BLACK GERMANS

http://www.blackgermans.us

72 notes

"Saturday Night Live Korea's Adoption Sketch: No Need for an Apology"

peaceshannon:

burndogturns:

image




Yeah. You read that right. ”Saturday Night Live Korea’s Adoption Sketch: No Need for an Apology" is the title of the latest post from our old chum Pissy Clissy No Co.

Now…I don’t have time for a response today…but I think that it’s worth sharing what he wrote before I get around to…

thanks to @burndogturns for tipping me off to this asshole who apparently thinks that SNL didn’t need to apologize:

So, with this in mind, I am going to defend those at Saturday Night Live Korea for their little comedy sketch. Not so much because I think it is really funny or a valid representation of adoptees, but because I am pretty sure I don’t know enough and don’t care enough to be outraged about it, and I get a little tired of misdirected and phony outrage.

read: i am going to defend this thing that i can’t possibly understand (nor do i even think is that valuable in the name of “comedy,” which is what i’m defending), but because “i don’ t know enough and don’t care enough to be outraged by it” - and if i’m too ignorant or indifferent to be outraged about it that means 1) no one else should be outraged and 2) my opinion about about it it still valuable.

For instance, I have heard that the skit in question on SNL is actually making fun of a specific TV program that used to run in Korea and Korean dramas where they used the subject of adoption (quite possibly many times) and airport meetings of adoptees and their real parents as a subject for melodramatic shows of emotion (cue the tears and piano music). Most foreigners living in Korea would not have known this and probably most adoptees - who had not spent much time in Korea - wouldn’t have known this either.

ummmmmm, i can assure that MOST adoptees know about these shows because they are basically one of the FEW ways we even have a CHANCE to find our families and so we all have to swallow our fucking pride and go on them, already hating feeling infantilized by the whole thing. if you think the show successfully mocked the way those shows use adoptees, and wasn’t mocking adoptees - then you do not understand korean well. don’t patronize us and act like we’re offended because we didn’t understand. also, even koreans (who are not the only ones who would’ve picked up on the cultural reference to those shows - again, adoptees know, thank you) were severely offended. but maybe you wouldn’t know that unless you can actually access korean media and SNS.

…outrage gets magnified as it’s spread around social media and it becomes very difficult to take a step back and see that it isn’t really that outrageous. Much graver misfortunes are made light of in comedy all the time.

again, you don’t get to tell people the people who are being mocked whether or not something is offensive. and once again, two (or two hundred) wrongs don’t make a right. just because other “graver” things are mocked, doesn’t make them all ok. it makes them all wrong. 

The point is that there are many unfortunate situations we will never truly understand, many that are much worse than the subject of adoption. Intelligent people can see comedy is comedy and making light of hardships is sometimes a necessary part of life and this in no way detracts from our ability to empathise with real people embroiled in really heart-achingly sad and difficult situations.

again, you don’t get to decide what situations are worse than the subject of adoption or birth family search. unless you have actually been adopted or embarked on a birth family search. you acknowledge you can’t understand these situations but somehow you still think you can assign which ones are worse and which are not worth getting outraged about?

In summary then, some might say I am getting outraged over people getting outraged, but no, not really. I am just tired of them making life less fun for us all and sitting on top of their throne of moral superiority and not admitting that a huge reason people get upset about stupid things like this is to help inflate their already sizable egos and make themselves feel important or special. 

I am not innocent in this regard either, to write a blog in the style of this one, you have to have a bit of an ego, and I am sure my ego does leak into my blogs from time to time, but at least I don’t require a sense of humour transplant.

read: i suspect that some people are using this to inflate their own egos and moral superiority. i might also be an egotistical asshole, but at least i’m an egotistical asshole with a sense of humor!”

As for the adoptees themselves who were offended by it, of course they can take offense to it and they can voice their feelings, but I think they need not, and in my opinion I think it is pretty lame. There are a million hardships we will never fully understand that people suffer from and to erase every one of these situations from comedy is not only impossible, but would make the world a very boring place indeed. Somethings are truly damaging or irresponsible - like using a blackface gag in a Sunday afternoon family comedy show - but do we really think any harm will come, any rights trampled upon, or any prejudices enhanced by SNL Korea’s mildly controversial sketch involving the issue of adoption? Surely not. This has nothing to do with people demanding censorship, by the way, this is simply me reacting to the outrage produced. People are totally within their rights to voice their outrage, as I am within my rights to say it’s stupid.

read: adoptees can be offended, but i deem them lame for voicing their anger and hurt over the dominant and degrading discourse about adoptees. i don’t think the way that adoptees have been separated by their families, language, cultural, and identities are “truly damaging.” why? because i said so. and who am i? the random white guy who knows the universal truth of who has the right to get offended (but of course, i’ve already acknowledged multiple times that i don’t really know or care about it). and even though i so generously acknowledge their right to complain, i think they’re stupid. and my opinion (on a subject that i don’t know anything about) is valuable, of course.

