Why James Baldwin’s Writing Stays Powerful: An Artfully Animated Introduction to the Author of Notes of a Native Son

Every writer hopes to be sur­vived by his work. In the case of James Bald­win, the 32 years since his death seem only to have increased the rel­e­vance of the writ­ing he left behind. Con­sist­ing of nov­els, essays, and even a chil­dren’s book, Bald­win’s body of work offers dif­fer­ent points of entry to dif­fer­ent read­ers. Many begin with with Go Tell it on the Moun­tain, the semi-auto­bi­o­graph­i­cal debut nov­el in which he mounts a cri­tique of the Pen­te­costal Church. Oth­ers may find their gate­way in Bald­win’s fic­tion­al treat­ment of desire and love under adverse cir­cum­stances: among men in Paris in Gio­van­ni’s Room, for exam­ple, or teenagers in Mem­phis in If Beale Street Could Talk. But unlike most nov­el­ists, Bald­win’s name con­tin­ues to draw just as many acco­lades — if not more of them — for his non­fic­tion.

Those look­ing to read Bald­win’s essays would do well to start with his first col­lec­tion of them, 1955’s Notes of a Native Son. In assem­bling pieces he orig­i­nal­ly pub­lished in mag­a­zines like Harper’s and the Par­ti­san Review, the book reflects the impor­tance to the young Bald­win of what would become the major themes of his career, like race and expa­tri­ate life.

Though res­i­dent at dif­fer­ent times in Turkey, Switzer­land, and (right up until his dying day) France, he nev­er took his eyes off his home­land of the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca for long. Nor, in fact, did the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca take its eyes off him. “Over the course of the 1960s,” says Ford­ham Uni­ver­si­ty polit­i­cal sci­ence pro­fes­sor Christi­na Greer in the ani­mat­ed TED-Ed intro­duc­tion to Bald­win above, “the FBI amassed almost 2,000 doc­u­ments” as they inves­ti­gat­ed his back­ground and activ­i­ties.

That the U.S. gov­ern­ment saw Bald­win as so polit­i­cal­ly dan­ger­ous is rea­son enough to read his books. But as one of Amer­i­ca’s most promi­nent men of let­ters, he could hard­ly be writ­ten off as a sim­ple fire­brand. Though known for his inci­sive views of white and black Amer­i­ca, he believed that every­one, what­ev­er their race, “was inex­tri­ca­bly enmeshed in the same social fab­ric,” that “peo­ple are trapped in his­to­ry, and his­to­ry is trapped in them.” As he found recep­tive audi­ences for his argu­ments in print and on tele­vi­sion, “his fac­ul­ty with words led the FBI to view him as a threat.” But that very fac­ul­ty with words — insep­a­ra­ble, as in all the great­est essay­ists, from the astute­ness of the per­cep­tions they express — has assured him a still-grow­ing read­er­ship in the 21st cen­tu­ry. Con­tend­ing with the most volatile social and polit­i­cal issues of his time cer­tain­ly did­n’t low­er Bald­win’s pro­file, but any giv­en page of his prose sug­gests that what­ev­er he’d cho­sen to write about, we’d still be read­ing him today.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Great Cul­tur­al Icons Talk Civ­il Rights: James Bald­win, Mar­lon Bran­do, Har­ry Bela­fonte & Sid­ney Poiti­er (1963)

James Bald­win Bests William F. Buck­ley in 1965 Debate at Cam­bridge Uni­ver­si­ty

James Baldwin’s One & Only, Delight­ful­ly Illus­trat­ed Children’s Book, Lit­tle Man Lit­tle Man: A Sto­ry of Child­hood (1976)

James Bald­win: Wit­ty, Fiery in Berke­ley, 1979

Chris Rock Reads James Baldwin’s Still Time­ly Let­ter on Race in Amer­i­ca: “We Can Make What Amer­i­ca Must Become”

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.

David Lynch Posts His Nightmarish Sitcom Rabbits Online–the Show That Psychologists Use to Induce a Sense of Existential Crisis in Research Subjects

If recent world events feel to you like an exis­ten­tial cri­sis, you may find your­self brows­ing Youtube for calm­ing view­ing mate­r­i­al. But there’s also some­thing to be said for fight­ing fire with fire, so why not plunge straight into the dread and pan­ic with David Lynch’s sit­com Rab­bits? Set “in a name­less city del­uged by a con­tin­u­ous rain” where a fam­i­ly of three humanoid rab­bits live “with a fear­ful mys­tery,” the eight-episode web series has, as we’ve pre­vi­ous­ly men­tioned here on Open Cul­turebeen used by Uni­ver­si­ty of British Colum­bia psy­chol­o­gists to induce a sense of exis­ten­tial cri­sis in research sub­jects. Hav­ing orig­i­nal­ly shot it on a set in his back­yard in 2002 (and incor­po­rat­ed pieces of it into his 2006 fea­ture Inland Empire), Lynch has just begun mak­ing Rab­bits avail­able again on Youtube.

