| Author | Message | ||
     Snake Girl Rating: N/A |
INTERESTING TOPIC: I just read Pearl Cleage's excellent book "Deals With the Devil and Other Reasons to Riot". Because of Cynique's recent praise of Miles Davis...I am especially wounded by Cleage's essay about Miles Davis and his "pride" in being a known wife beater for "all of his life". I found myself particularly upset at his great joy in beating and humiliating Cicely Tyson throughout their marriage. I agree with Cleage that it's idiotic for black women to support the careers of openly sexist, misogynistic men like Miles Davis--who express a contempt for women and encourage other men to do the same--just because it's cool. Imagine if BLACK MEN supported white racist rock stars like Axel Rose by saying..."Oh, he beat up some black kids and called them "nigger" for fun...but he's still got talent. I like his talent, not him as a person." What if droves of Black men purchased Axel Rose albums and supported his concerts...aware of the man's "abuse for fun" of black boys. Obviously, it made me very sad to read the things that Miles had to say. Like child molester R. Kelly, I don't think I will ever be able to enjoy his music again. I believe that any black woman who does is the perfect example of why our communities are the WORST in America for sexism, violence and male anarchy. THIS...I do blame on black women. Pearl Cleage's book, however, is not only about that one issue. It covers quite a few very important modern day issues relating to the black community, women's lives and the lives of our children. It's an absolutely fabulous boook. I have often been disappointed by females who post on these boards and are... "apolitical", squealing in delight over vapid books about "nothing"...women too shallow and "cowardly" to support authors like Cleage who dare to make us THINK about more than what hat to wear to church and whose nail polish wasn't matching. I have especially hated when those same weak women attacked me for having a larger vision than theirs...and the nerve to advance it. ROFL...you won't find me reading "Send Me a Man, Send Me No Roses--Part 2". NEXT UP: I'm reading "The Ecstatic" again by Victor LaValle. I loved it and I want to go there again. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
Miles' ill-temperment was lengendary. He was actually a misanthrope who didn't like anybody much. He viewed his audiences with contempt and would come on stage and turn his back on them while he was playing. He belonged to the ranks of eccentric geniuses, and I, for one, can separate the man from the music. Jazz musicians of Davis' ilk are a special breed, and are very often tortured souls enslaved by drugs or alcohol. And they usually attract the kind of women who become their enablers. (Cicely Tyson didn't have to stay with Miles Davis.) As Miles got older he mellowed out somewhat. | ||
| Snake Girl Rating: N/A |
Cynique...you are an enabler. Perhaps you should read the full length book "Mad at Miles" by Pearl Cleage...so that you can make an intellectual and FAIR response.. instead of the trade in stock sorry ass black woman excuse that has kept us on the bottom of the world for the last thousand years. I don't give a damn what his temperment was or how he "beat people a little less" as he got old, tired and had less energy....As Cleage pointed out: How can black men HIT US and still be our heroes? How can they HIT US and still be our husbands, our leaders, etc.? I could forgive him for being a "cheater"--but not this. And while we're on it, Cynique....white male plantation owners were ALSO "ilk of a special breed...tortured souls enslaved by drugs and alcohol...geniuses". You got love and understanding for them, too? Women in our community like you, Cynique are the enabler. After all...if confronted your sons about this man's behavior...wouldn't you have given your sons the same excuse you just gave us? Wouldn't you have given them permission? | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
It should be very obvious to your by now, Snake Girl, that I an NOT a feminist. And I am not on a crusade to save women from themselves or from anybody else. I leave that monumental task to you and lotsa luck. I don't have to apologize for Miles Davis. He was who he was. If you weren't so self-righteous and judgmental you would stop trying to mold people to fit your idea of the way you think they should be! Screw what I would tell my sons. What I would tell my daughters is if a man is abusive to you, get rid of his sorry ass. OK? So save your lectures for somebody who wants to hear them. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Do me a favor, ladies: If you two ever book a date to physically meet, PUUULLLEEEAASSEEE, let me know about it in advance. Because I would pay good money to make that trip. | ||
| Snake Girl Rating: N/A |
Cynique, you can RANT all you want now that you've put your paw in the paint. Your post was still careless and INDICATIVE of what most apolitical Non-thinking black women do in our communities....CONDONE abusive behavior and BLAME the women stay in these relationships...because they had mothers like you, Cynique, in the first place. Silence equals consent. You had the nerve to use the term "enabler" but then went on to be the perfect example of what one is...and the perfect example of what type of women RAISE these dysfunctional men who can't take responsibility for their Weaknesses. It doesn't matter what you tell your daughters...as long as you make excuses for the sorry deeds that sorry men do...to your sons. Battering women is something that NO WOMAN should publicly condone or tolerate verbally. That is the only way that our communities can heal. You needn't be a feminist to grasp Common Sense and Mother Wit. And since you've given me quite a few lectures the past few days...particularly after all I did was answer the questions that ABM asked me....you have a lot of nerve calling someone self-righteous. Nobody asked you to apologize for Miles Davis. As a matter of fact...I don't remember asking you a DAMN thing...CHICK. | ||
| Ssssss Rating: N/A |
ABM....What city do you live in. I think you mentioned it one time, but I forgot. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
Snake Girl, when you stop being orgasmic over that white-woman-marrying Quincy Jones then I'll give some weight to all of the drivel you mistakenly think has substance. Now, s'cuse me while I go check out a Miles Davis CD. (If people were never able to separate a man from his body of work, three-fourths of the artists in the world would be ostracized) | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
ABM, as far as me and snake girl ever having a face-to-face confrontation, I wouldn't go into the next room to meet this self-aggrandizing loose cannon. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
I agree with what you appear to be saying, Cynique. Show me a great, transcendent genius, and I'll show you someone who others would likely deem a rude, arrogant, abusive, aloof, uncooperative son-of-a-b'. That's because genius often operate in a time/place different from that of the rest of us. And they are being so constantly besotted by nascent theories/esthetics that whatever mondane/ordinary things that they see us thinking/doing must appear quite backwards, stupid and infuriating. They live almost completely in...the future. I am not asserting that being some great genius excuses one of being abusive. I agree such behavior should be condemned and pre-empted. But I also believe that the women who dove in to the deep-end of the pool with Davis likely knew that waters were gonna get REAL hot. Yet they probably became so enthralled by Davis' light that they didn't mind taking some of his heat...well, that was until they started to suffer some 2nd and 3rd degree burns. I think one should tread lightly when considering marrying some colossal talent. Because the yearnings of their gifts will almost always prevail over any/all things, including even over home, hearth and love. Heck, all you had to do was look into Mile's scolding glare with his fabled horn in hand to know no matter whoever you were, you were going to be coming in a distant second to his trumpet. PS: I recall reading that during a visit to the White House, Miles Davis was asked by an uppity white wife of some business or political dignitary the reason why he was invited to the White House. The irascible Davis' response (paraphrasing): Oh, I have changed and redefined music over 5 or 10 times. What the hell has your a$$ done in life other than being white. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Oh now, take it easy, Cynique. Sure Kola is a mouthful. But she isn't much more self-embellishing in her own way than you and I are in ours. Besides, you know you like to tussle as much as she does. So why don't the both of yah let me spot you a couple of thong bikini's and a small pit filled with peanut butter and jelly so you two can go-4-what-you-know? | ||
| Ssssss Rating: N/A |
ABM-- I have nothing else to say to you. Ever. Kola | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
Well, ABM, there's probably a reason why Miles Davis' reputation doesn't phase me, and it's because I'm a "don't-give-a-damn" character, myself. I'm kinda world-weary and my mission in life is just to get through it. I am not altruistic and socially conscious. I'm contrary and polemic and pragmatic. The one thing, however, that does win me over is a sense of humor and a wry wit. So you make the cut. Snake girl speaks with forked tongue, but she will survive my "slander". | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Ok. Ok. What is it now, Kola? ((yawwwnnn!)) What great offense dare I to commit that doth now make me forever exiled from thine glittering realm? Are you really angry with me? Or is it just time for you to feign anger so as to solicit from me a heart-felt apology and enduring allegiance, which I don't mind doing...so long as there indeed be ample reason for such. PS: For starters, I offer the legendary pleading of Spike Lee's Mars Blackman character in Spike's innaugural film A Girls Gotta Have It: "Please, baby, please, baby, please, baby baby baby, PLEASE!" | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Cynique, Thanks for the props on my having "...a sense of humor and a wry wit." I am regularly impressed with your incisive sense of satire as well. (I wish, however, that you and Kola could find a middle ground. But that is for you 2 to decide.) Life is rife with comedic irony and paradox. (For example, President Clinton, then the most powerful man on Earth, was almost booted out of office because he lied about getting a blowjob.) And no matter how serious we want to be, I believe Shakespeare's "Life is a tale of fools told by an idiot." There is so much about being alive in this world/time that is so capriciously stupefying that we all should at least try to get in on the sweet end of the joke whenever we can. Also, I believe that humor can be a most potent tool for effective communication and dispute resolution. For even if others disagree with you, it is harder for them to resent you and disregard your arguments...if you make them laugh. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
ABM, yes, humor is a a potent tool and ridicule is an even more powerful device. It's amazing how even the most formidable adversary can be damaged by ridicule. As for me and Kola, we are like an irresistible force and an immovable object. I do consider her a worthy opponent. I also think she has unfairly cut you off. I can understand her being pissed with me. I'm even going to take back what I called her. She is not so much a "self-aggrandizing loose cannon" as she is a zealot bent on reform. And, lest I seem like someone who condones women being abused, I would simply say that this is a complicated issue. The simplistic idea that mothers can raise their sons to not be abusive is wishful thinking. A lot of factors contribute to abuse. A man's core personality is one; whether or not he's quick-tempered or neurotic, or is an alcoholic or a drug addict. Stressful circumstances can also trigger abuse; whether a man has a job or whether he is in deep debt - and, last but not least, whether his mate is an enabler! The problem with Snake Girl and Cynique's debate was that I was focused on Miles Davis as an eccentric genius and she was focused on him as a flawed individual. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Cynique, You are right about the damage that ridicule can do, because no form of communication sticks better than a good joke. About our favorite Sudanese liberator: First, I looked over what I previously posted and hardly know what I said that was so unconscionable. If you do, let me know. And if I agree, I would gladly apologize, if contrition is justified. Could it be that our fiery womanist Kola is more tolerant of disagreeable females (you) than she is with contrary males (me)? Hmmmm???? I agree the sources of an abusive nature are varied. Also, I think it is too easy to paint men as being the villains and women being the victims in ALL abusive relationships. Because, frankly, some women don't mind getting tapped on their a$$es, now & then. I know that is woefully politically incorrect. But any honest discussion with a licensed psychologist would (grudgedly) confirm that. So if such a masochistic woman hooks up with a man who is pre-disposed to anger/hostility, violence will ensue. Again, none of that is justification for abuse. But if we are going to completely stamp out domestic violence, we should honestly consider that to stop some from hitting we'd better stop others from accepting being hit. And I'd bet my right pinky that some (maybe most) of the women who hooked up Miles Davis knew what they were in for. Davis was a world-renowned artist that had likely bedded 100's (maybe 1,000's) of women over his nearly 50 years of stardom. And come on. Women talk. You are going to tell me that some of those women didn't get the 411 on Davis before they said, "I Do"? Yeah, right! Face it: Some of Davis' women thought that they could bravely tame a tiger then meekly turned tail after he kept clawing them on their a$$es. PS: Davis was, no doubt, a SOB. Heck, he could be so unyielding that he fired JOHN COLTRANE from his band. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
I think Kola felt betrayed by you, ABM. Instead of remaining neutral, you reinforced my argument about Miles and the "masochistic" woman he married. You charmed her into thinking that you were in her corner and then you broke ranks. (I can't imagine that, after some of the other things you have written, she would be insulted by you suggesting that she and I don thongs and engage in a wrestling match) | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
"Heeyyy [Koooolaaa], Cuum out an' plaaaayyyyeee!!!" (Remember the 1979 movie The Warriors?) Jeez, Cynique. You think that's what her problem is? Boy. I would hope and expect Kola to be more mature than that. I certainly never thought I had "...charmed her into..." anything. I just express my honest opinions, whether they coincided or conflicted with her's. I have a GREAT deal of respect for Kola: Her writing, passion, candor, history and bravery. And honestly, Cynique, I side more with her than I do with you on the issues of Africa and its Diaspora, brothahs/sistahs, needing to come together. And even when I disagree with her, I can't help enjoying the energy with which she expresses herself. But hold on there, Nelly. That doesn't mean I'm a Queen Kola Zombie (4 Goodness Sake!). I'm a quid pro "beau". So the only chick that I'll bow down to is the one who (with modest regularity) bends over for me. ((wink)) And I too doubt my offer to sponsor she/you in a thong-cladded wrestling match was the problem. But, I don't know. Maybe she REALLY dislikes peanut butter & jelly. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
Well, ABM, maybe Kola, in her self-annointed role of savior, will consider that "to err is human, but to forgive is divine" and, with this in mind, will welcome you back into her cyber arms. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Oh well, to quote a Calvin Klein commercial, "There is a thin line between love and madness." Still, Cynique, I fret not. For I know that Kola will get bored and come around. (Baby, they always do.) So you watch-n-see. My long, Sudanese reptile will come slithering back to her snake charmer. | ||
| Chris Hayden Rating: N/A |
All: I did some thinking about the Miles Davis issue and I had to come down to one fact: at times Miles was pretty horrible to everybody. There is the famous incident of the white female fan who approached him gushing, "Mr. Davis. I have all your records and I think you're great --blah blah." and his reply, "So what?" Quincy Troupe (his eventual biographer) tells of passing word to Miles that he admired him and wanted to meet him and being told, "Miles don't wanna meet you, man." and another time meeting him at a party and having a nice conversation and seeing him a few weeks later and been rudely snubbed. He states that, in his opinion, they got along well and had a great relationship but that he had to curse Miles out from time to time. Miles was a genius--what we overlook is that geniuses are often nearly impossible to be around--as Miles found when he roomed with Bird. This does put up an interesting conundrum--should we patronize some artist whose personal behavior we despise? I guess we must be true to ourselves--though, as ABM says, there would be few people we would patronize, what will all the drunks, dope addicts and psychotics who create admiriable works of art. I'd be interested in reading the Cleage article. When and to whom did Miles boast about beating Cicely Tyson? I am not surprised but this is the first I heard of it (I remember from his autobiography him saying they fought and that she jumped on his back and yanked out all his extensions--and now that I recall, I remember some remarks his ex wife, Betty Davis made that indicated that HE liked to be beaten. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
Everybody has their favorite anecdote in regard to how cantankerous Miles was. Funny, nobody evers mentions his other wife Frances Taylor (from Chicago). I don't think their marriage was that volatile but probably probably died from neglect. Miles also bonded with Prince in his later years. What conversations they must've not had. LOL I also suspect that Pearl Cleage would be in sync with a lot of the things the Black Panthers stood for. Wonder how she'd reconcile that with the fact that Eldridge Cleaver was a notorious wife beater. The Panthers in general were very chauvinistic. | ||
| smarti Rating: |
I try not to read biographies of people whose work I admire, just in case they turn out to be assholes (which they often do) and it would spoil my enjoyment of whatever it is they do. For example I used to like Wesley Snipes until I found out that he beat up Halle Berry. I stopped reading Soul on Ice at the point where he described raping black women to practise for the "real thing" (raping white women). Gimme a break. I just wonder where the limit is - you can still enjoy Davis' music knowing he was a wife beater. Would it extend to works by a proven child molester? (I doubt that if R Kelly was convicted it would affect his record sales). What does a person have to do to become persona non grata? Admission of drug dealing and black on black violence doesn't seem to do anything to diminish an artist's appeal. Just my fifty cents worth. I can't post here that often so forgive me if I throw something into the ring and then go "pooof". | ||
| Yukio Rating: N/A |
If the artist is producing art, i can usually appreciate the art! Also, i tend not to be interested in the person's personal life. If i'm enjoying their painting, writing, music, etc....i'm not concerned about who they beat, molested, etc.... Also, if it pertains to someone's problematic ideas, like Du Bois, James Baldwin, and Richard Wright for example, then i TRY to evaluate their "entire" intellectual life and how their experiences, ideology, and the historical moment shape their ideas. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Smarti, Great talent is never the product of one's good character/behavior. It is most often a blindly divine gratuity, a capriciously fortuitous blessing that can rarely be predicted and is almost never earned. But, to answer your question, I would say that great genius might in the short-term be degraded by the malevolence of its human host. But, the future always honors he & that which helps create it. So, over time, regard for the source and fruits of truly divine inspiration will eventually transcend all else. Thus, I assert: We will soon ignore and forget Snipes and Kelly. And Eldridge Cleaver ("Soul on Ice" author), more via his association with the near-mythologized Black Panthers than his writing talents, might continue to be a minor historical footnote. But Baby, Miles Davis is FOREVER. PS: Smarti, you remind me of one of my favorite movies: Amadeus. Amadeus is about an 18th Century musical composer named Salieri (actor F. Murray Abraham's performance won 1985[or '86] Best Actor Oscar); who to achieve supreme musical artistry; swears his all-abiding faith, trust, love and sexual chastity to GOD only to be driven to all-consuming jealousy, blasphemy, conspiracy, murder & madness because; in spite of all that he tenders to GOD; Salieri's talents were completely and utterly trumped, usurped and obliterated by the rude, juvenile, ribald, profane, philanderous and...DIVINELY talented Mozart. | ||
| Kola Rating: N/A |
ABM... I could care less about your opinion on the topic of Miles Davis. The fact that while Cynique and I were fighting--you called me MOUTHY, intimated that I was "annoying" to everyone and basically joined in the "demonizing of MEAN EVIL KOLA"--not only hurt my feelings, but it was typical how you seem to take liberties with me that you don't take with the others. I reiterate that more nasty things have been said to me on this board...than ANYONE else...and yet, I dont' see you calling Cynique "Queen Cynique" or "mouthy" or intimating that she wants you to bow down to her. I am not a Queen. Although some of my admirers have given me that title--Terry McMillan, Donna Summer and Thumper have all been given the same title by their respective fans. It goes with having a public opinion. I certainly did not give it to myself--because frankly, you couldn't pay me to be a Queen. I never treated you unkind. I treated you as a confidante and countless times...I have been open and intensely vulnerable when talking to you. You NEVER seem to notice my vulnerability or my softness. You keep coming out of the blue with this "Amazon queen dominitrix b.s.". It's very unfair. As for your opinion of the topic: The fact you and Chris Hayden are SEXIST is something I already knew when 1) I forged friendships with you both... and 2) created the post. I expected your sexist excuses. Yukio and Cynique, however,--are just plain pathetic. Neither of them (like Chris) really investigated the topic...the man was an avowed woman beater his entire life....HE BEAT and ASSAULTED WOMEN...not the world...but WOMEN all his life. He bragged about busting the lips and blackening the eyes of "bitches"...ALL HIS LIFE. He never once beat up a MAN. He exclusively "beat down" women...ALL HIS LIFE. Women/mothers like Cynique and Yukio with their casual "he's a legend-boys will be boys" b.s. only provide the permission for this behavior to exist. YUKIO is lying when she says that she doesn't consider an artist's personal life with their artistic works....because if Miles Davis was a "good ol white boy" GENIUS who strung up a few nigs in his spare time...she'd definitely merge the two. That's what makes her even more pathetic. She reminds me of those people sitting around bumping their R. Kelly records...but claiming they're against "child molestation". **Him having sex with a 14 year old CHILD after all...is the "child's fault". He's a GENIUS artist. Meanwhile, we (as a community) continue to send the message that it's alright to rape our children...as long as you're a Black Male Genius. But it's not your opinion that riled me, ABM. It's your casual TWO-FACED spite for me in general. Especially since YOU are the one who constantly asks me questions...which I have answered as frankly as possible. I thought you were my friend, but now I don't trust you. DANIECIA...thanx my love. For the posting of my new memoirs book. I hadn't expected you to do it so quick. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
Kola, so what were you saying about how much you loved Quincy Jones, another musical genuius who emotionally abused all of his wives and shamelessly neglected the brood of children he sired. Guess you were too busy pouting to respond to this. BTW, I've never defended R. Kelly because he was a CHILD abuser and is by no means a genius with a lasting body of work. And once again I remind you that no mother raises her son to be a wife abuser. A man becomes one for any number of reason which have nothing to do with how he was raised, as I noted in a previous post. Actuallly, you're the one who's pathetic. You're so needy, so hungry for approval and adoration. I'm glad that you have found Danecia. She's just what your ego needs. | ||
| smarti Rating: N/A |
ABM I agree, I didn't exactly pick the luminaries, did I? But you get my drift. I would tape Miles, but I wouldn't buy his records. (OK that's another bad example as he is dead) My son thinks my moral standards are too high and outmoded (I think he means I'm self righteous, hehe) And I don't think that being out there in one way or the other is a prerequisite for creative acumen. And ABM, you remind me so much of someone else who used to post here about three or so years ago. Yukio - your assertion runs counter to some people's re-evaluation of Lincoln and Jefferson for instance as seen through our eyes and their consequent deconstruction. Interesting. And sure, of course you see them in the context of their times etc. That doesn't mean I have to like them for it, agree with them or apologise their shortcomings. | ||
| yukio Rating: N/A |
Kola: (ABM:Though this is not directed towards you, i want you to read this so that you can "know a little something about me!") Kola, you have repeatedly misinterpreted my points(which happens) and wrongly accused me of stating things(unacceptable). And you made personal attacks on me and others, not an analysis of the topic, but personally attacks, which i don't do! I rarely, if ever, bring my personal life or opinions on individuals like you do(BTW, ABM, this is why i don't talk about myself, because things become too personal posts can lead to individuals rather than their ideas on issues). Simultaneously KOLa, you have persistently and constantly complained about how you are mistreated and you're persistently and constantly done the same to me! Ironic! I've only posted ONCE in this thread, and at no point did make any comments on Miles Davis and his treatment of women! As a matter of fact, my post was a GENERAL reply to Smarti's comments, though i didn't post it directly to Smarti! You could've misinterpreted my post, but you couldn't asked me for clarification before you made you personal attacks/allegations! This is what I wrote: "If the artist is producing art, i can usually appreciate the art! Also, i tend not to be interested in the person's personal life. If i'm enjoying their painting, writing, music, etc....i'm not concerned about who they beat, molested, etc.... Also, if it pertains to someone's problematic ideas, like Du Bois, James Baldwin, and Richard Wright for example, then i TRY to evaluate their "entire" intellectual life and how their experiences, ideology, and the historical moment shape their ideas." Consider, the post pertained to appreciating the art, which pertains to smarti's comments not you initial post. Again it was a general response. Also, i used words like "usually" and "TRY." COnsider that i said "beat, molest, etc..." that could include Miles, Snipes, Cleaver, the black panthers, Brian McKnight, etc.... The "fair" thing you could've done was ask me who i was talking about or if i could clarify! You did not! You called me a liar, etc.... Smarti: As i said to Kola, i used words like "usually" and "TRY." I never had to reevaluate Lincoln. It was clear that the emancipation proclamation was political decision not moral. I never held him in high regard. There are many histories of the man and his political history in particular that are available for us to scruntinize. When people, black, white, etc.. believe that someone has done something for them, they appreciate it and label them a HERO. This is natural and it is something that groups, nations, countries, promote so that their citizens, constituency remain loyal and proud of their own. Rarely do they(citizens, constituency, etc) go further and learn the specifics, details, etc...of the situation. This also goes for Kennedy and FDR! These three presidents made political decisions that they felt they needed to make to ensure that they remained in office or what they thought was best for the country, etc......this for me is what is important. As it regards Jefferson, i'm not sure if i know what you are talking about! Please inform me! Again, my post was general! | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Yukio (& 2 smarti...& 2 all), Since you referred to me in your post, I will tender my 2-cents (though, as I often do, I'll likely overspend). First, ideas/views/beliefs are ALWAYS intensely personal. So, while I understand why you would be concerned with maintaining your anonymity (e.g., professional and/or personal security), you should know that whenever you assert an opinion, no matter how aloof, objective, impartial, impersonal, rational & verifiable that it maybe, someone/somewhere is going to taken professional/professional exception to what you say. And there's nothing wrong with that. That's natural. It's good. Healthy. Because no matter how refinedly well-educated we may indeed be, we still are emotional beings who invariably attach what we feel to what we think. And honestly, I kinda like being blared to by someone rabidly defending what/how they feel. I am actually quite honored by that because I feel that they think enuff of our discourse to expend the time/energy to vigorously (maybe viciously) "let me have it". So say what and however that you prefer, that does not shield you from pissing someone else off. Now this is my opinion of what is transpiring between you and Kola: Kola has certain expectations of you (& Cynique) and all other Black women, especially very bright/informed Black women such as yourself, that you, rightfully being of your own personal liberty/volition/free-will, refuse to completely subscribe to. And I agree with Cynique that Kola is proselytizing (which is not inherently a negative pursuit as most great leaders try to win over others over to their viewpoint), and maybe, you 2 aren't buying what she's proffering to her satisfaction. So, in my humble opinion, you and Kola will likely continue to bump loggerheads. I think what smarti (pardon me, smarti) is trying to say about Lincoln & Jefferson is that the previously impenetrable reputations of Lincoln & Jefferson have recently taken quite a beating as information about their more personal, less complimentary aspects of their lives have been revealed. Simply: Lincoln is now thought of much more as a racist who - as you said - freed the slaves more for political, than the more heroic/moral reasons previously advertised. And Founding Father Jefferson is known more for raping and possibly fathering children with his slave Sally Hemmings. And I am glad that you/smarti brought up Jefferson/Lincoln, because I have wanted to get something outtah my crawl for a while on this conveniently bit of revisionist history that is so vogue in academia: The current revisions of Lincoln & Jefferson's rep's, though likely accurate, amount in actual merit to hogwash! The fact of the matter is notwithstanding ALL of their personal faults, those 2 WHITE men are more responsible for the liberation of African Americans than any other people - Black/White/Brown/Yellow - in this country's history. There is no liberation of AA's without Jefferson's authoring & co-authoring the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. And there's certainly no freedom sans Lincoln's Civil War, Emancipation Proclamation and 13th and 14th Amendments. So, while we can and should celebrate MLK, Malcolm X, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglas, Harriet Tubman, etc. into perpetuity, NONE of what any of them did would have made much of difference to securing our freedom had Jefferson/Lincoln not done more, something that even transcended their own petty weaknesses and failings. The irony of Jefferson is he penned the very documents that would be the foundation of asserting the abolition of slavery while he was lustfully nailing a helpless young slave girl. And I care about as much about Lincoln allegedly hating Blacks people or his having ulterior motives for freeing Blacks as I would were while I was starving being fed a life-saving scrap of bread and cup of water only to later discover that my rescuer is a man-hating lesbian. | ||
| yukio Rating: N/A |
ABM: I can't say that i completely disagree with you about a person being passionate about their conventions, but my comments to Kola were not about that. Similarly, i don't have a problem with disagreement. I never directly addressed Miles. The post before this one stated that the initial post was general, so why would YOU even suggest that there is a disagreement? I do have a problem with discussions becoming more about the individual(s) and allegations rather than the ideas that one is passionate about. If someone is going to "let me have it," then their response should correctly and directly pertain to what i have written. Kola has repeated wrongfully attacked me not what i have said....its that simple and it's not healthy it is immature, disrespect, etc....especially coming from a person who complains about people disrespecting her...which i have never done. In terms of Jefferson and Lincoln: Since Jefferson and Lincoln had no intension to do right by black people, then they are just presidents...no love or hate! I thank god for Lincoln's decision, but it had less to do with his heart, convictions, and more to do with saving the Union. I respect the convictions, passion, and work that mlk, malcom, and others did...the results are different story. These freedom fighters didn't have the power(financial and political) to do what Lincoln did. I have no regard for Jefferson, his rhetoric provided the foundation and legitimation of the right for african americans to be free. Yet, his Declar. of Indep. was not meant for us, it did not include us, so his words "rhetoric" were useful only to make a point....We used our enemies own verbiage to illustrate their contradiction and malignity, so it is to African Americans that i respect(the intellectual to make the country address its lie/they the US is still in denial. Indeed, it is african americans that have made this country more democratic....though there is really no such thing as a democratic country. I don't know what you're talking about in the last sentence(man-hating lesbian?). | ||
| Susan Rating: N/A |
One thing this thread has further proven is that we as humans are usually hypocrites or at best, very inconsistent. When we like a person for whatever reason(s), we can look the other way when they behave in a bad manner. We can reason or rationalize such behavior away because heck, we think the abuser is a "genius" and besides, no one is perfect, is the another common retort. But, on the other hand, if we don't like the person for whatever reason, then whenever they behave in such a bad manner, we use such behavior to further justify our dislike or disdain for that person. To me, if you're going to ride the moral high horse then you can't pick and chose when to jump onto it and when dismount based upon whether you like or dislike the person. If the behavior is the same why does it matter who displays the behavior? Why be selective in deciding who should be accountable for their actions? If Pookie from-around-the-block Smith should be responsible for his actions then why shouldn't Miles the-famous Davis? Admittedly, I've wondered often why women stay with men who abuse them but then just because they stay doesn't mean they give another license to abuse them. But, if the abuser is allowed understanding and sympathies for his or her behavior then why isn't the abused aren't afforded the same? (Also wondering, should victims of racism deserve what they because they won't or aren't in a position to stop it?) If these same folk acted out on strangers on the streets then they would be arrested for assault/battery, rape or whatever, so why should it be seen any different when one has a personal relationship with the person they assault, batter or rape? Or, why does having a "talent" or a gift from above make you any less horrible for doing the same that anyone of us would most certainly condemn and convict Shaniqua (sp?), in a New York minute. Just been real interesting to see how folk keep moving their line of tolerance based on a host of conditions, what ifs and what abouts. However, I did read the book by Cleage a few years ago, and until I read that piece about Miles, I didn't know he was a wife batterer. Susan | ||
