevant.
 
Professur said:
I'm a little sensitive to english lords having raped scotish wimmen on their wedding nights, but you don't hear me going on about it all the time, do ya?
Click to expand...

You're Scottish? What's your last name?
 
Professur said:
Happy black people ... working? Yup. Didn't you know, black culture involves gov't hand out cheques now. In a chocolate city, I hear.
Click to expand...

I resent that remark...and I also can see that the painting is quite "Jim Crow". It's also a product of the times in which it was painted. If it had never been covered, though, this would be a non-issue, as the folks becrying it's re-opening use it as an excuse to act silly. I, personally, think it could be upsetting to some who never knew what the 60's were really like, and have to be overboard with their reactions...not enough for therapy, though. My skin has thickened with age.
 
Gato_Solo said:
I resent that remark...and I also can see that the painting is quite "Jim Crow". It's also a product of the times in which it was painted. If it had never been covered, though, this would be a non-issue, as the folks becrying it's re-opening use it as an excuse to act silly. I, personally, think it could be upsetting to some who never knew what the 60's were really like, and have to be overboard with their reactions...not enough for therapy, though. My skin has thickened with age.
Click to expand...

OK. All fair enough. Not really anything there I vehemently disagree about or bristle at in any way. But here's my question in return.

You "know" me. We've agreed on a lot, and agreed to disagree on others. Say what you will, I'm fairly consistent on things. I consider you pretty well learned and as open minded as the next bloke. So let's say a 30-something, middle/working class, non-government assisted, non-stereotyped black person happens across this painting. I am not talking about Jesse Jackson, nor am I referring to Snoop Dog, or any wanna be of either. Just your typical working Joe trying to make his family happy. He has no real idea what the civil rights struggle was truly like, and his head like everyone else's was filled with the Lincolnian myths he had to regurgitate to get a diploma. Is not something like this an opportunity to learn something of his own history? Would this not present an opportunity to investigate where he is truly "from" in an everyday sense of things?

And some even bigger questions. Would this even be an issue if the smiling laborer were white? If not, then who among us can claim true equality? Or true non-prejudicial ideaology?

I've seen images of Appalachian people in far worse light. Hell, Gatlinburg markets it. It makes me sick in my soul to see these stereotypes propogated for a dollar. But it spurred me to investigate what the true Appalachian mountain people were like 130 years ago. What I learned changed me forever. For one thing, I went from a vehement opponent of the Great Smoky Mountain National Park (because of the seizure of land from those who lived on it and other issues) to a staunch supporter of the park because of the ecological and environmental salvation it brought. I still oppose some of the methods used to achieve these goals, and I grieve for the displaced and far-from-fairly compensated, but it was a vital undertaking.

Maybe it's just me. Probably in fact. But I cannot see how this painting causes any real measurable harm to anyone. That is not an endorsement of Jim Crow. It is an acknowledgement that Jim Crow was real, and made a segment of our culture into a stronger people, even if by less than altruistic methods. The same way the "lazy mountaineer" image has made my own people better in the long run. I'm secure enough in my heritage,and know enough factual information about it, that the scalawag images of a hundred years or more ago don't fuel anger anymore...they fuel willingness to learn and spread accurate information to replace the falsehoods.
 
I seems very jim crowish to me, I am not personally offended, but I can understand those who are. It's like sellign lawn jockeies,some african americans are offended, some collect them.

What the picture is, is a picture of a stereotype of the time. And those can be offensive to people even if you don't see it.

Like this one would offend me
cover.jpg


but it might not offend anyone else, cause it is jsut a peice of propaganda from the annals of history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top