The first episode of Rab­bits went up yes­ter­day on David Lynch The­ater, the offi­cial Youtube chan­nel of the man who direct­ed Eraser­headBlue Vel­vetMul­hol­land Dri­ve, and oth­er such pieces of Lynchi­an cin­e­ma. Though he has­n’t made a fea­ture film in quite some time, he’s kept busy, as his fre­quent uploads have doc­u­ment­ed: take his 2015 ani­mat­ed short Fire (Pozar), which we fea­tured last month, or his dai­ly Los Ange­les weath­er reports.

More recent­ly, Lynch has been post­ing short videos called “What Is David Work­ing on Today?” These offer just what their title promis­es: a look at such art projects as and craft projects as “a drain spout for the bot­tom of my wood­en sink,” the “swing-out uri­nal” installed, and most recent­ly “the incred­i­ble check­ing stick.”

This might at first sound dispir­it­ing­ly nor­mal — at least until you get to how the check­ing stick is sup­posed to work — but those who have long enjoyed Lynch’s films know that nor­mal­i­ty is what gives them pow­er. David Fos­ter Wal­lace described the “Lynchi­an” as “a par­tic­u­lar kind of irony where the very macabre and the very mun­dane com­bine in such a way as to reveal the for­mer’s per­pet­u­al con­tain­ment with­in the lat­ter.” There is, of course, noth­ing macabre (and often noth­ing mun­dane) about the wood­en objects Lynch builds and repairs in his work­shop these days. But Rab­bits, too, was also one of his home­made projects, and its “sto­ry of mod­ern life,” as Lynch called it on Twit­ter, still makes for a har­row­ing­ly mun­dane view­ing expe­ri­ence.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

David Lynch Made a Dis­turb­ing Web Sit­com Called “Rab­bits”: It’s Now Used by Psy­chol­o­gists to Induce a Sense of Exis­ten­tial Cri­sis in Research Sub­jects

David Lynch Cre­ates Dai­ly Weath­er Reports for Los Ange­les: How the Film­mak­er Pass­es Time in Quar­an­tine

David Lynch Releas­es an Ani­mat­ed Film Online: Watch Fire (Pozar)

What Makes a David Lynch Film Lynchi­an: A Video Essay

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.

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

Is This the Most Accurate Fan Cover of the Beatles Ever? Hear a Faithful Recreation of the Abbey Road Medley

I once thought I might be from the last gen­er­a­tion to have spent a good part of their youth in front of a pair of speak­ers, play­ing their par­ents’ Bea­t­les records until they mem­o­rized every note. Abbey Road was a spe­cial favorite in our house. I must have heard the out­ro med­ley a hun­dred thou­sand times or more. Now that reis­sue vinyl is every­where, or some­thing resem­bling the orig­i­nal records, there are loads of peo­ple who can say the same thing—and loads more who have streamed Abbey Road on repeat until it’s seared into their mem­o­ries.

I ask those peo­ple now, young and old and mid­dle-aged, whose famil­iar­i­ty with Paul McCartney’s voice on “Gold­en Slumbers/Carry that Weight/The End” comes from this kind of obses­sive lis­ten­ing: do you think the cov­er ver­sion above post­ed on YouTube by Andy­Boy 63 sounds exact­ly like the record­ing made at EMI Stu­dios (renamed Abbey Road after the album) in 1969? Answer before lis­ten­ing to the orig­i­nal “Gold­en Slum­bers,” below. A fair num­ber of YouTube com­menters say they mis­took this for the album ver­sion or an out­take.

DUDE I THOUGHT I WAS LISTENING TO THE REAL THING I DIDNT REALIZE IT WAS A COVER!!! YOU SOUND JUST LIKE PAULIE

By far the most accu­rate cov­er ever of any song.

I thought this was the Bea­t­les for about three min­utes.… I knew it was­n’t Abbey Road but thought it was some track off the anthol­o­gy. This is good enough to make me think it’s actu­al­ly the Bea­t­les!

It sounds to me like a cov­er ver­sion that approx­i­mates the tim­bre of dynam­ics of the orig­i­nal, impres­sive­ly so, but is also clear­ly not The Bea­t­les.

We can hear the dif­fer­ences between Sir Paul’s voice and piano and Andy’s record­ing in the first few phras­es, but it’s not as if Andy has set out to deceive lis­ten­ers, mark­ing the songs as cov­ers in the descrip­tion. His inten­tion is to pay trib­ute. “As a child,” he writes on his YouTube chan­nel, “I always want­ed to learn to play gui­tar, bass, drums and piano so that I could play and sing my favourite Bea­t­les songs.” You’ll find sev­er­al more, includ­ing “Sgt. Pepper’s Lone­ly Hearts Club Band/With a Lit­tle Help from My Friends,” just above. Again, it sounds to me like a faith­ful­ly earnest cov­er cre­at­ed as a labor of love. And again, for many rea­sons, not the Bea­t­les. (His cov­er of “Help!” on the oth­er hand is scar­i­ly good. I think he does a bet­ter Lennon impres­sion.)

You’ve got to hand it to Andy for tak­ing his fan­dom to this lev­el of imi­ta­tion. The sin­cer­est form of flat­tery may not pro­duce the best cov­er ver­sion, but it is an excel­lent way to show off one’s musi­cian­ship. Still, no one does McCart­ney bet­ter than McCart­ney (see him play him­self below).

Oth­er artists play­ing his songs might sound best doing it as them­selves. But as an exer­cise in stu­dious recre­ation of Bea­t­les arrange­ments, Andy­Boy 63’s proves he’s even more of a fan than those who can hum every bar of Abbey Road with­out miss­ing a note. While we war­ble “Here Comes the Sun” in the show­er, he’s sin­gle-hand­ed­ly, per­sua­sive­ly rere­cord­ed some of The Bea­t­les’ most famous songs. He’s also cov­ered Lennon’s solo hits and songs by Bud­dy Hol­ly and Elvis, as well as releas­ing orig­i­nal music. Check it out here.

And for an absolute­ly fab ver­sion of the Abbey Road med­ley, watch the Fab Faux’s pret­ty impec­ca­ble ver­sion right below.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Paul McCartney’s Con­cep­tu­al Draw­ings For the Abbey Road Cov­er and Mag­i­cal Mys­tery Tour Film

Bea­t­les Trib­ute Band “The Fab Faux” Per­forms Live an Amaz­ing­ly Exact Repli­ca of the Orig­i­nal Abbey Road Med­ley

Hear 100 Amaz­ing Cov­er Ver­sions of Bea­t­les Songs

209 Bea­t­les Songs in 209 Days: Mem­phis Musi­cian Cov­ers The Bea­t­les’ Song­book

The Band Every­one Thought Was The Bea­t­les: Revis­it the Klaatu Con­spir­a­cy of 1976

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

Are There Limits for a Sitcom Premise? A Pretty Much Pop Culture Podcast (#47) Discussion and Quiz

Sit­coms pro­vide a form of escapism that does­n’t take one to a mag­i­cal world of pos­si­bil­i­ty, but instead to a basi­cal­ly unchang­ing, cozy envi­ron­ment with relat­able char­ac­ters engaged in low-stakes con­flicts.

So what are the lim­its on the type of premise that can ground a sit­com? While most of the longest last­ing sit­coms have sim­ple set-ups involv­ing friends or co-work­ers, stream­ing has led to more seri­al­iza­tion and hence wider plot pos­si­bil­i­ties.

Does this mean that the era of sit­coms has come to an end? Or has the genre just broad­ened to admit entries like Ricky Ger­vais’ After Life and Derek, Har­mon & Roi­land’s Rick & Morty, Greg Daniels’ Upload and Space Force, and Arman­do Ian­nuc­ci’s Avenue 5?

In this low-stakes, feel-good dis­cus­sion, Mark, Eri­ca, and Bri­an also touch on the Parks & Recre­ation reunion spe­cial, Curb Your Enthu­si­asm, It’s Always Sun­ny in Philadel­phia, Com­mu­ni­ty, Mod­ern Fam­i­ly, Red Oaks, The Simp­sons, Last Man on Earth, WOOPS!, the stain of Chuck Lorre, and more. Plus a quiz to guess which weird sit­com premis­es are real and which Mark made up.

Incor­po­rate these arti­cles into your sit­u­a­tion:

If you enjoy this dis­cus­sion, check out our pre­vi­ous episodes on Friends and The Good Place.

Learn more at prettymuchpop.com. This episode includes bonus dis­cus­sion that you can only hear by sup­port­ing the pod­cast at patreon.com/prettymuchpop. This pod­cast is part of the Par­tial­ly Exam­ined Life pod­cast net­work.

Pret­ty Much Pop: A Cul­ture Pod­cast is the first pod­cast curat­ed by Open Cul­ture. Browse all Pret­ty Much Pop posts or start with the first episode.

Al Jaffee, Iconic Mad Magazine Cartoonist, Retires at Age 99 … and Leaves Behind Advice About Living the Creative Life

Apart from Alfred E. Neu­man, there is no Al more close­ly iden­ti­fied with Mad mag­a­zine than Al Jaf­fee. Born in 1921, he was around for more than 30 years before the launch of that satir­i­cal mag­a­zine turned Amer­i­can cul­tur­al phe­nom­e­non — and now, at age 99, he’s on track to out­live it. Just this week, the longest-work­ing car­toon­ist in his­to­ry and inven­tor of the Fold-In announced his retire­ment, and “to mark his farewell,” writes the Wash­ing­ton Post’s Michael Cav­na, “Mad’s ‘Usu­al Gang of Idiots’ will salute Jaf­fee with a trib­ute issue next week. It will be the magazine’s final reg­u­lar issue to offer new mate­r­i­al, includ­ing Jaffee’s final Fold-In, 65 years after he made his Mad debut.”

