NORRIS EMERGES: Where to begin?

TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2021

Langston Hughes started with rivers: In some accounts, the current moment started with the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in 2012.

In other accounts, the current moment started with the murder of George Floyd, last year.

However you want to tell the story, the current moment can be quite intense.  On Sunday, the Washington Post's Michele Norris was saying, in a long essay, that we need to have "a national conversation on race"—an undefined type of national conversation which could take decades, she said.

Does that proposal make sense? Putting it another way, is our sprawling nation capable of conducting some such "conversation" in some sort of organized way?

There's no final way to answer that question, but we were struck by several aspects of Norris' heartfelt essay. For starters, we were struck by the degree of exasperation—perhaps, of anguish—visible throughout the long essay.

As an example of what we mean, consider the way this good, decent person began her presentation.

Norris began with an account of a personal experience. We can't speak to the accuracy of her account, but we can speak to the general tone of her narration:

NORRIS (6/6/21): Shortly after the National Museum of African American History and Culture opened in 2016 on the National Mall, I was speaking to some patrons of a successful nonprofit about the importance of candid racial dialogue in politics and in the places we live, work and worship.

One of the participants had recently toured the museum and had a pointed question. Why, she wondered, were all the exhibits that visitors first encounter dedicated to slavery? Among other things, she was referring to a reconstructed cabin built by former slaves from Maryland and a statue of Thomas Jefferson next to a wall with the names of more than 600 people he owned. “Couldn’t the exhibits begin with more uplift?” the woman asked, arguing that Black achievement was more worthy of the spotlight. She suggested that the museum should instead usher visitors toward more positive stories right from the start, so that if someone were tired or short on time, “slavery could be optional.”

Her question was irksome, but it did not surprise me. I’d heard versions of the “Can’t we skip past slavery” question countless times before. Each time serves as another reminder that America has never had a comprehensive and widely embraced national examination of slavery and its lasting impact. Yes, there are localized efforts. But despite the centrality of slavery in our history, it is not central to the American narrative in our monuments, history books, anthems and folklore.

Norris was speaking to a group of swells. One of the swells asked a question.

Norris found the question irksome. She seems to believe that she knows what the swell meant.

This patron had toured the National Museum of African American History and Culture and she'd had a certain reaction. She wondered if the story in question might be better told if the exhibit opened with uplift rather than with exhibits devoted to slavery.

(Inevitably, the irksome question had come from a woman. Quite possibly, she was a Karen!) 

In her telling, Norris knew what the patron meant. The patron meant that the museum, and the rest of us as a general matter, should just skip the whole slavery question.

Norris had heard it many times before. She knew what the patron meant.

Do you mind if we ask a certain question at this point in time? Is it possible that a certain kind of (borderline noxious) "privilege" is playing out in these remarks?

We refer to a possible sense of "privilege" on the part of Norris, not on the part of the Karen. 

For ourselves, we have no idea what the patron meant, or even if there ever was any such patron. But we can't help thinking that Norris is taking a bit of an all-knowing view with respect to the question she fielded.

How should the  National Museum of African American History and Culture best organize its exhibits? We have no idea, nor is there any objective answer to that question.

That said, that patron's question, on its face, doesn't strike us as . The population in question—this nation's African-American population—has been, among other things, author of one of the greatest moral / religious traditions in the history of the world.

The brilliance of that tradition emerged from centuries of brutal treatment. Way back when, Langston Hughes described the greatness as shown:

The Negro Speaks of Rivers

I’ve known rivers:
I’ve known rivers ancient as the world and older than the flow of human blood in human veins.

My soul has grown deep like the rivers.

I bathed in the Euphrates when dawns were young.
I built my hut near the Congo and it lulled me to sleep.
I looked upon the Nile and raised the pyramids above it.
I heard the singing of the Mississippi when Abe Lincoln went down to New Orleans, and I’ve seen its muddy bosom turn all golden in the sunset.
I’ve known rivers:
Ancient, dusky rivers.

