This piece brings to mind observations on White silence, by Black poet Michael Harriot.
Michael Harriot once pointed out how white people don’t talk about their accumulated wealth from centuries of slave labor.
Harriot also noted that White people are generally silent about the early exclusion of Black people from the G.I. bill, which raised millions of white people up into the middle class.
And he observed that the banks’ habit of red lining Black people from certain mortgage loans effectively blocked Blacks from participating in a modern source of White wealth: home ownership — where property values rise over time.
Had not thought about these things for a while. Thank you.
"The book is not dedicated to showing that good people can be racists. It is dedicated to demonstrating that some who appear to be racists are actually good people" A distinction without difference to my way of looking. Is the difference you're referring to the fact that so many whites see two separate meanings in those phrases? It requires a kind of mental gymnastics my brain isn't capable of fully absorbing.
I'm glad you reprinted this as well. I was never comfortable with the adoration "To Kill a Mockingbird " continually received and I remember the controversy over this book's publication. I don't know if it was the most ethical thing for this book to be published if the author had (rightly) never intended it to be released. Watchman gave me the feeling that Lee was trying to write a novel about the Women's Movement and generational conflict but couldn't make a story about it without inserting her characters back into the Civil Rights plot she wrote before. That so little has changed in how so many Americans think about racism (and sexism) is frustrating.
I think the difference is in the tone of the book. Is the point to show that everyday people we consider good can be racists, and so we should not be so sure that we have escaped racism? or is the point to say that racism isn't important because these good upstanding people are racist?
I love this piece and thank you for re upping it. I fear this divide is what is subconsciously informing the piss-poor postmortem from 2024 where people are trying to salvage an idea of goodness rather than facing the fact that someone can be nice to a fellow white person but show a different face to the minorities in their spaces. But instead of reckoning with that, like most minorities have to whether we want to or not, moderates are just telling marginalized voices to pipe down and trying to win back voters who made their position clear for decades. Hence why it’s hard for minorities and marginalized groups to want to help this nation from the racist rut it has found itself in. The arguments and mental gymnastics people go through is exhausting and demeaning to our own lived experiences. Maybe we are just a spoiled nation existing on the fumes of slave wealth and we deserve what’s happening. Anyways, you are a special voice Noah, and I’m so happy to be able to learn and grow through your writing.
Any dialogue or takes about Go Set A Watchmen are immediately dumped by my brain because of the controversial nature of the book's release. I love your writing, and appreciate the point you're making, but to my brain this book isn't an actual thing that exists.
This piece brings to mind observations on White silence, by Black poet Michael Harriot.
Michael Harriot once pointed out how white people don’t talk about their accumulated wealth from centuries of slave labor.
Harriot also noted that White people are generally silent about the early exclusion of Black people from the G.I. bill, which raised millions of white people up into the middle class.
And he observed that the banks’ habit of red lining Black people from certain mortgage loans effectively blocked Blacks from participating in a modern source of White wealth: home ownership — where property values rise over time.
Had not thought about these things for a while. Thank you.
"The book is not dedicated to showing that good people can be racists. It is dedicated to demonstrating that some who appear to be racists are actually good people" A distinction without difference to my way of looking. Is the difference you're referring to the fact that so many whites see two separate meanings in those phrases? It requires a kind of mental gymnastics my brain isn't capable of fully absorbing.
I'm glad you reprinted this as well. I was never comfortable with the adoration "To Kill a Mockingbird " continually received and I remember the controversy over this book's publication. I don't know if it was the most ethical thing for this book to be published if the author had (rightly) never intended it to be released. Watchman gave me the feeling that Lee was trying to write a novel about the Women's Movement and generational conflict but couldn't make a story about it without inserting her characters back into the Civil Rights plot she wrote before. That so little has changed in how so many Americans think about racism (and sexism) is frustrating.
I think the difference is in the tone of the book. Is the point to show that everyday people we consider good can be racists, and so we should not be so sure that we have escaped racism? or is the point to say that racism isn't important because these good upstanding people are racist?
I love this piece and thank you for re upping it. I fear this divide is what is subconsciously informing the piss-poor postmortem from 2024 where people are trying to salvage an idea of goodness rather than facing the fact that someone can be nice to a fellow white person but show a different face to the minorities in their spaces. But instead of reckoning with that, like most minorities have to whether we want to or not, moderates are just telling marginalized voices to pipe down and trying to win back voters who made their position clear for decades. Hence why it’s hard for minorities and marginalized groups to want to help this nation from the racist rut it has found itself in. The arguments and mental gymnastics people go through is exhausting and demeaning to our own lived experiences. Maybe we are just a spoiled nation existing on the fumes of slave wealth and we deserve what’s happening. Anyways, you are a special voice Noah, and I’m so happy to be able to learn and grow through your writing.
Any dialogue or takes about Go Set A Watchmen are immediately dumped by my brain because of the controversial nature of the book's release. I love your writing, and appreciate the point you're making, but to my brain this book isn't an actual thing that exists.
it seems like Kafka or dickinson to me; people often engage with work that wasn't necessarily intended for publication...
Powerful commentary.
WHICH Atticus Finch?
The one of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD?
Or the one of GO TELL A WATCHMAN?
The latter? Yes!
The former? I see why you say "Yes"—I'm going to have to study on this some.
First, I need to stop seeing Gregory Peck every time I think of Atticus....
well, the point of the piece is that they are not all that different.
Yes, that I got.
Wow, it's HARD to stop seeing Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch!
And the crazy part is? Peck probably would've agreed with the seeming contradiction, too....