| yukio Rating: N/A |
Susan: Good points! I appreciate your post! You're right, we(humans) are quite inconsistent, though i try to be consistent. Let me address Miles Davis, finally! I had no idea before this thread that he abused his women. I love Miles' music, not the man, before i learned of his violence and after. They are separate issues in my opinion. I'll support his music not his behavior. I don't support R. Kelley. Don't support MLK's infidelity, but do support and appreciate the work he did in the freedom movement. If I was an adult when Miles performed and learned that he was going to jail because he abused his wife, i wouldn't protest his imprisonment because i love his music. They are separate issues. He did a crime. In other words, as you stated:"If Pookie from-around-the-block Smith should be responsible for his actions then why shouldn't Miles the-famous Davis?" I believe that we are complex human beings, and that we are much more than the good/bad that we do....If Pookie from-around-the block Smith had talent, and i liked what i read(literature), heard(music), saw(visual or performance) then I'd appreciated his art. When i was bad, i was spanked...beat with whatever my mother's hands happened to grab and when i received good grades i received a hug, kiss, ice cream....and twizzlers! I'm neither good or bad...just a work in progress, trying to become a better human being! Like i said: "Also, i tend not to be interested in the person's personal life. If i'm enjoying their painting, writing, music, etc....i'm not concerned about who they beat, molested, etc.... " What does this quote mean to me? Well, i meant that when i listen to music, i don't seek to learn the artist's personal history(ie, disinterest). If i'm enjoying someone's writing, then i may read something else written by them..,not a biography about them. If i learn that they are terrible, i have to read for myself(DuBois's elitism for example...i've only read DuBois' and MLKing's), and then i'll make a decision. As far as R. Kelley, he'll not receive my money, but he most likely wouldn't have anyway! Also Susan, you are correct! Sometimes, it is about who you like! I do TRY to be consistent. Call me a hypocrite if you like. I can not have the same respect for Lincoln as i have for MLK...both fallible men. One "freed" our people, though he had slaves and the other "freed" our people, though he cheated on his wife and allegedly copied someone's dissertation. I know their behavior wasn't necessarily the same, but I think my point is clear....at least i hope so! | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
My further comments on this subject is that I am able to compartmentlize. I can like Miles' music but not him. He's the ice, his music is the steam. Similarly, I like the soldiers fighting over in Iraq, but I hate the war. I know people who don't like certain actors because of a role they once played in a movie. At some point you have to be able to make the distinction between the personality and the product. Leonardo DaVinci is just one of a legion of artists who had a dark side. He was a genuius and an inventor, a renassiance man way ahead of his time but he was also a libertine lecher. I don't take the moral ground with anybody. I live in a glass house so I don't throw stones. | ||
| msarti Rating: N/A |
Cynique I find that to be a funny statement. So just because you are fallible you won't take issue with anything anyone else is doing? Or are you just playing devil's advocate again? I don't think there is a lot wrong about sitting in a glass house with a large selection of rocks. Some of the things that I do I am quite happy to critize in others as I'm not proud of doing them myself. That probably makes me a hypocrite. But I'd rather be like that than never finding fault in anyone and being too permissive. I am not a Republican but I do think that there are very few people who set any kind of moral standard these days. Even the church is no longer an institution people can trust blindly. So what are we left with? Those celebrities who are all over the media can get away with anything they please because they can buy expensive lawyers. That is a great example to set our kids and results in people like Mike Tyson and R Kelly (bearing in mind that he hasn't actually been convicted of anything yet) committing felonies with impunity while the rest of us can't wait to purchase their latest product or fawn over their celebrity status (while Robin Givens will always remain a b*tch for blowing the whistle and humiliating the guy). Sorry for ranting. And digressing. Most probably. Also duplicating I think as others have been over this same ground before. But what the heck. I got fingers, I will use them. | ||
| smarti Rating: N/A |
ABM - re the presidents. Yes, that is what I meant, thanks for taking up the baton in my absence. I agree with what Yukio said - I can be grateful for the results of their politically motivated decisions, but that don't mean I have to admire them. re your hairy lesbian analogy LOL - thanks for the mental image. I will never think of Lincoln in the same light again. | ||
| Cynique. Rating: N/A |
smarti: every opinion I express is tempered by my jaded philosophy of life. I extract what I like from a situation and reject what I don't like. I do not impose my standards on anyone, and am not receptive to anyone imposing their standards on me. I have no inclination to reform the world, but good luck to you and all the others who are motivated to try and do so. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Yukio I am not saying that we should fall asleep and awaken to glorified portraits of Jefferson/Lincoln on our bedroom walls or pray to them as some kinds of gods (though I also decry the sanctification of MLK, Malcolm, etc. as well). But all of this stuff about castigating everything Jefferson/Lincoln did, that is so vogue now among many Black and liberal White folks, is just plain crazy. I believe that Jefferson's and Lincoln's actions, though petty and personal they may have been, set into course events that transcend the who/what they were. Any freedom that we casually exclaim now is directly attributable to the actions of those men. I could care less 'why' they did what they did. For, as even you alluded to, it was the very documents drafted by those men that were used as the basis for vigorously asserting our rights as human beings to begin with. Simply, had there been no Declaration of Independence, US Constitution, Civil War, 13th/14th Amendments, what could Black people have used to effectively argue that they deserved to be free? And I think it is very difficult to conclude how Lincoln REALLY felt about Black folks. I don't think we can go strictly by what has been reported of his statements. Because he lived during a time that virtually all White people, even the most ardent abolitionists, and even many Blacks, believed that Whites were superior. Therefore, what chances would he have ever had to become the president who freed the slaves if he had been espousing a racial equality dogma that almost none of the voting citizenry was particularly interested in hearing? I think it's quite possible that Lincoln was doing as politicians have ALWAY done: Tell folks what they want to hear to get elected. To me, it's what he did, not what he said, that counts most. (BTW: I have read that Lincoln never owned slaves. If you know different, please send me the source of your info.) The 'lesbian' quip was used to simply emphasize that I don't care if the person who helps to save my a$$ happens to personally dislike me. Susan I don't think any of us are advocating more empathy/understanding of abusers that we do for their apparent victims. I agree that most of us have moral equivocations that are greatly influenced by what we like/dislike. That's natural. We experience living in different ways, see life from different perspectives. So, what we feel about most subject matter will be largely dictated by what we most personally/directly either enjoy or disdain. Let's use MLK as example. Most of us forgive/excuse his being a rampant womanizer because of his efforts and sacrifice as a champion of Civil Rights. What, however, of the many women he bedded? What if he lied to ALL of them about what he felt about them, telling them he loved them all? What if he physically/mentally abused them? What if he impregnated some and forced them to abort the embryos? What if he bedded them knowing full well that they were already engaged or married to others, and what of the betrayed men? Would these women/men feel the same about King as most of us do? And if some of these are true, how then should those of us who hope to hold/maintain some moral/ethical standings feel about MLK? As bad as domestic violence is, it pales in comparison to slavery, where any/every facet of life was constructed to subjugate one's entire will/life/progeny to complete and utter will of another