Quick Takes

Comments on Quick Takes

• U of Toronto blackface
• Posted by Tim on November 12, 2009 at 9:00am EST

• If they had not attended an organized event its highly unlikely anyone would have noticed. Since the bobsleigh team in question were all persons of colour in real life, this lot was just in character. By this standard, Disney made a racist flick in "Cool Runnings" a few years ago.

• Blackface from a semi-sociological perspective
• Posted by John , History at Community Colleges on November 12, 2009 at 9:30am EST

• There is no doubt that this old fashioned type of comedy prop shows not only poor taste and would spark controversy, that is for sure. Racist innuendos like this show not only poor judgement in today's society, but also touch the feelings of both those who feel it is leveled at and those who are on the outside looking in. Even commenting on this topic might be a mistake, but I think we must look at this in the context of the situation as well.

  Was it for Halloween? Would it have been as offensive if one person was to make up a costume and be...say, Mike Tyson, with Evender Holyfield's ear hanging from his collar? Remember the masks that were all modeled after the US presidents? There are masks of all the presidents and the most popular ones are Richard Nixon and Ronald Regan, but I am not sure...is there a mask for Obama? Would that be considered a problem? Would it have been less offensive if those students dressed like women, stuffed their shirts and went as the US Women's Soccer Team? That would beg the question of if it is ok for a male to dress as a female for Halloween and not be a offensive sexist. Would that have been sexist to the same degree as racist in this case? Would it have been ok for black students to dress as the Jamaican Bobsled team? Would a costume depicting Josef Stalin been ok?

  Think about it. Are Halloween costumes to be censured to the current trend of societal thinking? Another question might be, were these students attempting to make a racist statement or just merely dressing for Halloween AND was it the costumes or a knee jerk reaction to them that is the problem...probably a little of both.

  For those who take the time to read this, please understand that I am looking at this as an interesting sociological problem and attempting to see things in a academic light, without condoning or berating either party. It just seems like people aren't asking themselves the proper questions before leaping into a fray. Whatever...I know I wouldn't have done what those students did, for fear of upsetting someone.

  Either way, the Jamaican bobsled team captured the attention and hearts of many of us when they competed. I thought it was great and was disappointed when they crashed, they had a movie made about them. In some ways this mimic might be a form of flattery? Who knows. Don't jump on me for asking these questions, they are legit and well founded inquiries that most people should be asking themselves when they see an article like this. I think, we also have to remember it was Halloween, not a public forum about societal virtues.

  Before you respond with any nasty comments, give some thought and remember as academics we can and should examine this with some detachment, regardless...What do you all think?

• Not "in character"
• Posted by Charisse , Communications on November 12, 2009 at 11:15am EST

• Using blackface as part of a costume is not dressing "in character," but rather in caricature of another culture, which is rarely, if ever, flattering. The lack of misunderstanding about the offensiveness of this type of caricature comes from ignorance about the historical use of blackface as a way to ridicule and demean African Americans and their culture, thus alienating them from the larger American culture.

  While we could easily say that people wear a variety of masks and costumes for Halloween, it is clear that blackface holds much more significance and brings to mind the America's historically atrocious behavior toward minority groups. It may seem harmless enough when detached from its historical significance, but to do so promotes ignorance rather than education.

• Posted by CA Educator , Prof at CSU on November 12, 2009 at 12:45pm EST

• It will take some time for the public perception of the quality of education in California to catch up with the reality. The cuts this year are most evident in the inability of students to get the classes they need to graduate or to complete a full-time schedule and maintain their financial aid. They are also evident in the refocusing on core major and GE courses and elimination of electives. Faculty are no longer able to teach specialized courses related to their research. As students work more hours to pay for tuition and books, they will read less and do less homework, and will graduate with lower gpas and knowing less. This will affect business later as the quality of the workforce deteriorates and there are fewer qualified students applying to grad schools.

  Sites like this should be focusing on the impact of the budget cuts, not the impressions among the general public. If more people were aware that our most mobile faculty (e.g., the most productive and most highly qualified) are sending out their resumes, they might be more concerned about the future.