Over these past six and a half decades, Jaf­fee has drawn praise for his wit and ver­sa­til­i­ty. But all through­out his career, he’s also man­aged to com­bine those qual­i­ties with seem­ing­ly unstop­pable pro­duc­tiv­i­ty. “I am essen­tial­ly a com­mer­cial artist,” Jaf­fee says in this brief two-part inter­view from OnCre­ativ­i­ty. “I will not try to save time, ever, on my work by going through it quick­ly and just get­ting it done. I have to be as sat­is­fied with it as the per­son who’s going to buy it from me.”

When an assign­ment comes in, he con­tin­ues, “I will not deliv­er it until I am sat­is­fied that I would buy it.” This requires a clear under­stand­ing of the clien­t’s needs — “you are there to solve their prob­lems,” he empha­sizes — as well as the will­ing­ness to turn down not-quite-suit­able jobs.

Of course Jaf­fee said all this in his younger days, back when he was only 96. Per­haps it isn’t sur­pris­ing that a man in his hun­dredth year would decide to step back from his worka­day sched­ule (his Fold-Ins alone num­ber near­ly 500) and focus on the projects from which com­mer­cial exi­gen­cies might have dis­tract­ed him. “I do fine art for my own amuse­ment,” he say in this inter­view. “We should all feel free to amuse our­selves that way and just hang every­thing we do up on the refrig­er­a­tor.” But he also express­es the wish to “cre­ate a cou­ple more things before I kick the buck­et.” This after, as he puts it to Cav­na, “liv­ing the life I want­ed all along, which was to make peo­ple think and laugh.” Now Jaf­fee’s younger read­ers have the chance to think hard and laugh hard­er as they catch up on era upon era of his past work — not that, strict­ly speak­ing, he has any old­er read­ers.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Al Jaf­fee, the Longest Work­ing Car­toon­ist in His­to­ry, Shows How He Invent­ed the Icon­ic “Folds-Ins” for Mad Mag­a­zine

Every Cov­er of Mad Mag­a­zine, from 1952 to the Present: Behold 553 Cov­ers from the Satir­i­cal Pub­li­ca­tion

A Gallery of Mad Magazine’s Rol­lick­ing Fake Adver­tise­ments from the 1960s

When Mad Mag­a­zine Ruf­fled the Feath­ers of the FBI, Not Once But Three Times

Watch Mad Magazine’s Edgy, Nev­er-Aired TV Spe­cial (1974)

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.

How the “First Photojournalist,” Mathew Brady, Shocked the Nation with Photos from the Civil War

In her 1938 essay “Three Guineas,” Vir­ginia Woolf won­dered “whether when we look at the same pho­tographs we feel the same things.” Woolf half-hoped that gris­ly images of the dead from the Span­ish Civ­il War might help put an end to the spread­ing glob­al con­flict. She rec­og­nized, writes Susan Son­tag in Regard­ing the Pain of Oth­ers, photography’s abil­i­ty “to viv­i­fy the con­dem­na­tion of war” and to “bring home, for a spell, a por­tion of its real­i­ty to those who have no expe­ri­ence of war at all.”

Math­ew Brady, the man cred­it­ed as the “father of pho­to­jour­nal­ism,” had no such lofty ambi­tions at the begin­ning of the Civ­il War. At first, he offered to pho­to­graph sol­diers before they left for the bat­tle­field, to pre­serve their pre-war image for pos­ter­i­ty should they not return. (He cyn­i­cal­ly adver­tised his ser­vices with the line, “You can­not tell how soon it may be too late.”) Brady was already a suc­cess­ful pho­tog­ra­ph­er and had tak­en por­traits of Abra­ham Lin­coln, Andrew Jack­son, Daniel Web­ster, and Edgar Allan Poe.

Hav­ing stud­ied under Samuel Morse, who brought the daguerreo­type tech­nique to the U.S., Brady opened his first stu­dio in New York in 1844 and became high­ly sought after. He might have safe­ly wait­ed out the war in the city, oper­at­ing a thriv­ing busi­ness, but, as he remem­bered lat­er, “I had to go. A spir­it in my feet said ‘Go,’ and I went.” Brady took his peti­tion all the way to Lin­coln, who approved it on the con­di­tion that Brady finance the doc­u­men­ta­tion him­self. “At his own expense,” notes the Amer­i­can Bat­tle­field Trust, “he orga­nized a group of pho­tog­ra­phers and staff to fol­low the troops as the first field-pho­tog­ra­phers.”

Soon after, “in 1862, Brady shocked the nation when he dis­played the first pho­tographs of the car­nage of the war in his New York Stu­dio in an exhib­it enti­tled ‘The Dead of Anti­etam.’ These images, pho­tographed by Alexan­der Gard­ner and James F. Gib­son, were the first to pic­ture a bat­tle­field before the dead had been removed and the first to be dis­trib­uted to a mass pub­lic.” The New York Times respond­ed as Woolf would sev­en­ty-six years lat­er, writ­ing of the pho­tos:

Mr. Brady has done some­thing to bring home to us the ter­ri­ble real­i­ty and earnest­ness of war. If he has not brought bod­ies and laid them in our door-yards and along the streets, he has done some­thing very like it.

Shocked the nation may have been, but the war dragged on three more years. Brady and his team not only pho­tographed the dead—they cap­tured every­thing from hot-air bal­loons to pon­toon bridges to breast­works to win­ter huts and wag­on trains. Brady went bank­rupt fund­ing the mak­ing of over 10,000 plates, many of them har­row­ing depic­tions of the war’s bru­tal­i­ty, before the U.S. gov­ern­ment final­ly bought them for $25,000.

The Pub­lic Domain Review has anoth­er har­row­ing col­lec­tion of Brady’s daguerreo­types—por­traits he took before the war that have decayed and dis­tort­ed, as have a great many of Brady’s pho­tos of the war dead. These images “were extreme­ly sen­si­tive to scratch­es, dust, hair, etc, and par­tic­u­lar­ly the rub­bing of the glass cov­er if they glue hold­ing it in place dete­ri­o­rat­ed.” Despite pho­tog­ra­phers’ promis­es to the con­trary, “this fix­ing” of the image for pos­ter­i­ty “was far from per­ma­nent.” See more of Brady’s Civ­il War pho­tographs at the Nation­al Archives.

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

The His­to­ry of the U.S. Civ­il War Visu­al­ized Month by Month and State by State, in an Info­graph­ic from 1897

Eerie 19th Cen­tu­ry Pho­tographs of Ghosts: See Images from the Long, Strange Tra­di­tion of “Spir­it Pho­tog­ra­phy”

The Civ­il War & Recon­struc­tion: A Free Course from Yale Uni­ver­si­ty

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

Imagining the Martin Luther King and Malcolm X Debate That Never Happened

Amer­i­can his­to­ry as it’s usu­al­ly taught likes to focus on rival­ries, and there are many involv­ing big per­son­al­i­ties and major his­tor­i­cal stakes. Abra­ham Lin­coln and Stephen Dou­glas, Thomas Jef­fer­son and Alexan­der Hamil­ton, W.E.B. DuBois and Book­er T. Wash­ing­ton. These fig­ures are set up to rep­re­sent the “both sides” we expect of every polit­i­cal ques­tion. While the issues are over­sim­pli­fied (there are always more than two sides and pol­i­tics isn’t a sport) the fig­ures in ques­tion gen­uine­ly rep­re­sent­ed very dif­fer­ent per­spec­tives on pow­er and progress.

When it comes to the his­to­ry of the Civ­il Rights move­ment, we are giv­en anoth­er such rival­ry, between Mar­tin Luther King, Jr. and Mal­colm X. Their ideas and influ­ence are pit­ted against each oth­er as though they had shared a debate stage. In fact, the two lead­ers met only once, dur­ing Sen­ate debates on the Civ­il Rights Act of 1964. “King was step­ping out of a news con­fer­ence,” writes DeNeen L. Brown at The Wash­ing­ton Post, when Mal­colm X, dressed in an ele­gant black over­coat and wear­ing his sig­na­ture horn-rimmed glass­es, greet­ed him.”

“Well, Mal­colm, good to see you,” King said.

“Good to see you,” Mal­colm X replied.

Cam­eras clicked as the two men walked down the Sen­ate hall togeth­er.

“I’m throw­ing myself into the heart of the civ­il rights strug­gle,” Mal­colm X told King.

Lat­er, King would express his dis­agree­ment with Malcolm’s “polit­i­cal and philo­soph­i­cal views—at least inso­far as I under­stand where he now stands.” The com­ment allowed for an evo­lu­tion in X’s thought that would, in fact, occur that year, while lat­er events would push King in a far more rad­i­cal direc­tion. As Brown writes:

Although the two men held what appeared to be dia­met­ri­cal­ly oppos­ing views on the strug­gle for equal rights, schol­ars say by the end of their lives their ide­olo­gies were evolv­ing. King was becom­ing more mil­i­tant in his views of eco­nom­ic jus­tice for black peo­ple and more vocal in his crit­i­cism of the Viet­nam War. Mal­colm X, who had bro­ken with the Nation of Islam, had dra­mat­i­cal­ly changed his views on race dur­ing his 1964 pil­grim­age to Mec­ca.