simply on the basis of race. Yes, we should do any-everything possible to protect others from abuse. We, however, must also understand/accept that there are people who willingly enter/remain in physically/mentally/emotionally harmful relationships, maybe for sexual, financial, status, fame, enjoy fighting or M&S favors/pleasures. And as long such masochism exist, we will never be able to fully eradicate such abuse. And, I think the reason why it is difficult for many of us to completely debase Miles Davis now is that most of us knew nothing of his alleged offenses while he lived. So, on some level, to castigate him now smacks of us conveniently pissin' on a dead pitbull. It would have been much more meaningful if Davis had been exposed while he lived. Because all we have now are unopposed castigations towards man who many would consider to have been the greatest (known) musician of the 20th Century. smarti Happy to help you out, though, I actually said "...man-hating lesbian", not "hairy lesbian". Since, however, many lesbians choose to abstain from many of the strictures (e.g., shaving) of the traditional feminine beauty regime, I imagine there are many follicly-evident gay women. Contrary to what you appear to be saying, I tend to think that mankind is much more decent/moral now than it ever was. We only appear more reprehensible because we are much more aware of how our neighbors and we live than we were during prior decades and generations. I think what is most confounding and troublesome now is how do we devise & maintain some viable & legitimate standards & morals in a worlds that demands that we on almost a daily basis embrace changing/varying economies, technologies, languages, cultures & faiths. Because, until we can devise some all-embracing standards, wealth (and/or poverty) will prevail as the sole, deciding arbiter of everything and everyone. Cynique You often come off as someone who is so afraid of being hurt or let down that you would rather be ornery, contrary and "cynical" to artificially shield you from having to endure possibly being disappointed. What’s the maddah, Baby? You need of a laxative, a bran muffin...or a "lil' sum' sum'" else?  | ||
| Chris Hayden Rating: N/A |
ALL: I guess this thread is proof that admiration or liking someone can be largely subjective---if not all. You get the usual statement from the neighbors after discovering one of their own has thirty bodies buried in the yard--"He was a nice guy. He kept his house nice." Adolf Hitler's mama, relatives and friends liked him. Re Miles I did not know about the spousal abuse (again I'd heard hints spread by his ex wife Betty Mabry Davis that HE liked a little masochistic spice in his relationship--her song, "He Was A Big Freak" ("I used to beat him with a turquoise chain. . .pain was his middle name") but I did know that he was an off and on again dope addict. I suppose like Yukio and Cynique and others have said, I admired his music, not his personal life. Can someone enjoy a person's art or lifework if there are unsavory aspects to his personality, actions or life? I think it has limits--but where do you set them? Jews dislike Wagner because he was an anti Semite. I don't think his music has been performed in Israel yet. As for Lincoln and Jefferson I have no use for them, they were out for themselves. Jefferson's words might have been stirring but he never intended them to refer to me, or his Mama, or any white male who did not own property, and the people we should be honoring are those who tried to make this system live up to those words, to fill them with some content. Lincoln was the point man in a power struggle between Northern Industrialists and Southern Slave Owners to see who was going to run the nation--both of them were power hungry egomaniacs, largely out for themselves. We were merely a football in the struggle--by holding out the illusion of freedom (what was that without equality) the South was potentially deprived of the labors of a large portion of its population, and the North with spies, saboteurs laborers and fighting men--almost 200,000 black men served in the Union Army--it burns me to listen to people talking about the white men sacrificing their lives for us. ABM:Had Dr. King done all that to those women I would have despised him. I have to despise what he was doing to his wife even if he was treating them like queens (or especially if he was). But then I think about him, a man who could have rested on his laurels after 1963, said it was time for somebody else to carry the ball, gotten rich, with his brains blown out on that hotel balcony--I have to despise his womanizing, but admire him for that. I suppose we should not worship any human being, as all of us are imperfect. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Chris, Everything uncomplimentary/disparaging/racist trait that you attribute to Jefferson/Lincoln may be true. Although, it is ironic that it is largely because of these men who were "out for themselves" (And really, who isn't?) that you are "free" to say them. And I will acknowledge any man whose death & injury resulted in the liberty of my people. I could care less whether he was Black, White or "other". "Had Dr. King done all that..."? Come on, Chris. Let's pretend we are adult Black men who have been around the block a few times here. K? Cause we are ALL dealing/doing some deep denial of Dr. King. It is PROBABLE that Dr. King did at some or much of what I speculate. All you gotta do check out Dr. Michael Eric Dyson's recent King bio, the FBI files on Dr. King or even MLK's close companion's Rev. Abernathy's autobiography to know that dude was "wilding out" with the honies. The only reason many more very nasty things have not been spreaded around about Dr. King is because he has become such a beloved, "sainted" figure by EVERYBODY, Black/White, that it is in no one best interest to tell the WHOLE story about him. And I am not trying to debase Dr. King. I am just saying that if you to toss the remains of any man, great or humble, you are likely going to see and smell something you won't like. PS: It's stupid for Israel to ban Richard Wagner. Does Israel think Wagner was the ONLY anti-Semitic (especially, German) composer? Heck, why did they not also ban Richard Strauss' heroically musical manifestation of Frederick Nietzsche "Also Sprach Zarathushtra", which, by Hitler's own admittance, were the literal and musical inspiration for Nazism? The power of Wagner's music was and is far-n-away greater than he ever was. How can you have any legitimate classical music program without including Wagner's "Der Ring des Nibelungen"? | ||
| RGA Rating: N/A |
ABM, Are you sure that you are black? Dogging Dr. King to take up for some white men. I'm sure you can find another way to prove your point. I think the difference is Dr. King actions were intentional. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
Wow! Should we all sit in awe, now that ABM has spoken from his mount. (That's how you come across to me.) I reject your implication that if I'm practical and not an idealist, this has to be attributed to my internalizing disappointment. In fact, I really think that if I had experienced more disappointments in life I would be more sensitive and sympathetic. Maybe if you realized that I am a lot older than you might think, you would not be so quick to regard my apathy as a facade. I've kinda been there, done that and there are a lot of things I just don't give a damn about. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
RGA, I am not trying to run down Dr. King or "take up" for white men. What I am trying to say that often when we look beyond what we are made believe about someone - MLK - whatever color/gender they may be, we will likely witness something unflattering about them. And I conversely noted that sometimes we have benefited greatly from those whom we would consider to be our nemesis - Jefferson/Lincoln. I try to avoid judging someone by what their "intent" was because one's intentions don't mean a damn if nothing good (or something bad) comes of it. And you never REALLY know ANYBODY'S intentions. Just because King/Malcolm were Black doesn't mean their actions were any more ennobled that those of white people. Really, no disrespect to them, but what else were King/Malcolm suppose to do but vie for the liberation their own family/people/blood? Actually, I just as amazed by someone who extends his/her hand when he might otherwise avoided trouble. I am intrigued by the white participants of Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad or German gentiles who hid Jews in their attics during the height of the Holocaust. I am proud to be Black. But I am also proud to be an American. So I see nothing wrong with appreciating those who made contributions to specifically benefit Black people and/or to Americans as a whole. And I proudly include Dr. King, Malcolm X, Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson among the many others whose contributions should be acknowledged and celebrated. PS: Why is there no Black commemoration of white Abolitionist John Brown? | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Cynique:"Wow! Should we all sit in awe, now that ABM has spoken from his mount." ABM: Why of course you should, my Dear. You surely must have learned such by now. ((wink)) Cynique: "I'm practical and not an idealist..." ABM: And I'm an Aries. Cynique: "Maybe if you realized that I am a lot older than you might think, you would not be so quick to regard my apathy as a facade." ABM: So then you attribute your "cynicism" to old age? Funny. Most of the ol' folks I know are very idealistic and optimistic. Cynique: ...there are a lot of things I just don't give a damn about. ABM: And yet, ironically, you are almost always the first to exclaim how your opinion about everything. Hmmm??? | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
