Active Users:476 Time:22/12/2024 06:44:22 PM
That's part of what I was thinking Artsapat Send a noteboard - 23/03/2010 07:50:19 AM
In part because "black music" is an antiquated term at best and quite insulting in several contexts. The black paint would be construed by several as being related to blackface attire and that is very controversial here and has been for at least one generation, if not two.

Interesting how social mores differ from culture to culture, though.


In the Netherlands, we have Sinterklaas, who is really the ancestor to Father Christmas. Instead of a short tubby man, we have a long, thin bishop. He is modelled after the real bishop of Myra (born in Patara, Turkey around 280), called Saint Nicholas. He had already been honoured in this region for centuries, when somewhere in the 19th century, he got a loyal sidekick ("Zwarte Piet", or Black Pete), who was a clown of Moorish decent. Sinterklaas and Zwarte Piet go around children's homes every year around Dec 5th, to give presents and Zwarte Piet clowns around and is generally clumsy.

Of course, in the Netherlands of the 19th century and early 20th century, we had no black people to play Zwarte Piet for the children. So, it's been a tradition for almost 200 years to paint some people's face black and have them play Zwarte Piet. (See linked picture.)

This is interesting culturally, because of two reasons. First, it's something that will never be accepted in the US, even though it was the Dutch who introduced Sinterklaas (and thus Father Christmas after several iterations on US soil). To illustrate, a picture of a Zwarte Piet was once one of the "WTF is this?" pictures at I-am-bored.com. On the other hand, my parents have lived in NJ for years and have dressed up as Sinterklaas (my father with an EPIC beard) and Zwarte Piet for at least the past five years, for the Dutch children (who are more American than Dutch) that live in the tri-state area.

Secondly, it's becoming more and more a problem in the Netherlands too. Every year, you hear more people say it's racist, with the other side claiming its tradition that's not meant to BE racist (1). The Blackface attire is not so much of a problem, but more the depiction of a black man/woman who is the stupid/clumsy sidekick of the wise, white man. I used to be on the traditional side of the debate, but since I've been talking to Dutch people of Surinamese and Antillian descent who are genuinely insulted (and since I started to understand a bit more about the blackface controversy in the US), I'm starting to shift.




(1) Before Zwarte Piet, Sinterklaas used to work alone, or with the devil at his side for some reason. When Zwarte Piet was introduced, the Europeans didn't see much difference between Moors and Devils, so it's probably even intended to be racist since the beginning.

=========
EDIT: once again, smileys....
The mystery deepens... I think. *MySmiley*
Zwarte Piet
This message last edited by Artsapat on 23/03/2010 at 07:50:58 AM
Reply to message
Is it racist?: Commercial for Jazz/Soul radio - 22/03/2010 01:47:45 PM 2692 Views
I'd say that's pretty racist. - 22/03/2010 01:53:59 PM 688 Views
I don't think it's racist at all - 22/03/2010 07:15:55 PM 723 Views
Uh. - 22/03/2010 09:36:35 PM 832 Views
Re: Uh. - 29/03/2010 07:03:14 PM 770 Views
I'm not Dutch, but that was a pretty ignornant claim - 29/03/2010 07:20:09 PM 704 Views
Re: I'm not Dutch, but that was a pretty ignornant claim - 29/03/2010 07:28:34 PM 796 Views
Not "higher" nor "lower," but "different" would be the word to use here - 29/03/2010 07:46:15 PM 637 Views
Re: Not "higher" nor "lower," but "different" would be the word to use here - 29/03/2010 07:53:56 PM 589 Views
An illustration of Larry's point... - 29/03/2010 08:14:55 PM 658 Views
This. ~points at Larry's post~ *NM* - 29/03/2010 07:42:35 PM 404 Views
Re: This. ~points at Larry's post~ - 29/03/2010 07:57:30 PM 679 Views
Um. - 29/03/2010 08:00:54 PM 831 Views
Re: Um. - 29/03/2010 08:44:31 PM 620 Views
My question for you was on that one line that Larry responded to. - 29/03/2010 08:46:26 PM 650 Views
I was thinking the same thing as Rebekah - 23/03/2010 07:15:51 AM 694 Views
I don't see it - 22/03/2010 08:19:31 PM 686 Views
+1 *NM* - 22/03/2010 08:30:01 PM 390 Views
Re: +2 *NM* - 22/03/2010 09:53:43 PM 387 Views
Re: +3 *NM* - 22/03/2010 10:00:55 PM 365 Views
i'd say the actions in the commercial are more racist than the words - 22/03/2010 10:00:02 PM 681 Views
It would not float here in the US - 22/03/2010 10:07:08 PM 690 Views
Agreed. - 23/03/2010 05:36:14 AM 843 Views
Could you please expand on one point in your reasoning? - 23/03/2010 07:20:31 AM 689 Views
It's not race specific music if it's enjoyed/performed/presented by various races. - 23/03/2010 07:32:33 AM 922 Views
MOBO - 23/03/2010 10:20:22 AM 634 Views
Nice term, if a bit clumsy - 23/03/2010 11:10:34 AM 651 Views
The trouble lies in historical neuroses cooked in our melting pot, I think. - 23/03/2010 11:29:06 AM 687 Views
I suspect so as well - 23/03/2010 12:32:00 PM 776 Views
Well, the thing is, "American" is PURELY a culture, not a race. - 23/03/2010 01:55:59 PM 881 Views
That's part of what I was thinking - 23/03/2010 07:50:19 AM 1009 Views
Only if it's racist to mention the fact that different races exist. Which seems to be the US view. - 23/03/2010 09:24:23 AM 678 Views
Agreed - 23/03/2010 10:21:59 AM 705 Views
Not at all, the problem is when people seem to say something is exclusive to a given race. - 23/03/2010 11:51:06 AM 919 Views
I agree with some of what you say, but I think you're assuming more than is warranted. - 23/03/2010 02:33:34 PM 645 Views
perhaps not as default... - 23/03/2010 03:08:19 PM 710 Views
The term encompasses listeners, performers and presenters. - 23/03/2010 04:42:55 PM 728 Views
So it's really not about skin color any more, right? - 23/03/2010 09:12:20 PM 766 Views
it's racist and unacceptable. - 23/03/2010 09:07:10 PM 806 Views

Reply to Message