“Much of Amer­i­ca did not know the rad­i­cal King—and too few know today,” writes Cor­nell West in his intro­duc­tion to The Rad­i­cal King, a col­lec­tion of less­er-known speech­es and writ­ings. But “the FBI and US gov­ern­ment did. They called him ‘the most dan­ger­ous man in Amer­i­ca.’” Mal­colm X’s extreme­ly harsh crit­i­cism of King as “a 20th-cen­tu­ry or mod­ern Uncle Tom” is even more unfair and unwar­rant­ed against this back­ground, espe­cial­ly giv­en the title of King’s final, unde­liv­ered, ser­mon: “Why Amer­i­ca May Go to Hell.”

In the years after X’s death, King fought for labor rights and advo­cat­ed for “a bet­ter dis­tri­b­u­tion of wealth,” writ­ing in 1966, “Amer­i­ca must move toward demo­c­ra­t­ic social­ism.” His anti-impe­ri­al­ist, anti-colo­nial stance alien­at­ed many for­mer sup­port­ers and enraged the gov­ern­ment, but “he refused to silence his voice in his quest for unarmed truth and uncon­di­tion­al love,” West writes. Maybe Malcolm’s unre­lent­ing crit­i­cisms played a part in King’s rad­i­cal­iza­tion.

The video “debate” above—actually a 9‑minute edit of their inter­view dis­cus­sions of each other—begins with one of Mal­colm X’s with­er­ing state­ments about King’s non­vi­o­lent resis­tance, which he char­ac­ter­izes as “defense­less­ness.” One can see, giv­en the ad hominem attacks, why King refused requests for a debate. Had it hap­pened, how­ev­er, it might have gone some­thing like this, with ques­tions focused sole­ly on vio­lence vs. non­vi­o­lence as effec­tive and/or moral­ly jus­ti­fi­able tac­tics for the Civ­il Rights strug­gle.

The nuances and sick­en­ing his­tor­i­cal ironies of the ques­tion get lost when dis­agree­ment is staged as a zero-sum prize­fight, as the Rocky theme in the intro not-so-sub­tly sug­gests it is. King, X, and vir­tu­al­ly every oth­er civ­il rights leader through­out his­to­ry, under­stood the prac­ti­cal impor­tance of self-defense in a vio­lent­ly racist state. “Even the paci­fist King was a firm advo­cate of black gun own­er­ship,” writes John Mer­field at Wis­con­sin Pub­lic Radio,” although he, like oth­ers, drew a sharp dis­tinc­tion between self-defense, which he saw as legit­i­mate, and polit­i­cal vio­lence, which he called fol­ly.”

King also staunch­ly refused to address the ques­tion of vio­lence out­side the larg­er ques­tion of jus­tice, with­out which, he said, there could be no peace. Move­ment lead­ers like Angela Davis who car­ried for­ward the rad­i­cal, anti-impe­ri­al­ist analy­sis of both the lat­er King and X would con­tin­ue to push against the sim­plis­tic ques­tion of whether vio­lence is jus­ti­fied as a response to bru­tal oppres­sion. In a famous inter­view clip above, she demon­strates the absur­di­ty of the idea that peo­ple sub­ject­ed to racial ter­ror­ism by the author­i­ties and groups pro­tect­ed by them should have to answer charges of com­mit­ting polit­i­cal vio­lence.

The his­to­ry of racist killings is a long “unbro­ken line,” said Davis more recent­ly dur­ing the Fer­gu­son upris­ing. While Civ­il Rights lead­ers of the 20th cen­tu­ry may have dis­agreed about the right response, all of them agreed it had to end imme­di­ate­ly if the coun­try is to sur­vive and the promise of true free­dom to be real­ized.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Watch Mal­colm X Debate at Oxford, Quot­ing Lines from Shakespeare’s Ham­let (1964)

Mar­tin Luther King Jr. Explains the Impor­tance of Jazz: Hear the Speech He Gave at the First Berlin Jazz Fes­ti­val (1964)

Ava DuVernay’s Sel­ma Is Now Free to Stream Online: Watch the Award-Win­ning Director’s Film About Mar­tin Luther King’s 1965 Vot­ing-Rights March

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

Watch a Mesmerizing Stream of Unwatched YouTube Videos: Astronaut.io Lets You Discover the Hidden Dimensions of the World’s Largest Video Platform

When times are hard, it often helps to zoom out for a moment—in search of a wider per­spec­tive, his­tor­i­cal con­text, the for­est full of trees…

Astronaut.io, an algo­rith­mic YouTube-based project by Andrew Wong and James Thomp­son, offers a big pic­ture that’s as restora­tive as it is odd:

Today, you are an Astro­naut. You are float­ing in inner space 100 miles above the sur­face of Earth. You peer through your win­dow and this is what you see.

If the stars look very dif­fer­ent today, it’s because they’re human, though not the kind who are prone to attract­ing the paparazzi. Rather, Astro­naut is pop­u­lat­ed by ordi­nary cit­i­zens, with occa­sion­al appear­ances by pets, wildlife, video game char­ac­ters, and hous­es, both inte­ri­or and exte­ri­or.

Launch Astro­naut, and you will be bear­ing pas­sive wit­ness to a parade of unevent­ful, unti­tled home video excerpts.

The expe­ri­ence is the oppo­site of earth­shak­ing.

And that is by design.

As Wong told Wired’s Liz Stin­son:

There’s this metaphor of being on a train …you see things out the win­dow and think, ‘Oh what is that?’ but it’s too late, it’s already gone by. Not let­ting some­one go too deep is pret­ty impor­tant.

After some tri­al and error on Twit­ter, where video con­tent rarely favors the rest­ful, Wong and Thomp­son real­ized that the sort of mate­r­i­al they sought resided on YouTube. Per­haps it’s been reflex­ive­ly dumped by users with no par­tic­u­lar pas­sion for what they’ve record­ed. Or the account is a new one, its own­er just begin­ning to fig­ure out how to post con­tent.

The videos on any giv­en Astro­naut jour­ney earn their place by virtue of gener­ic, cam­era-assigned file names (IMG 0034, MOV 0005, DSC 0165…), zero views, and an upload with­in the last week.

The over­all effect is one of mes­mer­iz­ing, unre­mark­able life going on whether it’s observed or not.

Chil­dren per­form in their liv­ing room

A woman assem­bles a bride’s bou­quet

A kit­ten bats a toy

A pre-fab home is moved into place

The vision is heart­warm­ing­ly glob­al.

Astro­naut is anti-star, but there are some fre­quent sight­ings, owing to the num­ber of name­less incon­se­quen­tial videos any one user uploads.

This week a Viet­namese fash­ion­ista, a karaoke space in Argenti­na, and a box­ing ring in Mon­tre­al make mul­ti­ple appear­ances, as do some very tired look­ing teach­ers.

The effect is most sooth­ing when you allow it to wash over you unim­ped­ed, but there is a red but­ton below the frame, if you feel com­pelled to linger with­in a cer­tain scene.

(You can also click on what­ev­er pass­es for the video’s title in the upper left cor­ner to open it on YouTube, from whence you might be able to suss out a bit more infor­ma­tion.)

A very young Super Mario fan has appar­ent­ly col­o­nized a parent’s account for his nar­rat­ed gam­ing videos.

Halfway around the world, a for­mal­ly dressed man sits behind a desk pri­or to his first-ever upload.

Some gift­ed dancers fail to rotate pri­or to upload­ing.

A recent­ly acquired night vision wildlife cam has already cap­tured a num­ber of coy­otes.

And every­one who comes through the door of a Chi­nese house­hold adores the hap­py baby with­in.

It’s unclear if the algo­rithm will alight on any cell phone footage doc­u­ment­ing the shock­ing scenes at recent protests sparked by the death of George Floyd. Per­haps not, giv­en the urgency to share such videos, titling them to clue view­ers in to the what, who, where, when, and why.

For now Astro­naut appears to be the same floaty trip Jake Swearin­gen described in a 2017 arti­cle for New York Mag­a­zine:

The inter­net is a place that often rewards the shock­ing, the sad, the rage-induc­ing — or the naked­ly ambi­tious and atten­tion-seek­ing. A morn­ing of watch­ing Astronaut.io is an anti­dote to all that.

Begin your explo­rations with Astro­naut here.

h/t to read­er Tom Hedrick

Relat­ed Con­tent:

A Playlist of Songs to Get You Through Hard Times: Stream 20 Tracks from the Alan Lomax Col­lec­tion

Sooth­ing, Uplift­ing Resources for Par­ents & Care­givers Stressed by the COVID-19 Cri­sis

An Art Gallery for Ger­bils: Two Quar­an­tined Lon­don­ers Cre­ate a Mini Muse­um Com­plete with Ger­bil-Themed Art

Ayun Hal­l­i­day is an author, illus­tra­tor, the­ater mak­er and Chief Pri­ma­tol­o­gist of the East Vil­lage Inky zine.  Every day since March 15, she has uploaded a set of 10 micrhvi­sions of social­ly dis­tanced New York City. Fol­low her @AyunHalliday.

David Lynch Recounts His Surreal Dream of Being a German Solider Dying on D‑Day

Some of last week’s major head­lines:

Police forcibly remove a large num­ber of peace­able pro­tes­tors from the area in front of a Wash­ing­ton DC church, so a 73-year-old white man can be pho­tographed stand­ing there alone, hold­ing a prop bible.

An unarmed 75-year-old white man approach­es a Buf­fa­lo police offi­cer at a protest and is shoved so force­ful­ly that he cracks his skull open, lying uncon­scious and bleed­ing as mem­bers of the force step past him with­out offer­ing assis­tance. But first the weath­er, as per­ceived by a 74-year-old white man peer­ing out the win­dow of his stu­dio of his Hol­ly­wood Hills home (one of three), pri­or to shar­ing a dream in which he is a Ger­man sol­dier dying on D‑Day….

What makes this news­wor­thy?

The date and the iden­ti­ty of the self-appoint­ed weath­er­man, film­mak­er David Lynch.

For the record, June 6, 2020 start­ed out cloudy and a bit chilly. The hope just off Mul­hol­land Dri­ve was for increased “gold­en sun­shine” in the after­noon.

(One does won­der how much time this ama­teur spends out­doors.)

76 years ear­li­er, an absolute­ly accu­rate weath­er fore­cast was essen­tial for the Allied Inva­sion of France. Mul­ti­ple mete­o­ro­log­i­cal teams con­tributed obser­va­tions and exper­tise to ensure that con­di­tions would be right, or right enough, for the inva­sion Gen­er­al Dwight D. Eisen­how­er envi­sioned.

As author William Bryant Logan details in Air: The Rest­less Shaper of the World:

In the end the Allies won the day because in order to pre­dict the weath­er, they act­ed like the weath­er. Com­pet­ing groups jos­tled and maneu­vered, each try­ing to pres­sure the oth­ers into accept­ing their point of view. In just the same way, the high- and low-pres­sure cells fought and spun into one anoth­er over the Atlantic. The fore­cast­ers rein­forced their own ideas, and none of their ideas was the win­ner,  just as each gyre and each cen­ter of low and high pres­sure pressed against the oth­ers, squeez­ing out the future among them. The Ger­mans, on the oth­er hand, believ­ing that they could con­quer uncer­tain­ty by fiat, declared that weath­er and peo­ple would con­form to their assump­tions. They were proved wrong. The Allies appeared on the beach­es of Nor­mandy, just like a sur­prise storm.

Lynch’s D‑Day anniver­sary report for Los Ange­les was his 27th, part of a dai­ly project launched with­out expla­na­tion on May 11.

His emo­tion­al weath­er seems to run cool. He relays his his­toric life or death uncon­scious encounter (it involves a machine gun) in much the same tone that he uses for report­ing on South­ern California’s pleas­ant late spring tem­per­a­tures. For the record, Lynch was born 593 days after D‑Day, and has no plans for a WWII feature—or any oth­er big screen project—in the fore­see­able future.

In a vis­it with The Guardian’s Rory Car­roll, he expressed how tele­vi­sion has become the medi­um best suit­ed to the sort of long and twist‑y nar­ra­tives he finds compelling—like art, life, and rein­car­na­tion:

Life is a short trip but always con­tin­u­ing. We’ll all meet again. In enlight­en­ment you real­ize what you tru­ly are and go into immor­tal­i­ty. You don’t ever have to die after that.

So maybe he real­ly was a luck­less 16-year-old Ger­man sol­dier…

One whose cur­rent incarnation’s foun­da­tion cre­at­ed a fund to pro­vide no-cost Tran­scen­den­tal Med­i­ta­tion instruc­tion to vet­er­ans as a way of cop­ing with Post-Trau­mat­ic Stress. Lynch named the fund in hon­or of Jer­ry Yellin, a fel­low TM prac­ti­tion­er and peace activist who, as an Amer­i­can fight­er pilot, flew the final com­bat mis­sion of World War II on August 14, 1945.

Sub­scribe to Lynch’s YouTube chan­nel to stay abreast of his dai­ly weath­er reports, like the install­ment from June 3, below, which finds him voic­ing his sup­port for Black Lives Mat­ter.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

David Lynch Cre­ates Dai­ly Weath­er Reports for Los Ange­les: How the Film­mak­er Pass­es Time in Quar­an­tine

David Lynch Releas­es an Ani­mat­ed Film Online: Watch Fire (Pozar)

David Lynch Teach­es an Online Course on Film & Cre­ativ­i­ty

Ayun Hal­l­i­day is an author, illus­tra­tor, the­ater mak­er and Chief Pri­ma­tol­o­gist of the East Vil­lage Inky zine.  Her dai­ly art-in-iso­la­tion project is close­ly tied to the weath­er in New York City.  Fol­low her @AyunHalliday.


  • Great Lectures

  • Sign up for Newsletter

  • About Us

    Open Culture scours the web for the best educational media. We find the free courses and audio books you need, the language lessons & educational videos you want, and plenty of enlightenment in between.


    Advertise With Us

  • Archives

  • Search

  • Quantcast
    Open Culture was founded by Dan Colman.