379 notes

medievalpoc:

Anonymous Venetian Artist
Cameo With Bust of an African Boy
Italy (c. 1590)
Sardonyx and Gold, Overall: 5/8 x 7/16in. (1.6 x 1.1cm); visible cameo: 15.8 x 13.2 mm.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
[x] [x]

medievalpoc:

Anonymous Venetian Artist

Cameo With Bust of an African Boy

Italy (c. 1590)

Sardonyx and Gold, Overall: 5/8 x 7/16in. (1.6 x 1.1cm); visible cameo: 15.8 x 13.2 mm.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

[x] [x]

28,427 notes

museumofmodernerotica asked: Maybe this is a crazy question, but how did Europeans know what Africans looked like? I know that some of the paintings here are of North Africans/Middle Easterners, but others clearly depict people born south of the Sahara. I've heard of Prester John but I never imagined that medieval Europeans were aware that Prester John would have had brown skin. Am I missing something?

medievalpoc:

Like. There are a lot of things I could say here. But I’m just going to do my best to answer your question, and the answer is either very simple or very complicated, depending on your current point of view.

1. “They” knew what people with brown skin looked like because people with brown skin had been there literally THE ENTIRE TIME. Some (and father back, ALL) of “them” had brown skin themselves.

2. “People with Brown Skin” and “Europeans” are not separate and mutually exclusive groups.

3. No matter how far back you go, the mythical time that you’re looking for, when all-white, racially and culturally isolated Europe was “real”, will continue to recede from your grasp until it winkles out the like imaginary place it is.

We can just keep going back. In every area, from all walks of life, rich and poor, kings and peasants, artists and iconoclasts, before there were countries and continents, before there were white people.

Russia, 1899:

image

Switzerland, c. 1800:  [fixed link here]

image

Netherlands, 1658:

image

Poland, 1539:

image

Germany, 1480s:

image

Spain, 1420s:

image

France, 1332:

image

Scotland, England, France, 1280s:

image

France, 1220s:

image

England, 1178:

image

Belgium, 1084:

image

Greece, c. 1000:

image

Spain, 850s:

image

Throughout Europe, 800s-500s:

image

England, c. 300 AD:

image

Scotland, c. 100 AD:

image

image

Italy, 79 AD:

image

Greece, 170 B.C.:

image

Greece, 300 B. C.:

image

Greece, 400s B.C.

image

Greece, 500s B.C.:

image

Egypt, 1200s B.C.:

image

Crete (Minoan), 1600 B.C.:

image

Crete (Minoan), early 2000s B.C.:

image

Romania, 34,000 B.C.:

image

The time when “EVERYONE” in Europe was White does not exist. They knew what people with brown skin looked like because they were there. They knew what “Africans” looked like because they were there, and they weren’t “they”, they were us, or you. I think what you’re missing is something that never existed.

910 notes

Can anyone actually provide a reputable and non-biased source to prove that Beethoven was, in fact, a PoC?

medievalpoc:

magdolenelives:

medievalpoc:

political-incorrectness:

If not, I think it’s safe to say that as he was born in Germany to European parents, he was PROBABLY WHITE and can PoC PLEASE stop trying to take credit for the achievements of white people? 

(I’ve worded this really badly, but I am currently half asleep.)

Wow.

Why is this tagged “medievalpoc”?

"reputable and non-biased"

"stop trying to take credit for the achievements of white people"

I just

Like seriously there are so many things wrong with everything you’ve just typed I cannot even begin to address it.

Suffice to say, your apparent biases in regards to “reputable and non-biased sources” actually disqualify ANY source that would meet your personal requirements for random internet people to provide you with a free education- and for what purpose? To convince you that people of color have HAD accomplishments?

Who gains ANYthing here besides you?

Why should *I* care?

Why should anyone care? You tagged it with my blog’s title in hopes of getting some kind of homework tutoring or works cited page for free? You think that’s really going to be the result of your racist baiting?

Or do you just think that people of color with blogs or anyone who runs an educational blog owes you free tutoring, as well as correcting your painfully obvious character defects?

This is an art history and historiography blog, about education and our education system.

This is not “hold hands with a racist until they magically become a better person” dot com.

Good luck in your life of yelling demands for proof of reality from passersby.