• All history is offensive to someone
• Posted by Bubba on November 12, 2009 at 12:45pm EST

• Sorry to say, but blackface is offensive only because people choose to be offended.

  I've know blacks who were offended by tap dancing. Some were offended by Dixieland jazz played by whites. Some were offended by Dixieland jazz. So...?

  Can't we focus on the real issues of equal access to housing, education, empoyment and health care despite race instead of four halloween pranksters in grease paint?

  Talk about swallowing elephants and choking on fleas!

• No public support for quality
• Posted by Alan Contreras at Eugene, Oregon on November 12, 2009 at 12:45pm EST

• Why is it surprising that Californians don't think budget cuts will endanger quality? Most people have no idea what academic quality is and never will know. In addition, there is no public support for educational quality as an abstract concept and never has been.

  Imagine what would happen in the political arena if the K-12 school board in a state suddenly required that students have a genuine learning experience and knowledge base to graduate from high school. They would be hanged.

  What support for quality exists comes from a small number of leaders and industries that are capable of understanding the larger picture of what universities do.

  The public understands and supports what higher education does that has tangible results in their communities and lives. Only if budget cuts clearly damage communities and lives will "the public" care, and college leaders always strive to minimize that kind of visible direct damage.

  The natural tendency of academic leadership (and the legislators who fund public colleges) to compromise and avoid clear win-loss situations works to ensure that the "public" perceives postsecondary education as in reasonably good shape. This is the no pain - no gain situation that Mark Yudof and other leaders of state systems facing huge cuts have to deal with today.

• Quality in higher education(California)...public perception
• Posted by mark musick , Quillen Chair at East Tennessee State University on November 12, 2009 at 2:15pm EST

• A longtime friend and University of Kentucky president Otis Singletary (deceased) once explained that we in education are in part responsible for this public misperception that there is little connection between "quality" and funding cutbacks or shortages. He said that we in education describe "quality" as "something that is OFTEN THREATENED but NEVER diminished". He included himself in the long line of presidents that had stood before legislative committees and asserted that quality hung in the balance based on increases in funding , and when that funding did not materalize were back before the committees in following years extolling the accomplishments ( and quality) of the university's programs...whose quality was again threatened by budgetary problems ( but not yet diminished).

• Can't we all just get along
• Posted by Alan on November 12, 2009 at 4:00pm EST

• Regarding Blackface, you are right John. You ask some good questions that should be discussed. And Bubba, you are right also. We have a black president for heaven's sake, and millions (yes, millions) of white people voted for him so he can serve as president. So get over it already. If you have talent, and work hard, you'll succeed in this country, regardless of color. Quit swallowing on elephants and choking on fleas, as Bubba says.

• financial support vs quality
• Posted by RBG on November 12, 2009 at 5:30pm EST

• It would seem that the citizens of California are captive to the Free-Lunch syndrome. Maybe this is a precursor to a universal belief that there is no relationship between quality and financial support. Let us hope that such nonsense does not extend to surgeons and pilots.

• Jamaican bobsled team -- a celebration of?
• Posted by Cate on November 12, 2009 at 5:30pm EST

• Not having seen the students, I can't be sure, but I would have assumed that they appreciated the team's effort! The Jamaican bobsled team is celebrated by those of us in sport, as a true example of sport, sportsmanship, and an amazing level of sheer will power that most of us could not achieve. If anyone does not know the original story, the film is a light-hearted portrayal, a fun film -- and the ending -- true to the real story, brings tears to my eyes every time I think of it.

  I agree that most of us do not fully appreciate the extent of racism, even those of us who try -- but, couldn't we find out the true (pre-criticism) intent of the students before we castigate them?

• Posted by Dr. Anonymous on November 12, 2009 at 8:15pm EST

• I agree with John and Bubba. My position is that political correctness is always wrong-headed. It simply doesn't matter if someone is offended. People are offended all the time. It is not the duty of the university or of government to castigate people accused of offending someone. In addition, the natural level of discourse of college-level students is invective and satire. Good for them! And grant that we all remain young!