If you're thinkin' of being my baby
It don't matter if you're black or white
Albanian pop sensation Rita Ora is the latest star to be accused of blackfishing - i.e., adopting - or, if you prefer, appropriating - a look that is perceived to be African; braided hair, dark skin, full lips, curvaceous body shape, etc.
Why would she want to do this?
Well, presumably, in order to widen her fan base, increase her record sales, and raise her cultural status; for is there anything cooler today (certainly in the minds of advertisers and those who set or follow trends on social media) than being black, or, at the very least, bi-racial?
Blackfishing, then, is simply a contemporary form of what sociologists call passing - i.e., the ability of an individual to be regarded as a member of an identity group (or community) different from their own. Sometimes, this is a matter not merely of social acceptance, but survival; expressing one's true identity can be dangerous for all kinds of people, not just masked superheroes.
At other times, however, it's all about manipulating appearances in order to achieve fame and fortune. This may be cynical and show a lack of concern for others, but, to be honest, I don't have a problem with it. In fact, one might suggest that we're all just passing at some level; that all identities are styles and games of artifice - isn't that what the trans movement teaches us?
In other words, none of us are what we seem to be, or believe ourselves to be. And so, when I hear people getting upset about this issue, I don't doubt the sincerity of their outrage or the strength of their feeling. But I do think they're indulging in old-fashioned moralism and a naive form of essentialism.
And I would ask them: who really wants to be Doris Day when you can pretend to be Rihanna?
Why would she want to do this?
Well, presumably, in order to widen her fan base, increase her record sales, and raise her cultural status; for is there anything cooler today (certainly in the minds of advertisers and those who set or follow trends on social media) than being black, or, at the very least, bi-racial?
Blackfishing, then, is simply a contemporary form of what sociologists call passing - i.e., the ability of an individual to be regarded as a member of an identity group (or community) different from their own. Sometimes, this is a matter not merely of social acceptance, but survival; expressing one's true identity can be dangerous for all kinds of people, not just masked superheroes.
At other times, however, it's all about manipulating appearances in order to achieve fame and fortune. This may be cynical and show a lack of concern for others, but, to be honest, I don't have a problem with it. In fact, one might suggest that we're all just passing at some level; that all identities are styles and games of artifice - isn't that what the trans movement teaches us?
In other words, none of us are what we seem to be, or believe ourselves to be. And so, when I hear people getting upset about this issue, I don't doubt the sincerity of their outrage or the strength of their feeling. But I do think they're indulging in old-fashioned moralism and a naive form of essentialism.
And I would ask them: who really wants to be Doris Day when you can pretend to be Rihanna?
Notes
For a related post to this one in defence of cultural appropriation, click here.
For a related post to this one on the case of Rachel Dolezal, click here.
We don't know all the ins and outs of Ms Ora's black-facing/fishing/listedness or whatnot - who, for the record and what it's worth, has apparently never actually claimed to be black, but (white) Albanian - but Lionel Shriver has spoken with forthright common sense and nuanced intelligence on the topic of cultural appropriation in the literary context some time back, and in ways that critically non-conformist readers of TTA will continue to reflect on.
ReplyDeletettps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/13/lionel-shrivers-full-speech-i-hope-the-concept-of-cultural-appropriation-is-a-passing-fad
In the meantime, we don't find it controversial to state, for example, that we are not a woman (though may have some 'feminine' traits), not black (though we tend to burn in the sun), not gay (though have found the odd man passingly attractive in our time), not trans (nor particularly transphobic). Nor are we an alarm clock, an ice cream or a Siamese kitten. (Indeed, the list of things we - quite essentially and non-negotiably - are not is virtually endless.)
The idea that all identity is a cultural game - does it really need repeating? - makes a mockery of our biology, whatever identitarian appeals to the trans 'movement' (and what it might 'teach us') continue to be inflicted on us, the tiresome and increasingly coercive conformism of which Jordan Peterson and Camille Pagla have, between them, surely thankfully trashed. To refuse to see everything, including sex and gender, as 'fluid' cultural construction, one doesn't have to be a 'moralist' or 'essentialist' - just not a sucker for a fashionable and some would say pernicious form of postmodernism projected onto persons. Increasingly now, even children (god forbid) are not even allowed the luxury of a childhood and/or the necessity of a puberty before having their every callow rumination on their girl/boyhood seized on as indicative of an urgent programme for realignment.
Mind you (whisper it), we still have a soft spot for the Black and White Minstrels Show!
Are you then repeating Freud's claim that Anatomie ist das Schicksal ...?
ReplyDeleteWhich is fine, except that l'anatomia presuppone il cadavere ... As D'Annunzio pointed out ...
ReplyDelete