My soul has grown deep like the rivers.

Would something be wrong with encountering something like that when one enters this museum? We can't imagine why. In our view, it might even be a very good—and yes, an "uplifting"—idea!

Or not, of course. There's always more than one way to do things. There's almost always more than one way to understand.

It's dangerous, of course, to structure any conversation around the claim that one population group may be morally or spiritually superior to others. 

Could someone take Hughes' poem that way? Inevitably, somebody would!

It's also true that a person can make a perfectly sensible, good-faith suggestion and be discarded as "irksome." Inevitably, our brutal history has produced such reactions—our brutal history, plus the lack of ultimate wisdom produced by the way our imperfect brains are wired.

Is it be a bad idea if those who enter that museum are confronted, right off the bat, with the imagery of enslavement? Maybe! Within the past year, some observers have complained that the news media should stop playing the tape of George Floyd's death, saying the constant broadcast of such imagery is disrespectful to Floyd and harmful to black Americans.

It isn't obvious that that suggestion is wrong. Nor is it obvious that the patron who raised her hand that day was making a lousy suggestion.

At any rate, that's the way the museum in question had chosen to start its exhibit. Also, that's the way Norris, a good decent person, chose to start her long essay.

As she continued, Norris seemed to draw many conclusions from what she heard in that irksome question. This is where the recollection took her, at the start of a very long essay:

NORRIS (continuing directly from above): There is a simple reason: The United States does not yet have the stomach to look over its shoulder and stare directly at the evil on which this great country stands. That is why slavery is not well taught in our schools. That is why the battle flag of the army that tried to divide and conquer our country is still manufactured, sold and displayed with defiant pride. That is why any mention of slavery is rendered as the shameful act of a smattering of Southern plantation owners and not a sprawling economic and social framework with tentacles that stamped almost every aspect of American life.

We can read about, watch and praise documentaries and Hollywood projects about the Civil War, or read countless volumes on the abolitionist or civil rights movements. But these are all at a remove from the central horror of enslavement itself. From the kidnappings in Africa to the horrors of the Middle Passage, the beatings and the instruments of bondage, the separation of families, the culture of rape, the abuse of children, the diabolical rationalizations and crimes against humanity—no, we haven’t had that conversation. We have not had that unflinching assessment, and we are long overdue.

From one admittedly irksome question, we were invited to take a long trip.

Instantly, we were told what "the United States" lacks the stomach to do. We were also told that we should revisit the horrors of the past, and that seems to include all the horrors:

We're long overdue to hear about "the kidnappings in Africa, the horrors of the Middle Passage, the beatings and the instruments of bondage, the separation of families, the culture of rape, the abuse of children, the diabolical rationalizations and crimes against humanity," Norris now said.

We're long overdue to hear about that, and we should spend decades doing it.

Does this suggestion make ultimate sense? Should that patron he asked to hear more about the horrors, the culture of rape, the crimes against humanity?

That strikes us as a very human suggestion. But in the end, does the suggestion make ultimate sense?

If we're going to have a long conversation, what should that conversation be like? Also, where has this version of Norris emerged from? Why did Hughes perhaps adopt one tone, with Norris now offering another?

Tomorrow: Revisiting horrors


20 comments:

  1. "For ourselves, we have no idea what the patron meant, or even if there ever was any such patron."

    Somerby has no problem calling the good decent person, Norris, a liar, for saying something he doesn't like.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Would something be wrong with encountering something like that when one enters this museum?"

    The accomplishments of African Americans should be part of the American mainstream and should appear in the other museums in Washington DC, not be segregated to a single special museum devoted to African Americans. Langston Hughes is part of literature, not solely part of African American heritage.

    It should no longer be necessary to prove that African Americans have contributed to American culture. And that is not the purpose of this African American museum. The organization of the exhibits should be guided by the purpose of the museum, as determined by its board and staff. No doubt that has been discussed extensively, although Somerby dismisses that effort by saying there is no "objective" way to determine how exhibits should be organized (a statement that presumably applies to all of the Smithsonian museums).

    In a time when people do not appreciate the impact that slavery has had on African American history and culture, it strikes me as fully appropriate to begin with that experience. The disapproval of white people who visit the museum, who presumably do not like being reminded about that part of American history, should not be dismissed as "Karen" (Somerby's way of dismissing any criticism of racist white behavior) when Norris never uses that term herself. These white objections to mention of slavery are to spare white feelings. Somerby needs to recognize that and understand that the museum is intended to educate white and black visitors, not to distort history (by reorganizing its presentation) in order to make everyone feel comfortable with the past.

    We have a group of people who cannot understand why black children get lower test scores than white children. They want to explain it using genetics. Perhaps they would be less prone to use that convenient explanation if they understood what the suppression of literacy during our brutal racial history (to use Somerby's language) meant in terms of people's lives and current experience. People need to be confronted by slavery and that is why it is first -- so that no one will miss it in their journey through the museum, as they might if it were hidden in the back or on a higher, less visited floor.

    Somerby's reaction, like the one Norris explicitly complains about, is why slavery needs to be front and present as people enter the museum. Because the purpose is not to exalt accomplishments that should be part of mainstream America, but to remind people about the parts it wishes to hide from public view, the shameful parts that have shaped our bigoted views of black people.

    It is telling the Somerby doesn't understand this. It is essays like this one that make it clear that Somerby is no liberal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think he's raising valid questions about how best to make outsiders understand the full range of the African American experience. Is it always the best approach to lead with the victimization story, which most Americans probably have developed a shorthand way of understanding? Maybe a different approach, emphasizing the immense achievements of such grievously oppressed people, would get the visitors thinking in new ways. Your approach may be the best, but I don't think it's obviously the only way. And Somerby certainy didn't say the museum should not have exhibits on slavery. It is weird that you think it telling to end with asserting that Somerby is no "liberal," as if not being so buttonholed is a crime. He certainly isn't a conventional liberal, but he is far from a conservative.

      Delete
    2. I think it's Bob's continued repeating of Right-wing grievances, and his running interference for Conservatives, which make people think he's a conservative.

      Delete
  3. "at the start of a very long essay"

    The nerve of Norris! Making people read a whole bunch of words about something she feels strongly about!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't see any incompatibility between what Norris asks and the Langston Hughes poem. Why does Somerby?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Somerby is so busy highlighting the parts of Norris's work that support his complaint, that he completely misses the answer to Somerby's own questions:

    "That is why the battle flag of the army that tried to divide and conquer our country is still manufactured, sold and displayed with defiant pride. That is why any mention of slavery is rendered as the shameful act of a smattering of Southern plantation owners and not a sprawling economic and social framework with tentacles that stamped almost every aspect of American life."

    This is why the museum is organized as it is. This is why we need to have that conversation. Somerby would have heard these words if he weren't so busy trying to evade such a conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The nerve of you saying ouch because I stepped on your foot! You are supposed to suffer in silence. You are supposed to forgive every wrong. How dare you confront me with my own wrongdoing! Who are you to dare to suffer?

    This is Somerby's stance and it is truly untenable.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, dear Bob, whether you like it or not, The Superior African Race has achieved the ultimate martyrdom.

    The (alleged) descendants of the Israelites must be extremely disappointed.

    We don't mind, really. Let Patrisse Cullors swindle liberal idiots and buy expensive houses. Let Michele Norris swindle liberal idiots and buy whatever she craves.

    Who are we to judge? Who are you, dear Bob? Judge not lest ye be judged.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 'Norris began with an account of a personal experience. We can't speak to the accuracy of her account, '


    Somerby takes a pot-shot at Norris's veracity. Note that he gives Trump, Roy Moore, Ron Johnson, Devin Nunes and Matt Gaetz the benefit of doubt when they lie. Proof once again that Somerby is a Trumptard.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. “Nor is it obvious that the patron who raised her hand that day was making a lousy suggestion.”

    I have been to the museum. Has Somerby? It is constructed so that the visitor typically starts underground, with the earliest history of African Americans in the United States. It is claustrophobic and windowless.

    The visitor proceeds farther and farther upstairs, finally emerging into spacious, well-lighted floors that exhibit the positive contributions of African Americans over the years.

    It’s intended to give the visitor a sense of the journey that African Americans have taken in America. I found it exhilarating and a very positive, uplifting experience.

    But it may be uncomfortable for some to witness the tragedies and truths that are documented there.

    And of course, you don’t have to start at the lower level; the visitor is free to skip all the uncomfortable stuff if he wants to. It’s up to the individual.

    I’m sympathetic to Norris.

    We live in a country where there are still monuments to traitorous slaveholders all over the public squares of America. America not only hasn’t come to terms with its racist past-it is still celebrated in many places.

    Can you imagine a faction in Germany similar to the confederate sympathizers here, urging Germans to erect monuments to Adolf Hitler and getting pissed off when they get pushback?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Why does Somerby quote Langston Hughes in a post about the National Museum of African American History and Culture?

    Because he was black?

    Somerby has told us that “race” is an illusion, so why doesn’t he just go with Robert Frost and the snowy woods? Won’t any poet do just as well as any other?

    Perhaps Somerby trots out Hughes as a purported example of how a black poet ought to sound, ie positive and uplifting? That certainly makes white guys like Bob feel better than if they encountered dark, angry poetry by a black writer. Or a slave cabin in a museum.

    And the same Wikipedia entry where Bob got his Hughes quote tells us that “Hughes was one of the few prominent black writers to champion racial consciousness as a source of inspiration for black artists.”

    He wasn’t exactly preaching an abandonment of race as an idea. Perhaps he would think differently now, but I don’t presume to enlist him in any causes.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Norris: She suggested that ... if someone were tired or short on time, “slavery could be optional.”

    So it’s a time / energy problem. Many peoples ain’t got no time for slavery. And many is just plumb worn out.

    I suggest mandatory national paid holidays for all Americans, say four to six weeks, like most countries in Europe have so that people have more time to study stuff like slavery.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Then vote for Democrats, instead of your fellow bigots.

      Delete
    2. I always have voted Dem, but Clinton and Obama never proposed paid vacation for Americans. I'm hoping Biden will.

      Delete
  13. Oprah should have used her 2nd Amendment rights to protest police misconduct, instead of her lame-ass First Amendment rights.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Has Ohpra defunded her local police dept. yet?

    ReplyDelete
  15. You made some decent points there. I looked on the internet for the issue and found most individuals will go along with with your website.

    Conorneill.com
    Information
    Click Here
    Visit Web

    ReplyDelete
  16. DR EMU WHO HELP PEOPLE IN ANY TYPE OF LOTTERY NUMBERS
    It is a very hard situation when playing the lottery and never won, or keep winning low fund not up to 100 bucks, i have been a victim of such a tough life, the biggest fund i have ever won was 100 bucks, and i have been playing lottery for almost 12 years now, things suddenly change the moment i came across a secret online, a testimony of a spell caster called dr emu, who help people in any type of lottery numbers, i was not easily convinced, but i decided to give try, now i am a proud lottery winner with the help of dr emu, i won $1,000.0000.00 and i am making this known to every one out there who have been trying all day to win the lottery, believe me this is the only way to win the lottery.

    Dr Emu can also help you fix this issues

    (1)Ex back.
    (2)Herbal cure & Spiritual healing.
    (3)You want to be promoted in your office.
    (4)Pregnancy spell.
    (5)Win a court case.

    Contact him on email Emutemple@gmail.com
    What's app +2347012841542
    Website Https://emutemple.wordpress.com/
    Https://web.facebook.com/Emu-Temple-104891335203341

    ReplyDelete