Somewhere up there in trumpet heaven, Miles Davis must be wearing a malicious grin. Even in death he was able to rile people. And I might add that I've found this discussion to be very stimulating. I found points of agreement in almost all of the posts. Diversity rules! | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
ABM: And yet, ironically, you are almost always the first to exclaim how your opinion about everything. Hmmm??? Being opinionated doesn't interfere with me being cynical. - I think that's the reponse I want to give to your ambiguous comment. | ||
| Cynique Rating: N/A |
ABM: So then you attribute your "cynicism" to old age? Funny. Most of the ol' folks I know are very idealistic and optimistic. Cynique: I don't think that's funny at all, I think your observation about "the old folks you know" is irrelevant. What's funny is that I'm not going to let you have the last word, unless I want to. LOL | ||
| yukio Rating: N/A |
ABM: "But all of this stuff about castigating everything Jefferson/Lincoln did, that is so vogue now among many Black and liberal White folks, is just plain crazy." Are we discussing what you and I think,or what black and liberal white folks think? My position has always been what i have already stated: The decision freed my people(appreciated); it was a political decision; he sought to do what he thought was best to save the union. "Simply, had there been no Declaration of Independence, US Constitution, Civil War, 13th/14th Amendments, what could Black people have used to effectively argue that they deserved to be free?" The "what if" questions are unanswerable, since we don't know what the history of this country would have looked like! The past is not a formula. Changing part of it necessarily changes the present. In other words, there is a possibility that "freedom" would have never come, but there is a possibility that desegregation could have come before the civil rights acts. Who knows? In addition, the civil war, declar. of indep., constitution were only part of the struggle. There was the abolitionist movement, run aways, the industrial revolution, great migration...any change in the history of any of these moments could have changed history! Finally, Lincoln's decision had nothing to do with the Constitution or the Declaration of independents. And african americans could have used the history...the fact of injustice....we could have migrated....who knows...but if we change one variable, then we change the others.... | ||
| Chris Hayden Rating: N/A |
ABM: Re Dr. King, in your paragraph above taking him as an example, there were a whole lot of "What ifs?". As far as I know the record only shows he was having sex with women, not lying to them about leaving his wife, etc etc etc. I think you are showing an unconscious desire to knock him down, could be wrong. And I don't owe a damn thing, not one damn thing to either Lincoln or Jefferson. Jefferson a man who was so screwed up he wouldn't even free his own children? Lincoln, who was considering a scheme to ship us back to Africa, a scheme that might have been broken up by his assasination? They didn't do a damn thing for me. It seems as though you are swallowing the whole bait of your early miseducation wherein one is taught to revere these Great White Fathers for reasons that were made up largely after they are dead--have you ever considered that it is taught so that you will revere their offspring? You seem to want to be greatful to them for something awfully bad. Well, that is okay for you. You can tell me that you do, and why. I hereby state that I don't give a damn for them, either one of them. There is nothing you cold tell me about them where I should. I don't give a damn if you can come in here and show me where they had a cure for cancer, or that they turned water to wine, or that when they used the toilet they crapped gold. I still don't think a damn thing about the--perhaps as a result of finding out it was all propaganda and cult worship, largely cultivated during the 30's and the 40's. Read what some contemporaries thought about them--I think somebody called old Abe "a gorilla". Oh, and I applaud the Israeli's for keeping the poison of somebody who loathed them out of their systems--apparently they don't just look at the material side of things, the beautiful music, and decide, no this man's beliefs were too antithetical to us and our survival to let anything he did come around us and our childen. For all I know, they do ban Strauss' "Zarathustra" for the same reason--though oddly enough, Nietchze was not Anti Semitic and he had a very low opinion of the Germans--something Nazis and Germans overlooked. | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Chris, LOVE LIVE THE "KING": Yes there are "What ifs" in my previous posts (as there are with everything/everybody for that matter). And I am neither capable of nor interested in trying to prove Dr. King did any of the negative things previously conjected. I was mostly trying to elict how our opinions of someone we all love might be influenced by learning less complimentary things about them (Jeez! I thought that was apparent.). But come on now Chris. I don't care who you are. If you screw around enuff with just 5 women, at least 1 or 2 are going to say/do something that you don't like/resent or even something that could under the wrong circumstances get you into trouble. My point is not to expose or knock down King. His historical standing is rocksolid. What I'm saying is if we dug deep down in to any Black man's business, you are going to pull something smelly. I am not trying to be an MLK iconoclast. Quite the opposite actually. I love and am forever grateful to Dr. King for what he did to help our people. But I think it is unfortunate that we have made Dr. King into to some unattainably superhuman deity. Dr. King deserves to be remember not as some fantasy figure, but rather as he actually was, a brilliant, charismatic and brave but flawed man who, largely because the pressures/complexities of the burdens on him, likely surrendered to certain temptations that all humans have (And I find it instructive that although JFK's lothario efforts are now the stuff of "studly" legend, that has done nothing to diminish the love Americans feel toward him as a president and leader.). If we honestly but lovingly told the truth about MLK, we would have a better chance of using who/what he was to reach our young, especially those who are troubled and have made mistakes, because they could begin to see themselves less as irreconcilable mistakes but rather as Dr. Kings "in-the-making". That is why, to many, Malcolm X is a more relevant, more real person to aspire to become than Dr. King. X was someone who made some bad mistakes early in his life and even later under the duplicitous direction of the Nation of Islam, but X managed to educate himself and liberate his mind/spirit and live a impactful, productive life, before his woefully tragic/untimely passing. HAIL TO THE CHIEFS: Man! Run tell dat "Yoozah sucka fo Da man" dogma to someone's who's interested. We are obviously having 2 different discussions about Lincoln/Jefferson. So I'll leave that be but to say: "I pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under GOD, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all." You (& anyone else) can take that HOWEVER you want to. GET REAL, ISRAEL: It is a dangerous thing to utterly reject the creations of others simply because of whatever political views they allegedly held. Because to try to do so will eventually make you out to be a hypocrite. If the Israelis were to consistently ban ANY/ALL things drafted, created, initiated and conceived about/of/for/by anti-Semites, Israel WOULD NOT EXIST, much less be able to disallow Wagner from being performed in it's concerts halls. Wagner did not pen "Gotterdammerung" to serve as musical accompaniment for leading hapless Jews into fatal gas chambers (Hell, he was dead +50 years before anyone ever heard of Nazis.). The greatest way for Jews to "defeat" the racist sentiment of Wagner is to proudly perform, listen and dance to his wondrous music during the births and barmitzvahs of their children. Oh, it has been said by several credible sources that Pres. Franklin Roosevelt harbored anti-Semitic viewpoints. Some even assert that is reason why the US was tardy in rescuing Jews from the Holocaust. So then, should living Jews reject retirement checks generated from the Social Security program that was borne from FDR's New Deal? Or Chris, if you found out the creator of the Internet was a cross-burning member of the KKK, would you refuse to ever use the Web again? Or let go ALL THE WAY: Since all of the Founding Fathers and all of their white offsprings were slave-owning racists and rapists, we African Americans should all in a fit of righteous indignation expatriate to Africa. Oh, I forgot, we've already tried that before...and we can see lately in Liberia what that might get us. | ||
| Yukio Rating: N/A |
ABM: You seem very abusive to history. What is your methodology of understanding history? | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Yukio: You seem very abusive to history. What is your methodology of understanding history? ABM: I am surprised that you (among all the frequent posters) would call my commentary "abusive". Please provide the "methodology" that supports your referring to me thusly. Then, I may be able to adequately satisfy your request. | ||
| Yukio Rating: N/A |
" I am surprised that you (among all the frequent posters) would call my commentary "abusive". " Why me of all posters? When i ask for "methodology," i mean how do you go about approaching and interpreting history. For example, your "what if" suppositions SUGGEST that you view history from the present backwards, while i ATTEMPT to contextualize the historical moment with the historical participants, viewing history forwards. BTW, "abusive" may have been too strong. It was a gut reaction to your comment about Liberia! | ||
| ABM Rating: N/A |
Yukio, I don't consider myself to be smart enuff to be able to clearly/fully gather, discern and interpret all of the whats, whens, whys, hows, wheres of times, people and events that precede me. Thus, I can only fairly view the telling of history via my own (admittedly, very limited) understanding and perspective. Take for instance my suppositions regarding Dr. King. I hardly know diddly about MLK. But he was apparently an intelligent, educated, handsome, virile, short, stentorian, charismatic/persuasive, southern AA husband, father and highly renowned and respected Reverend who was born/reared during The Great Depression and World War II and had enormous demands on his time/attention from a veritable limitless number/types of people. And Dr. King lived under the constant threat of being incarcerated/injured/killed. So I try to understand Dr. King by not only by acknowledging what was going on around him by also visualizing who/what I think he might have been and done based on his apparent personal traits/experiences. For instance, I think Dr. King's philandering was likely due to his feeling that he could be killed at anytime and that he should enjoy the "pleasures" of the flesh for as long as he lived. Or that he was so depressed or besotted by the enormity of his situation, that perhaps the only thing that could momentarily transport him from the great weight of his duties was enjoying the transient pleasures of a an endless array of sexually available females. Now, I know many of us who have been trained to deify King don't want to believe that about him. But I find those to be highly probable. And, frankly, I don't need to "contextualize" a Black man wanting/pursing/obtaining sexual gratification from seemingly willing women for me to understand some of what Dr. King might have been dealing with. I admit my method is likely prone to error, due in large part whatever my personal biases, ignorances and experiences. And while I agree we should try to "contextualize" historical moments, I think any attempt to do so will at best yield specious results. Because if you weren't there; living, thinking, breathing & feeling along with those who were; you can never adequately piece together the story. And even the most sincere and objective "ATTEMPT" to "contextualize" is going to be slanted according one's biases. My comment about Liberia was intend to infer that just because one has been physically liberated does not mean one's mind/spirit is free. I understand that many of Liberia's problems stem from expatriated American slaves having perpetrated against Native Africans much of the same unfairness and prejudices that had been exacted on them by whites slavers. That is a significant part of the issue that is seldom discussed by the media, Black & White. Simply: How can we in divine self-righteousness champion freedom when it may well reside within us an even greater desire to enslave others. | ||
| Yukio Rating: N/A |
ABM: Thank you. I sorta understand HOW you approach history. "Take for instance my suppositions regarding Dr. King. I hardly know diddly about MLK. But he was apparently an intelligent, educated, handsome, virile, short, stentorian, charismatic/persuasive, southern AA husband, father and highly renowned and respected Reverend who was born/reared during The Great Depression and World War II and had enormous demands on his time/attention from a veritable limitless number/types of people. And Dr. King lived under the constant threat of being incarcerated/injured/killed. So I try to understand Dr. King by not only by acknowledging what was going on around him by also visualizing who/what I think he might have been and done based on his apparent personal traits/experiences." In this quote, you did contextualized MLK in a particular moment(Great Depression and WWII and violent nature of his life style). Now, this is a very general contexualization, but it is one never the less. The problem with your assessment, i believe, is that it is full of adjectives that characterize some one who you know "diddly" about, so that the adjectives are empty, since you could use similar adjectives to describe other people during the time and they would be quite different from MLK. The fact that he was educated, handsome, virile tells us very little, at the end of the day, because we're going to attach our own meaning to those words which could render a very different portrait of who MLKthe was. I think you need to know his specific experience so that these adjectives can be placed in a particular context:moment, historical atmosphere, family relations, class, religion, etc....(mine are also empty if devoid of MLK's particular life). In other words, someone describes you, but i'll not really appreciate the discription without meeting you(best) or learning about you from you deeds and dealings with other people.....ABM is a good man, smart, witty, etc.....now this may be true, but these words are not representative of the real ABM! "And while I agree we should try to "contextualize" historical moments, I think any attempt to do so will at best yield specious results. Because if you weren't there; living, thinking, breathing & feeling along with those who were; you can never adequately piece together the story. And even the most sincere and objective "ATTEMPT" to "contextualize" is going to be slanted according one's biases." There are biographies that attempt to provide the answers to all these questions of the thoughts, feeling, and experiencing of participants in history. There are oral histories available, autobiographies, etc....Of course, no history can fully reproduced the past as it was experienced, but oral histories, archival documents, comteporaneous newspaper articles, diaries, etc...do help tell us about the past. I can't say that i believe in objectivity either, but the impossibility of objectivity should not disqualify the research that goes into doing history. "Simply: How can we in divine self-righteousness champion freedom when it may well reside within us an even greater desire to enslave others." This is just a fact of history....contradiction. Consider the French Revolution's notions of liberty, fraternity, and something else (don't recall) and the fact that these same people refused to free Haiti...of course they took their freedom in the Haitian Revolution. Should we not seek freedom if we're going to be contradictory? Those African Americans did not intend on colonizing Liberia and they didn't see the contradiction; they actually thought they were educating the "natives." We can see the contradiction and the fact that their Christianity made them no different from the Missionaries in Africa, Central America, etc... and it made them no different than the National Urban League, and other black organizations that thougth that the path to "uplift" black people was through religion, thrift, and morality...in other words, black americans' "backwardness" was partially responsible for their poverty. All of these groups thought they were helping the Liberians, africans americans, africans, etc....but they were all imposing a particular life style on people in order that these socalled "backward" people would become civilized. Were african americans in liberia sincere, probably...were african americans in the US dealing with urban black populations during the WWI sincere, probably, but were their programs the same as missionary programs? Yes...contradictory yes....but it didn't have to happen that way and it definitely wasn't there intent....but intent is not good enough, and so Liberians were colonized.... Another discussion: You seem so extreme....on many issues, you seem to say ok....well lets go "ALL THE WAY" or as it pertains to gender, you will never do something.....is there no middle ground? And, does it always involve doing something so extreme.....are we not doing this stuff to engage not necessarily to motivate people to do something, just something for us to think about and if we want to change then we will do so.....you seem to take these posts personal.....jus some thoughts! |