Good Gods, the responses to this garbage manage to scrape the bottom of the barrel even by the level of scum that is Tumblr anti-social justice…

thecrybabiesoftumbler: “I read that as “we dont actually have reputable sources”

political-incorrectness: “That’s basically what it is. If you ask these people to back up their arguments or provide evidence, they throw a tantrum ranting about how they aren’t there to educate anyone (which is fucking hilarious, as medievalpoc looks like an educational blog to me) which just makes it look like they have no idea what they’re talking about. What scares me is how many people on Tumblr are this ignorant, and the fact that I can get more sense out of the WN community than the so-called ‘liberals’.

That’s right, you just saw someone make a racist post asking “can PoC PLEASE stop trying to take credit for the achievements of white people” (no, seriously), tag it with the URL of a blog devoted to people of color in art history, and not only get pissed that they got their ass handed to them (how dare an educational blog not be willing to throw information to racists making ridiculous claims!), but actual defend white supremacists (WN = White Nationalists).
Oh, and then there’s the lack of “reputable sources” since MPOC never cites sources, right? Oh, wait, I forgot the pesky “reputable and non-biased” probably means “White Nationalist literature”. Ew.

For those interested and not lazy racists, http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/tagged/beethoven, since apparently that was too hard to do and required a snotty post whining about people of color stealing from whites that had to be tagged with the blog’s URL.

Notice the confirmation circlejerk quoted above. Of course NO sources THOSE PEOPLE could provide would EVER be good enough, right?

Oh, also for anyone ACTUALLY INTERESTED AND NOT WHITE SUPREMACISTS:

Beethoven may have concealed for Adrienne Kennedy was that the composer was believed to be black-a belief widely held by the poets and artists of Kennedy’s generation, who drew upon the works of J. A. Rogers for their evidence. In Nature Knows No Color-Line,for example, Rogers argues that

… Germans are not the pure “whites” many assert they are. Several German writers agree on that, among them Frederick Hertz, Brunold Springer and Rudolf Rocker. Beethoven, for instance, is named by all three as showing Negro “blood”…. We need but think of Luther, Goethe, Beethoven, who lacked almost completely the external marks of the “Nordic” race and whom even the most outstanding exponents of the race theory characterize as hybrids with Oriental, Levantese and Negro-Malaysian strains in them.

In Sex and Race, Rogers devotes his attention to the dark Beethoven sketched by Letronne and engraved by Hofel:

The color of the engraving does not necessarily correspond to the subjects real color, though many seem to think so. A white man can be made to look black, and a black man, white, in a picture. A dark tint, however, will bring out Negroid features i there are any, as they do in this picture of Beethoven-the reason, perhaps, why this one is often reproduced in a shade much lighter than the original.

Beethoven was described by one who knew him as “blackish-brown” in color. As for his features they have been so Nordicized that, as Thayer remarks, the dark-skinned, ill-favored little man that was Beethoven would not recognize himself if he were to return. Every bit of evidence available from those who knew Beethoven indicates he was of Negro ancestry.

Orpheus Ascending: Music, Race, and Gender in Adrienne Kennedy’s She Talks to Beethoven.
Philip C. Kolin.
African American Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, Black Women’s Culture Issue (Summer, 1994), pp. 293-304.
There’s also a quote from the Washington Courier from 1961:
When I told Dr. Otto Neuratli of the Museum of Vienna , that Beethoven was of Negro ancestry he not only confirmed it but showed me Beethoven’s genealogy. He also mentioned Goethe, Germany’s most famous writer, as being of that stock. Rocker also names Goethe and Martin Luther, along with Beethoven, as among those who lacked almost completely the external marks of the Nordic race. (Nationalism and Culture, pp. 319, 1937.) Some who knew Beethoven bear this out.
Fanny del Rio, who was in love with him, for instance. In her book. “Ah Unrequited Love,” dedicated to Queen Victoria, she says “his flat, broad nose, ra’her wide mouth … swarthy complexion, gave him a strong resemblance to a mulatto.”
His life-mask in the Beethoven House in Bonn (very, very rarely shown in America), shows a very flat nose, wide mouth with full lips and other Negroid features. It is reproduced - in “Sex and Race,” Vol. 3.  The New York Times, July 1, 1940, also cites Brunold Springer of Beethoven’s Negro strain in an article, “Negroid Blood In Hitler’s Aryans.”
So basically, what we’re talking about are facts known for decades/centuries.
But hey, everyone knows these people don’t have reputable sources so why even bother, right?
Because no source is good enough for white supremacists trying to prove that people of color are trying to “steal” white accomplishments.

135 notes

medievalpoc: