Thomas Jefferson’s Great-Great-Great-Great-Great-Great Grandson Poses for a Presidential Portrait

We hold these truths to be self-evi­dent: that all men are cre­at­ed equal; that they are endowed by their Cre­ator with cer­tain unalien­able rights; that among these are life, lib­er­ty and the pur­suit of hap­pi­ness…  —Thomas Jef­fer­son, 3rd Pres­i­dent of the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca

He was a bril­liant man who preached equal­i­ty, but he didn’t prac­tice it. He owned peo­ple. And now I’m here because of it. —Shan­non LaNier, co-author of Jefferson’s Chil­dren: The Sto­ry of One Amer­i­can Fam­i­ly

Many of the Amer­i­can par­tic­i­pants in pho­tog­ra­ph­er Drew Gard­ner’s ongo­ing Descen­dants project agreed to tem­porar­i­ly alter their usu­al appear­ance to height­en the his­toric resem­blance to their famous ances­tors, adopt­ing Eliz­a­beth Cady Stanton’s lace cap and sausage curls or Fred­er­ick Dou­glass’ swept back mane.

Actor and tele­vi­sion pre­sen­ter Shan­non LaNier sub­mit­ted to an uncom­fort­able, peri­od-appro­pri­ate neck­wrap, tugged into place with the help of some dis­creet­ly placed paper­clips, but skipped the wig that would have brought him into clos­er vis­i­ble align­ment with an 1800 por­trait of his great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grand­fa­ther, Thomas Jef­fer­son.

“I didn’t want to become Jef­fer­son,” states LaNier, whose great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grand­moth­er, Sal­ly Hem­ings, was writ­ten out of the nar­ra­tive for most of our country’s his­to­ry.

An enslaved half-sis­ter of Jefferson’s late wife, Martha, Hem­ings was around six­teen when she bore Jefferson’s first child, as per the mem­oir of her son, Madi­son, from whom LaNier is also direct­ly descend­ed.

She has been por­trayed onscreen by actors Car­men Ejo­go and Thandie New­ton (and Maya Rudolph in an icky Sat­ur­day Night Live skit.)

But there are no pho­tographs or paint­ed por­traits of her, nor any sur­viv­ing let­ters or diary entries. Just two accounts in which she is described as attrac­tive and light-skinned, and some polit­i­cal car­toons that paint an unflat­ter­ing pic­ture.

The mys­tery of her appear­ance might make for an inter­est­ing com­pos­ite por­trait should the Smith­son­ian, who com­mis­sioned Gardner’s series, seek to entice all of LaNier’s female and female-iden­ti­fy­ing cousins from the Hem­ings line to pose.

While LaNier was aware of his con­nec­tion to Jef­fer­son from ear­li­est child­hood, his peers scoffed and his moth­er had to take the mat­ter up with the prin­ci­pal after a teacher told him to sit down and stop lying. As he recalled in an inter­view:

When they didn’t believe me, it became one of those things you stop shar­ing because, you know, peo­ple would make fun of you and then they’d say, “Yeah, and I’m relat­ed to Abra­ham Lin­coln.”

His fam­i­ly pool expand­ed when Jefferson’s great-great-great-great-grand­son, jour­nal­ist Lucian King Truscott IVwhose fifth great-grand­moth­er was Martha Jef­fer­sonissued an open invi­ta­tion to Hem­ings’ descen­dants to be his guests at a 1999 fam­i­ly reunion at Mon­ti­cel­lo.

It would be anoth­er 20 years before the Thomas Jef­fer­son Foun­da­tion and Mon­ti­cel­lo tour guides stopped fram­ing Hem­ings’ inti­mate con­nec­tion to Jef­fer­son as mere tat­tle.

Now vis­i­tors can find an exhib­it ded­i­cat­ed to her life, both online and in the recent­ly reopened house-muse­um.

Truscott laud­ed the move in an essay on Salon, pub­lished the same week that a year­book pho­to of Vir­ginia Gov­er­nor Ralph Northam in black­face pos­ing next to a fig­ure in KKK robes began to cir­cu­late:

Mon­ti­cel­lo is com­mit­ting an act of equal­i­ty by telling the sto­ry of slave life there, and by exten­sion, slave life in Amer­i­ca. When my cousins in the Hem­ings fam­i­ly stand up and proud­ly say, we are descen­dants of Thomas Jef­fer­son, they are com­mit­ting an act of equal­i­ty…. The pho­to­graph you see here is a pic­ture of who we are as Amer­i­cans. One day, a pho­to­graph of two cousins, one black and one white, will not be seen as unusu­al. One day, acts of equal­i­ty will out­weigh acts of racism. Until that day, how­ev­er, Shan­non and I will keep fight­ing for what’s right. And one day, we will win.

Watch a video of Jef­fer­son descen­dant Shan­non Lanier’s ses­sion with pho­tog­ra­ph­er Drew Gard­ner here.

See more pho­tos from Gardner’s Descen­dents project here.

Read his­to­ri­an Annette Gor­don-Reed’s New York Times op-ed on the com­pli­cat­ed Hem­ings-Jef­fer­son con­nec­tion here.

via Petapix­el

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

John Trumbull’s Famous 1818 Paint­ing Dec­la­ra­tion of Inde­pen­dence Vir­tu­al­ly Defaced to Show Which Found­ing Fathers Owned Slaves

Meet “Found­ing Moth­er” Mary Katharine God­dard, First Female Post­mas­ter in the U.S. and Print­er of the Dec­la­ra­tion of Inde­pen­dence

Hamil­ton Mania Inspires the Library of Con­gress to Put 12,000 Alexan­der Hamil­ton Doc­u­ments Online

Ayun Hal­l­i­day is an author, illus­tra­tor, the­ater mak­er and Chief Pri­ma­tol­o­gist of the East Vil­lage Inky zine.  Fol­low her @AyunHalliday.

How Fast Can a Vaccine Be Made?: An Animated Introduction

From Ted-Ed comes a video that answers a time­ly ques­tion: How fast can a vac­cine be made?

They write: “When a new pathogen emerges, our bod­ies and health­care sys­tems are left vul­ner­a­ble. And when this pathogen caus­es the out­break of a pan­dem­ic, there’s an urgent need for a vac­cine to cre­ate wide­spread immu­ni­ty with min­i­mal loss of life. So how quick­ly can we devel­op vac­cines when we need them most? Dan Kwartler describes the three phas­es of vac­cine devel­op­ment.” Explorato­ry research, clin­i­cal test­ing, and man­u­fac­tur­ing.

When you’re done, you can watch their relat­ed video: When is a pan­dem­ic over?

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bun­dled in one email, each day.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

After MLK’s Assassination, a Schoolteacher Conducted a Famous Experiment–“Blue Eyes/Brown Eyes”–to Teach Kids About Discrimination

Get­ting his­to­ry across to young stu­dents is chal­leng­ing enough, but what should a teacher do when actu­al his­to­ry-mak­ing events hap­pen on their watch? They have to be acknowl­edged, but to what extent do they have to be explained, even “taught”? Of the teach­ers who have turned his­to­ry-in-the-mak­ing into a les­son, per­haps the most famous is Jane Elliott of Riceville, Iowa. On April 5, 1968, the day after Mar­tin Luther King Jr.‘s assas­si­na­tion, she divid­ed her class­room of third-graders along col­or lines: blue-eyed and brown-eyed. On the first day she grant­ed the brown-eyed stu­dents such spe­cial priv­i­leges as desks in the front rows, sec­ond help­ings at lunch, and five extra min­utes of recess. The next day she reversed the sit­u­a­tion, and the blue-eyed kids had the perks.

What brought seri­ous atten­tion to Elliot­t’s small-town class­room exper­i­ment was the result­ing arti­cle in the Riceville Recorder, which report­ed some of what her stu­dents wrote in their assign­ments respond­ing to the expe­ri­ence. The Asso­ci­at­ed Press picked up the arti­cle and soon Elliott received a call from The Tonight Show invit­ing her to come chat with John­ny Car­son about her “Blue Eyes/Brown Eyes” exer­cise on nation­al tele­vi­sion.

“I did­n’t know how this exer­cise would work,” Elliott tells Jim­my Fal­lon on the clip from the cur­rent Tonight Show at the top of the post. “If I had known how it would work, I prob­a­bly would­n’t have done it. If I had known that, after I did that exer­cise, I lost all my friends, no teacher would speak to me where they could be seen speak­ing to me, because it was­n’t good pol­i­tics to be seen talk­ing to the town’s only ‘N‑word lover.’ ”

Elliot­t’s fam­i­ly also expe­ri­enced severe blow­back from her sud­den fame, but it did­n’t stop her from fur­ther­ing the clear­ly res­o­nant idea she had devised. She con­tin­ued to per­form Blue Eyes/Brown Eyes in class: the third time, it was filmed and became the 1970 tele­vi­sion doc­u­men­tary The Eye of the Storm. (Some of the lan­guage used by her stu­dents sure­ly would­n’t make it to the air today.) Fif­teen years lat­er, PBS’ Front­line reunit­ed Elliot­t’s third-grade class of 1970 for its Emmy Award-win­ning episode A Class Divid­ed, and a decade there­after Ger­man film­mak­er Bertram Ver­haag would again film Elliott per­form­ing her sig­na­ture exer­cise for the doc­u­men­tary Blue Eyed. In a vari­ety of set­tings across Amer­i­ca and the world, Elliott con­tin­ues, in her late eight­ies, to make her point. It isn’t always well received, as she reveals in this Front­line fol­low-up inter­view, and at times has even drawn threats of vio­lence. “I can be scared, but I won’t be scared to death,” she says. “Or, at my age, of death.”

via Boing Boing

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Mar­tin Luther King, Jr.’s Hand­writ­ten Syl­labus & Final Exam for the Phi­los­o­phy Course He Taught at More­house Col­lege (1962)

How Mar­tin Luther King, Jr. Used Niet­zsche, Hegel & Kant to Over­turn Seg­re­ga­tion in Amer­i­ca

Read Mar­tin Luther King and The Mont­gomery Sto­ry: The Influ­en­tial 1957 Civ­il Rights Com­ic Book

How a Virus Spreads, and How to Avoid It: A For­mer NASA Engi­neer Demon­strates with a Black­light in a Class­room

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les and the video series The City in Cin­e­ma. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall, on Face­book, or on Insta­gram.

Revisiting The Wire During 2020’s Black Lives Matter Movement

George Floyd’s mur­der while under arrest for alleged­ly pass­ing a coun­ter­feit bill of small denom­i­na­tion sparked mas­sive world­wide demon­stra­tions against police bru­tal­i­ty and in sup­port of Black Lives Mat­ter.

It also led to the abrupt can­cel­la­tion of television’s recent hit, Live PD, and its longest-run­ning real­i­ty show, Cops.

As Aman­da Hess recent­ly observed in The New York Times, pub­lic opin­ion has turned on any show that pro­motes an image of police offi­cers as uni­ver­sal­ly decent forces for good, “lov­able goof­balls,” or anti-heroes whose rough edges make a play for view­ers’ alle­giance by sug­gest­ing the char­ac­ters are real­is­ti­cal­ly flawed and thus, relat­able:

The “good cop” trope is a stan­dard of both police pro­ce­du­rals and real-life police tac­tics, and now crowd­sourced video of the protests has giv­en cops a new stage for per­form­ing the role. In recent days, sup­pos­ed­ly uplift­ing images of the police have spread wild­ly across the inter­net, com­pet­ing for views with evi­dence of cops beat­ing, gassing and arrest­ing pro­test­ers. In Hous­ton, an offi­cer con­soled a young black girl at a ral­ly: “We’re here to pro­tect you, OK?” he told her, envelop­ing her in a hug. “You can protest, you can par­ty, you can do what­ev­er you want. Just don’t break noth­ing.” In Nashville, the police tweet­ed a pho­to of cops kneel­ing next to a black boy with a “Black Lives Mat­ter” sign, smil­ing from behind their riot hel­mets. And in Atlanta, a line of Nation­al Guard sol­diers did the Macare­na. On the final rump shake, a black rifle slung over one soldier’s back swung to the beat.

These images show cops engag­ing in a kind of pan­tomime of protest, mim­ic­k­ing the ges­tures of the demon­stra­tors until their mes­sages are dilut­ed beyond recog­ni­tion. They reframe protests against racist police vio­lence into a bland, non­spe­cif­ic goal of sol­i­dar­i­ty. These moments are meant to rep­re­sent the shared human­i­ty between offi­cers and pro­test­ers, but cops already rank among the most human­ized groups in Amer­i­ca; the same can­not be said for the black Amer­i­cans who live in fear of them. Cops can dance, they can hug, they can kneel on the ground, but their indi­vid­ual acts of kind­ness can no longer obscure the vio­lence of a sys­tem. The good-cop act is wear­ing thin.

Accord­ing to Hol­ly­wood Reporter crit­ic Inkoo Kang, almost any por­tray­al of cops on TV right now ran­kles, even one that was laud­ed for its real­is­tic por­tray­al of cor­rup­tion and abuse on the force, HBO’s crit­i­cal­ly acclaimed The WireBarack Obama’s avowed favorite.

Kang writes:

In the first sea­son of The Wire, just about every on-the-ground cop par­tic­i­pates in police bru­tal­i­ty — often as a kind of pro­fes­sion­al pre­rog­a­tive. Their vio­lence is meant to add dark­er streaks to the char­ac­ters’ oth­er­wise hero­ic gloss, but it also has the effect of nor­mal­iz­ing police bru­tal­i­ty as a part, even a perk, of the job.

Her com­ments touched a nerve with actor Wen­dell Pierce, whose char­ac­ter was based on a Bal­ti­more homi­cide detec­tive, Oscar Requer, who achieved his posi­tion at a time when black offi­cers rou­tine­ly faced racial harass­ment from with­in the force. Pierce pub­lished his response on Twit­ter:

How can any­one watch “The Wire” and the dys­func­tion of the police & the war on drugs and say that we were depict­ed as hero­ic. We demon­strat­ed moral ambi­gu­i­ties and the pathol­o­gy that leads to the abus­es. Maybe you were react­ing to how good peo­ple can be cor­rupt­ed to do bad things.

If The Wire did any­thing right, it depict­ed the human­i­ty of the Black lives so eas­i­ly pro­filed by police and the destruc­tion of them by the so-called war on drugs; a delib­er­ate pol­i­cy of mass incar­cer­a­tion to sus­tain a wealth dis­par­i­ty in Amer­i­ca that thrives keep­ing an under­class.

The Wire, if any­thing, was the canary-in-the-mine that fore­casts the insti­tu­tion­al moral morass of pol­i­tics and polic­ing that lead us to the protests of today. “The big­ger the lie, the more they believe” was a line of mine that is so salient and pro­found in today’s cli­mate.

“The Wire” is a deep dive study of the con­tribut­ing vari­ables that feed the vio­lence in our cul­ture: in the streets and at the hand of police. Clas­sism, racism, destruc­tion of pub­lic edu­ca­tion, and moral ambi­gu­i­ty in our lead­er­ship all feed this par­a­digm of Amer­i­can decline.

I know I sound defen­sive and I prob­a­bly am, The Wire is per­son­al for me. The Wire is also Art. The role of Art is to ignite the pub­lic dis­course. Art is where we come togeth­er as a com­mu­ni­ty to con­front who we are as a soci­ety, decide what our val­ues are, and then act on them.

The cri­tique here is that tele­vi­sion seems to fol­low behind the cur­rent events of the day. I would ask that you con­sid­er that maybe The Wire was a pre­cur­sor to the dis­cus­sion that is manda­to­ry now. It was an indi­ca­tor, a warn­ing light, of the implo­sion we are feel­ing today.

At a time when the world is called upon to lis­ten care­ful­ly to what black peo­ple are say­ing, and much of the world has shown them­selves ready to do so, Pierce’s words car­ry extra weight.

His asser­tion that the show, which ran from 2002 to 2008, accu­rate­ly depict­ed a sys­tem so rot­ten that col­lapse was inevitable, is echoed in inter­view clips with cre­ator and one-time police reporter, David Simon, above.

The video essay was put togeth­er by aspi­rant screen­writer Nehemi­ah T. Jor­dan whose Behind the Cur­tain series aims to pro­vide insights on how cel­e­brat­ed scripts for both the big and small screensFight Club, Uncut Gems, The Sopra­nos, Break­ing Bad—come by their aes­thet­ic qual­i­ty.

Simon’s ambi­tion for The Wire was that it truth­ful­ly con­vey what he had observed as a reporter, as well as the lives of the peo­ple he inter­act­ed withboth Bal­ti­more cops and those they most­ly failed to serve.

In a 2015 White House con­ver­sa­tion with then-Pres­i­dent Oba­ma, Simon remarks that an empha­sis on drug-relat­ed offens­es led to an epi­dem­ic of pre­sump­tive police work, and a decline in “com­pe­tent retroac­tive inves­ti­ga­tion of felonies.” A dis­pro­por­tion­ate num­ber of young black and Lati­no men were incar­cer­at­ed dur­ing this time, and upon their release, their felony his­to­ries meant that few of them were able to secure mean­ing­ful employ­ment. America’s prob­lems were com­pound­ed.

Whether or not you are moved to watch, or rewatch The Wire, we hearti­ly rec­om­mend Where We Go from Here, a recent New York Dai­ly News op-ed by actor Michael K. Williams, who played fan favorite Omar Lit­tle, and whose real life coun­ter­part Simon dis­cuss­es with Omar-fan Oba­ma.

New York native Williams, who has worked to end mass juve­nile incar­cer­a­tion, foment col­lab­o­ra­tion between police and at-risk youth and serves as an ambas­sador for The Inno­cent Project, pos­sess­es a deep under­stand­ing of the New York Police Department’s struc­ture, chain of com­mand, and day to day work­ings. Stat­ing that tan­gi­ble action is need­ed to “shift police cul­ture” and “trans­form the rela­tion­ships between law enforce­ment and com­mu­ni­ties of col­or,” he makes a case for six con­crete reforms:

  1. Over­haul Comp­Stat, the NYPD’s crime track­ing mech­a­nism.
  2. Elim­i­nate plain­clothes units.
  3. Cre­ate an inde­pen­dent body to inves­ti­gate “use of force” inci­dents at the time they occur.
  4. Reimag­ine the duties of civil­ians with­in the depart­ment tasked with com­mu­ni­ty-build­ing.
  5. Imple­ment ongo­ing trau­ma-cen­tered train­ing, edu­ca­tion and activ­i­ties for offi­cers, exec­u­tives and the com­mu­ni­ties they serve.
  6. Make racial jus­tice a core com­po­nent of NYPD train­ing and edu­ca­tion.

Read Michael  K. William’s Op-Ed here.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

An Art­ful, Ani­mat­ed Trib­ute to The Wire, Cre­at­ed by a Fan of the Crit­i­cal­ly-Acclaimed TV Series

The Wire Breaks Down The Great Gats­by, F. Scott Fitzgerald’s Clas­sic Crit­i­cism of Amer­i­ca (NSFW)

The Wire as Great Vic­to­ri­an Nov­el

Ayun Hal­l­i­day is an author, illus­tra­tor, the­ater mak­er and Chief Pri­ma­tol­o­gist of the East Vil­lage Inky zine.  Fol­low her @AyunHalliday.

Explaining the Pandemic to My Past Self: A Dark, Comedic Reflection on the Last Few Months

What would hap­pen if I tried to explain what’s hap­pen­ing now to the Jan­u­ary 2020 ver­sion of myself? That’s the ques­tion that Julie Nolke asked and answered in ear­ly April.

Now she’s back with a sequel where she tries to explain the events of June to her April self.

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bun­dled in one email, each day.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Tom Morello Responds to Angry Fans Who Suddenly Realize That Rage Against the Machine’s Music Is Political: “What Music of Mine DIDN’T Contain Political BS?”

I, Danc­ing Bear,” a song by an obscure folk artist who goes by the name Bir­d­engine, begins thus:

There are some things that I just do not care to know

It’s a love­ly lit­tle tune, if maudlin and macabre are your thing, a song one might almost call anti-polit­i­cal. It is the art of solip­sism, denial, an inward­ness that dances over the abyss of pure self, navel gaz­ing for its own sake. It is Kaf­ka-esque, pathet­ic, and hys­ter­i­cal. I love it.

My appre­ci­a­tion for this weird, out­sider New Roman­ti­cism does not entail a belief that art and cul­ture should be “apo­lit­i­cal,” what­ev­er that is.

Or that artists, writ­ers, musi­cians, actors, ath­letes, or whomev­er should shut up about pol­i­tics and stick to what they do best, talk about them­selves.

The idea that artists should avoid pol­i­tics seems so per­va­sive that fans of some of the most bla­tant­ly polit­i­cal, rad­i­cal artists have nev­er noticed the pol­i­tics, because, I guess, they just couldn’t be there.

One such fan just got dunked on, as they say, a whole bunch on Twit­ter when he raged against Tom Morel­lo for the “polit­i­cal bs.”

That’s Tom Morel­lo of Rage Against the Machine, whose debut 1992 album informed us that the police and the Klan work hand in hand, and that cops are the “cho­sen whites” for state-sanc­tioned mur­der. That Rage Against the Machine, who raged against the same Machine on every album: “Bam, here’s the plan; Moth­er­fuck Uncle Sam.”

The poor sod was burned so bad­ly he delet­ed his account, but the laughs at his expense kept com­ing. Even Morel­lo respond­ed.

Why? Because the dis­grun­tled for­mer fan is not just one lone crank who didn’t get it. Many peo­ple over the years have expressed out­rage at find­ing out there’s so much pol­i­tics in their cul­ture, even in a band like Rage that could not have been less sub­tle. Many, like for­mer lever-puller of the Machine, Paul Ryan, seem to have cyn­i­cal­ly missed the point and turned them into work­out music. Morel­lo’s had to point this out a lot. (Dit­to Spring­steen.)

This uncrit­i­cal con­sump­tion of cul­ture with­out a thought about icky polit­i­cal issues is maybe one rea­son we have a sep­a­rate polit­i­cal class, paid hand­some­ly to do the dirty work while the rest of us go shop­ping. It’s a recipe for mass igno­rance and fas­cism.

You might think me crazy if I told you that the CIA is part­ly respon­si­ble for our expec­ta­tion that art and cul­ture should be apo­lit­i­cal. The Agency did, after all, fol­low the lead of the New Crit­ics, who exclud­ed all out­side polit­i­cal and social con­sid­er­a­tions from art (so they said).

Influ­en­tial lit­er­ary edi­tors and writ­ing pro­gram direc­tors on the Agency pay­roll made sure to fall in line, pro­mot­ing a cer­tain kind of writ­ing that focused on the indi­vid­ual and ele­vat­ed psy­cho­log­i­cal con­flict over social con­cerns. This influ­ence, writes The Chron­i­cle of High­er Edu­ca­tion, “flat­tened lit­er­a­ture” and set the bound­aries for what was cul­tur­al­ly accept­able. (Still, CIA-fund­ed jour­nals like The Paris Review pub­lished dozens of “polit­i­cal” writ­ers like Richard Wright, Gabriel Gar­cia Mar­quez, and James Bald­win.)

Then there’s the whole busi­ness of Hol­ly­wood film as a source of Pen­ta­gon-fund­ed pro­pa­gan­da, sold as innocu­ous, apo­lit­i­cal enter­tain­ment….

When it comes to jour­nal­ism, an ide­al of objec­tiv­i­ty, like Emerson’s inno­cent, dis­em­bod­ied trans­par­ent eye, became a stan­dard only in the 20th cen­tu­ry, osten­si­bly to weed out polit­i­cal bias. But that ide­al serves the inter­ests of pow­er more often than not. If media rep­re­sents exist­ing pow­er rela­tion­ships with­out ques­tion­ing their legit­i­ma­cy, it can claim objec­tiv­i­ty and bal­ance; if it chal­lenges pow­er, it becomes too “polit­i­cal.”

The adjec­tive is weaponized against art and cul­ture that makes cer­tain peo­ple who have pow­er uncom­fort­able. Say­ing “I don’t like polit­i­cal bs in my cul­ture” is say­ing “I don’t care to know the pol­i­tics are there.”

If, after decades of pump­ing “Killing in the Name,” you final­ly noticed them, then all that’s hap­pened is you’ve final­ly noticed. Cul­ture has always includ­ed the polit­i­cal, whether those pol­i­tics are shaped by mon­archs or state agen­cies or shout­ed in rap met­al songs (just ask Ice‑T) and fought over on Twit­ter. Maybe now it’s just get­ting hard­er to look away.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Pol­i­tics & Phi­los­o­phy of the Bauhaus Design Move­ment: A Short Intro­duc­tion

Hear a 4 Hour Playlist of Great Protest Songs: Bob Dylan, Nina Simone, Bob Mar­ley, Pub­lic Ene­my, Bil­ly Bragg & More

Love the Art, Hate the Artist: How to Approach the Art of Dis­graced Artists

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Daniel Radcliffe Writes a Thoughtful Response to J.K. Rowling’s Statements about Trans Women

Image by Gage Skid­more, via Wiki­me­dia Com­mons

There are many more impor­tant things hap­pen­ing in the world than the tweets of Har­ry Pot­ter author J.K. Rowl­ing, but the tweets of J.K. Rowl­ing are nonethe­less wor­thy of atten­tion, for the sake of fans of the series, many of whom are young and do not under­stand why their par­ents might sud­den­ly be angry with her, or who are very angry with her them­selves. As you have prob­a­bly heard, Rowl­ing has dou­bled and tripled down on state­ments oth­ers have repeat­ed­ly told her are trans­pho­bic, igno­rant, and offen­sive.

What­ev­er you think of her tweets (and if you agree with her, you’re prob­a­bly only read­ing this post to dis­agree with me), they sig­nal a fail­ure of empa­thy and humil­i­ty on Rowling’s part. She could just say noth­ing and try to lis­ten and learn more. Empa­thy does not require that we whol­ly under­stand another’s lived expe­ri­ence. Only that we can imag­ine feel­ing the feel­ings some­one has about it—feelings of mar­gin­al­iza­tion, dis­ap­point­ment, fear, desire for recog­ni­tion and respect, what­ev­er; and that we trust they know more about who they are than we do.

Rowl­ing is nei­ther a trans woman, nor a doc­tor, nor an expert on gen­der iden­ti­ty, a fact that Daniel Rad­cliffe, Har­ry Pot­ter him­self, points out in his response to her:

Trans­gen­der women are women. Any state­ment to the con­trary eras­es the iden­ti­ty and dig­ni­ty of trans­gen­der peo­ple and goes against all advice giv­en by pro­fes­sion­al health care asso­ci­a­tions who have far more exper­tise on this sub­ject mat­ter than either Jo or I. Accord­ing to The Trevor Project, 78% of trans­gen­der and non­bi­na­ry youth report­ed being the sub­ject of dis­crim­i­na­tion due to their gen­der iden­ti­ty. It’s clear that we need to do more to sup­port trans­gen­der and non­bi­na­ry peo­ple, not inval­i­date their iden­ti­ties, and not cause fur­ther harm.

While the author has qual­i­fied her dog­mat­ic state­ments by express­ing sup­port for the trans com­mu­ni­ty and say­ing she has many trans friends, this doesn’t explain why she feels the need to offer unin­formed opin­ions about peo­ple who face very real harm from such rhetoric: who are rou­tine­ly vic­tims of vio­lent hate crimes and are far more like­ly to live in pover­ty and face employ­ment dis­crim­i­na­tion.

Radcliffe’s thought­ful, kind response will get more clicks if it’s sold as “Har­ry Pot­ter Claps Back at J.K. Rowl­ing” or “Har­ry Pot­ter DESTROYS J.K. Rowl­ing” or “Har­ry Pot­ter Bites the Hand that Fed Him” or some­thing, but he wants to make it clear “that is real­ly not what this is about, nor is it what’s impor­tant right now” and that he would­n’t be where he is with­out her. He clos­es with a love­ly mes­sage to the series’ fans, one that might apply to any of our trou­bled rela­tion­ships with an artist and their work:

To all the peo­ple who now feel that their expe­ri­ence of the books has been tar­nished or dimin­ished, I am deeply sor­ry for the pain these com­ments have caused you. I real­ly hope that you don’t entire­ly lose what was valu­able in these sto­ries to you. If these books taught you that love is the strongest force in the uni­verse, capa­ble of over­com­ing any­thing; if they taught you that strength is found in diver­si­ty, and that dog­mat­ic ideas of pure­ness lead to the oppres­sion of vul­ner­a­ble groups; if you believe that a par­tic­u­lar char­ac­ter is trans, non­bi­na­ry, or gen­der flu­id, or that they are gay or bisex­u­al; if you found any­thing in these sto­ries that res­onat­ed with you and helped you at any time in your life — then that is between you and the book that you read, and it is sacred. And in my opin­ion nobody can touch that. It means to you what it means to you and I hope that these com­ments will not taint that too much.

The state­ment was post­ed at the Trevor Project, an orga­ni­za­tion pro­vid­ing “cri­sis inter­ven­tion and sui­cide pre­ven­tion ser­vices to les­bian, gay, bisex­u­al, trans­gen­der, queer & ques­tion­ing (LGBTQ) young peo­ple under 25.” Learn more about resources for young peo­ple who might need men­tal health sup­port at their site.

Update: You can read Rowl­ing’s response, post­ed today here.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

J.K. Rowl­ing Defends Don­ald Trump’s Right to Be “Offen­sive and Big­ot­ed”

J.K. Rowl­ing Is Pub­lish­ing Her New Children’s Nov­el Free Online, One Chap­ter Per Day

Har­ry Pot­ter Final­ly Gets Trans­lat­ed Into Scots: Hear & Read Pas­sages from Har­ry Pot­ter and the Philosopher’s Stane

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

An Anti-Racist Reading List: 20 Books Recommended by Open Culture Readers

You may have received an email from your favorite online retail­er, your boss, uni­ver­si­ty pres­i­dent, or the CEO of your bank: “It has come to our atten­tion that racism is real, and it is real­ly, real­ly bad.” Oppor­tunism is real too, but a sig­nif­i­cant num­ber of indi­vid­u­als seem to have final­ly drawn the same con­clu­sion and feel moral­ly com­pelled to do some­thing about an epi­dem­ic that has—very discriminately—killed tens of thou­sands of black, indige­nous, and peo­ple of col­or in the U.S. through the unequal dis­tri­b­u­tion of med­ical resources, and dozens more at the hands of the police and racist vig­i­lantes. That’s only in the past three months.

But racism isn’t new; the cur­rent con­flict has been on its way for a very long time. How long? Anti-racist schol­ar and activist Ibram X. Ken­di, author of the Nation­al Book Award-Win­ning Stamped from the Begin­ning, would say from the country’s ear­li­est set­tle­ment and enslave­ment of African peo­ple. “For near­ly six cen­turies,” he writes, “antiracist ideas have been pit­ted against two kinds of racist ideas: seg­re­ga­tion­ist and assim­i­la­tion­ist,” Ken­di wrote dur­ing the protests in Fer­gu­son and oth­er U.S. cities. At the time, antiracists were large­ly char­ac­ter­ized in main­stream media as fringe agi­ta­tors, naïve Gen‑Z neo­phytes, and pos­si­ble for­eign agents, not “real Amer­i­cans.”

How things have changed in six years. Antiracism has become a default posi­tion, all of a sud­den, for per­haps the first time in U.S. his­to­ry, so much so that every com­pa­ny and insti­tu­tion has issued some sort of state­ment in sup­port of Black Lives Mat­ter, and every­one is col­lect­ing and shar­ing Anti-Racist Read­ing Lists, near­ly all of which con­tain Kendi’s fol­low-up book, last year’s How to Be an Anti-Racist (which he dis­cuss­es above with Brené Brown). How long this will last is any­one’s guess, but it is with­out a doubt a cul­tur­al sea change a long time in the mak­ing.

Ken­di and White Fragili­ty author Robin DiAn­ge­lo are the “mac dad­dies of the bunch” of recent antiracist authors, Lau­ren Michele Jack­son writes at Vul­ture, and it’s become a crowd­ed field as more and more Amer­i­cans attempt to come to grips with a nation­al his­to­ry many of them are learn­ing for the first time. As Ken­di and Pulitzer Prize-win­ning jour­nal­ist Nikole Han­nah-Jones, cre­ator of the 1619 project, dis­cuss on Chris Hayes’ pod­cast at the top, the country’s past as it is taught to us and as it hap­pened are two entire­ly dif­fer­ent things. Antiracism has always rec­og­nized the vicious, cease­less mur­der, dis­en­fran­chise­ment, and ran­sack­ing of black and brown peo­ple, and has pushed against the nar­ra­tives that deny or excuse these acts.

Car­ol Ander­son, author of White Rage, has giv­en us one of the most raw, com­pelling, and exhaus­tive­ly researched accounts of the vio­lence of Recon­struc­tion and the lynch­ings of the ear­ly 20th cen­tu­ry. Above, she links the mur­der of 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery and recent police killings to the shock­ing­ly bru­tal racism that fol­lowed the Civ­il War. Anderson’s book also rou­tine­ly appears on sug­gest­ed read­ing lists, and well it should. All of these schol­ars and authors have pro­duced acces­si­ble work full of his­to­ries one might pre­vi­ous­ly have only encoun­tered in grad­u­ate-lev­el col­lege and uni­ver­si­ty cours­es. It is essen­tial infor­ma­tion for peo­ple com­mit­ted to over­turn­ing racist sys­tems, which is exact­ly why it has been left out of the text­books.

For all the urgency of edu­ca­tion, the anti-racist book­list is an ambigu­ous kind of cur­ren­cy. Jack­son won­ders what func­tion it serves, exact­ly. Read­ing lists can be an eru­dite brush-off, a polite way of say­ing, “go away and read a book.” They can be a way to sig­nal mas­tery and work for online mer­it badges rather than real ben­e­fi­cial action. They can “feel good to solic­it, good to mete out, but some­one at some point has to get down to the busi­ness of read­ing. And there, between giv­ing and receiv­ing, lies a great gulf. No one can quite account for what hap­pens. Read­ing, hope­ful­ly, but you nev­er can be sure.”

Jackson’s cri­tique of the anti-racist read­ing list is worth read­ing before engag­ing with lists of books, recent and his­tor­i­cal, that oppose racist ideas, poli­cies, and sys­tems. What are we look­ing for in such lists? And can we real­ly make good use of them? She makes a case for why fic­tion, poet­ry, and dra­ma should not appear, since they deserve the sta­tus of art, not as instru­men­tal works of social change. “It is unfair,” Jack­son writes, “to beg oth­er lit­er­a­ture and oth­er authors, many of them dead, to do this sort of work for some­one,” when the work they set out to do is pri­mar­i­ly cre­ative. Ignor­ing genre “rein­forces an already per­ni­cious lit­er­ary divide that books writ­ten by or about minori­ties are for edu­ca­tion­al pur­pos­es” only.

Despite many poten­tial blind spots, despite the fact that “our cus­tom­ar­i­ly wan atten­tion spans have been dec­i­mat­ed” by pan­dem­ic and protest, the read­ing “has to get done,” Jack­son weari­ly admits. Anti-racist book­lists must cir­cu­late. And read­ers must make crit­i­cal judg­ments about which books to read and what to take away from them, since we’re giv­en the equiv­a­lent of a syl­labus with­out a class or an instruc­tor. We trust that our read­ers can find their way and will make a good faith effort to do the read­ing. There won’t be a grad­ed exam; the test is far more con­se­quen­tial than that.

We solicit­ed an anti-racist read­ing list on Twit­ter and chose the books below sub­mit­ted by our read­ers. Since there’s no such thing as a defin­i­tive list, and dif­fer­ent kinds of read­ers have dif­fer­ent needs, we include oth­er col­lec­tions of read­ings lists here, includ­ing “41 Children’s Books to Sup­port Con­ver­sa­tions on Race, Racism, and Resis­tance.” You’ll find an anti-racist read­ing list on Twit­ter, here, com­piled by doc­tor­al researcher Vic­to­ria Alexan­der, and a list on LinkedIn enti­tled “Why White Peo­ple Stay Silent on Racism, and What to Read First,” from orga­ni­za­tion­al psy­chol­o­gist Adam Grant.

If this is over­whelm­ing but you feel you must start to engage with the his­to­ry and the­o­ry of anti-racism, don’t despair or buy a pile of books you know you can’t read right now. All of the most promi­nent anti-racist authors have been in high demand for inter­views. “There are snap­pi­er places to glean the long-sto­ry-short of Amer­i­ca, like pod­casts, if it took some­one this long to care,” writes Jack­son, or if, like so many mil­lions of oth­er stressed out, angry, griev­ing, out-of-work Amer­i­cans, you’re sim­ply too burned out to crack anoth­er book. But if you’re will­ing and able to dig in, see our read­er-sub­mit­ted list below and sug­gest oth­er titles you’d rec­om­mend in the com­ments. If you pre­fer audio­books, many of these texts also exist as audio­books on Audi­ble. Get details on Audi­ble’s free tri­al here.

Between the World and Me—Ta-Nehisi Coates: Hailed by Toni Mor­ri­son as “required read­ing,” a bold and per­son­al lit­er­ary explo­ration of America’s racial his­to­ry by “the most impor­tant essay­ist in a gen­er­a­tion and a writer who changed the nation­al polit­i­cal con­ver­sa­tion about race” (Rolling Stone)

Biased: Uncov­er­ing the Hid­den Prej­u­dice That Shapes What We See, Think, and Do—Jen­nifer L. Eber­hardt PhD: How do we talk about bias? How do we address racial dis­par­i­ties and inequities? What role do our insti­tu­tions play in cre­at­ing, main­tain­ing, and mag­ni­fy­ing those inequities? What role do we play? With a per­spec­tive that is at once sci­en­tif­ic, inves­tiga­tive, and informed by per­son­al expe­ri­ence, Dr. Jen­nifer Eber­hardt offers us the lan­guage and courage we need to face one of the biggest and most trou­bling issues of our time. She expos­es racial bias at all lev­els of society—in our neigh­bor­hoods, schools, work­places, and crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem. Yet she also offers us tools to address it.

Black Like Me—John Howard Grif­fin: The his­to­ry-mak­ing clas­sic about cross­ing the line in Amer­i­ca’s seg­re­gat­ed south. The Atlanta Jour­nal & Con­sti­tu­tion calls it “One of the deep­est, most pen­e­trat­ing doc­u­ments yet set down on the racial ques­tion.”

How To Be An Antiracist — Ibram X. Ken­di: “What do you do after you have writ­ten Stamped From the Begin­ning, an award-win­ning his­to­ry of racist ideas? … If you’re Ibram X. Ken­di, you craft anoth­er stun­ner of a book.… What emerges from these insights is the most coura­geous book to date on the prob­lem of race in the West­ern mind, a con­fes­sion­al of self-exam­i­na­tion that may, in fact, be our best chance to free our­selves from our nation­al nightmare.”—The New York Times

I Can’t Breathe: A Killing on Bay Street—Matt Tiab­bi: A work of riv­et­ing lit­er­ary jour­nal­ism that explores the roots and reper­cus­sions of the infa­mous killing of Eric Gar­ner by the New York City police.

Just Mer­cy: A Sto­ry of Jus­tice and Redemp­tion—Bryan Steven­son: “Every bit as mov­ing as To Kill a Mock­ing­bird, and in some ways more so … a sear­ing indict­ment of Amer­i­can crim­i­nal jus­tice and a stir­ring tes­ta­ment to the sal­va­tion that fight­ing for the vul­ner­a­ble some­times yields.”—David Cole, The New York Review of Books

On the Cour­t­house Lawn: Con­fronting the Lega­cy of Lynch­ing in the Twen­ty-First Cen­tu­ry—Sher­ri­lyn A. Ifill: “This path­break­ing book by Sher­ri­lyn Ifill shows how the ugli­est mes­sages from our racial his­to­ry and pol­i­tics can hide open­ly in the pub­lic square. Her unflinch­ing mem­o­ry restores hope for the com­mon good.”—Taylor Branch, Pulitzer Prize–winning author of Part­ing the Waters

So You Want to Talk About Race—Ijeo­ma Oluo: “Ijeo­ma Olu­o’s [book] is a wel­come gift to us all — a crit­i­cal offer­ing dur­ing a moment when the hard work of social trans­for­ma­tion is ham­pered by the inabil­i­ty of any­one who ben­e­fits from sys­temic racism to reck­on with its costs. Olu­o’s man­date is clear and pow­er­ful: change will not come unless we are brave enough to name and remove the many forces at work stran­gling free­dom. Racial suprema­cy is but one of those forces.” ―Dar­nell L. Moore, author of No Ash­es in the Fire

Stamped from the Begin­ning: The Defin­i­tive His­to­ry of Racist Ideas in Amer­i­ca—Ibram X. Ken­di: The Nation­al Book Award win­ning his­to­ry of how racist ideas were cre­at­ed, spread, and deeply root­ed in Amer­i­can soci­ety. In this deeply researched and fast-mov­ing nar­ra­tive, Ken­di chron­i­cles the entire sto­ry of anti-black racist ideas and their stag­ger­ing pow­er over the course of Amer­i­can his­to­ry. He uses the life sto­ries of five major Amer­i­can intel­lec­tu­als to dri­ve this his­to­ry: Puri­tan min­is­ter Cot­ton Math­er, Thomas Jef­fer­son, abo­li­tion­ist William Lloyd Gar­ri­son, W.E.B. Du Bois, and leg­endary activist Angela Davis.

Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You—Jason Reynolds and Ibram X. Ken­di: “Read­ers who want to tru­ly under­stand how deeply embed­ded racism is in the very fab­ric of the U.S., its his­to­ry, and its sys­tems will come away edu­cat­ed and enlight­ened. Wor­thy of inclu­sion in every home and in cur­ric­u­la and libraries every­where. Impres­sive and much need­ed.” ―Kirkus

Sun­down Towns—James Loewen: In this ground­break­ing work, soci­ol­o­gist James W. Loewen brings to light decades of hid­den racial exclu­sion in Amer­i­ca. In a sweep­ing analy­sis of Amer­i­can res­i­den­tial pat­terns, Loewen uncov­ers the thou­sands of “sun­down towns”—almost exclu­sive­ly white towns where it was an unspo­ken rule that blacks weren’t welcome—that cropped up through­out the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry, most of them locat­ed out­side of the South.

The Auto­bi­og­ra­phy of Mal­colm X: As Told to Alex Haley: In the sear­ing pages of this clas­sic 1964 auto­bi­og­ra­phy, Mal­colm X out­lines the lies and lim­i­ta­tions of the Amer­i­can Dream, along with the inher­ent racism in a soci­ety that denies its non­white cit­i­zens the oppor­tu­ni­ty to dream.

The Col­or of Law—Richard Roth­stein: Roth­stein argues with exact­ing pre­ci­sion and fas­ci­nat­ing insight how seg­re­ga­tion in America—the inces­sant kind that con­tin­ues to dog our major cities and has con­tributed to so much recent social strife—is the byprod­uct of explic­it gov­ern­ment poli­cies at the local, state, and fed­er­al lev­els.

The Fire Next Time—James Bald­win: “Bald­win’s best­seller from 1963, which com­mem­o­rat­ed the cen­ten­ni­al of the sign­ing of the Eman­ci­pa­tion Procla­ma­tion, still res­onates pow­er­ful­ly today. The late author’s book con­sists of two essays that exam­ine racial injus­tice in Amer­i­ca, includ­ing his own expe­ri­ence grow­ing up as a black teenag­er in Harlem.”

The New Jim Crow: Mass Incar­cer­a­tion in the Age of Col­or­blind­ness —Michelle Alexan­der: The New Jim Crow “took the acad­e­my and the streets by storm, and forced the nation to recon­sid­er the sys­tems that allowed for bla­tant discrimination.”—The Chron­i­cle of High­er Edu­ca­tion

The Oth­er by Wes Moore: “This is a fas­ci­nat­ing book about two young men from Bal­ti­more with the same name. One, the author, became a Rhodes Schol­ar while the oth­er land­ed in jail. It’s as much a med­i­ta­tion on cir­cum­stance and luck as it is a com­men­tary on how suc­cess­ful our soci­ety is in man­ag­ing those who are on the precipice, both social­ly and eco­nom­i­cal­ly.”

The Per­son You Mean to Be: How Good Peo­ple Fight Bias—Dol­ly Chugh: An inspir­ing guide from Dol­ly Chugh, an award-win­ning social psy­chol­o­gist at the New York Uni­ver­si­ty Stern School of Busi­ness, on how to con­front dif­fi­cult issues includ­ing sex­ism, racism, inequal­i­ty, and injus­tice so that you can make the world (and your­self) bet­ter.

The Warmth of Oth­er Suns—Isabel Wilk­er­son: In this epic, beau­ti­ful­ly writ­ten mas­ter­work, Pulitzer Prize–winning author Isabel Wilk­er­son chron­i­cles one of the great untold sto­ries of Amer­i­can his­to­ry: the decades-long migra­tion of black cit­i­zens who fled the South for north­ern and west­ern cities, in search of a bet­ter life.

White Fragili­ty: Why It’s So Hard for White Peo­ple to Talk About Racism—Robin DiAn­ge­lo: The New York Times best-sell­ing book explor­ing the coun­ter­pro­duc­tive reac­tions white peo­ple have when their assump­tions about race are chal­lenged, and how these reac­tions main­tain racial inequal­i­ty.

White Rage—Car­ol Ander­son: “White Rage is a riv­et­ing and dis­turb­ing his­to­ry that begins with Recon­struc­tion and lays bare the efforts of whites in the South and North alike to pre­vent eman­ci­pat­ed black peo­ple from achiev­ing eco­nom­ic inde­pen­dence, civ­il and polit­i­cal rights, per­son­al safe­ty, and eco­nom­ic oppor­tu­ni­ty.” — The Nation

Why Are All the Black Kids Sit­ting Togeth­er in the Cafe­te­ria?—Bev­er­ly Daniel Tatum: Walk into any racial­ly mixed high school and you will see Black, White, and Lati­no youth clus­tered in their own groups. Is this self-seg­re­ga­tion a prob­lem to address or a cop­ing strat­e­gy? Bev­er­ly Daniel Tatum, a renowned author­i­ty on the psy­chol­o­gy of racism, argues that straight talk about our racial iden­ti­ties is essen­tial if we are seri­ous about enabling com­mu­ni­ca­tion across racial and eth­nic divides. This ful­ly revised edi­tion is essen­tial read­ing for any­one seek­ing to under­stand the dynam­ics of race in Amer­i­ca.

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

Noam Chom­sky Explains the Best Way for Ordi­nary Peo­ple to Make Change in the World, Even When It Seems Daunt­ing

Watch Ava DuVernay’s 13th Free Online: An Award-Win­ning Doc­u­men­tary Reveal­ing the Inequal­i­ties in the US Crim­i­nal Jus­tice Sys­tem

Albert Ein­stein Explains How Slav­ery Has Crip­pled Everyone’s Abil­i­ty to Think Clear­ly About Racism

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast