I've been scolded on prior occasions for arguing that people should understand the historical context for a creative work before passing judgment on it, but the fact is that history matters. In the context of black-face, that history primarily includes mocking a population that had little to no power to respond. Even if one could cite a case where mockery was not the intended goal of putting on black-face - even if one could cite an unlikely situation in which a white performer was attempting to respectfully portray a black character - that situation would still entail a white entertainer taking a job that could/should have been given to someone who would have had far fewer opportunities available to them. Because of this history, the morality of Gov. Northam's behavior as a college student is not really ambiguous. The degree to which a 59 year old man is responsible for his actions as a late adolescent are debatable, but that the behavior was not acceptable is not debatable.
Given the historical context, grease paint, shoe polish, or any other makeup effect intended to make a white person look like a caricature of a black person or even intended to make the person actually look like a black person is not okay. The latter point is covered by the portrayal of Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr.) in Tropic Thunder - Lazarus has no intention of mocking or belittling people of color, but the character's decision to play a black person is clearly wrong. (Downey Jr.'s decision to play a character playing a person of color has been described as "risky".)
While the circumstances of that movie are satirical, in real life Brian Cranston's role in The Upside recently invited similar criticism from individuals with disabilities. As Peter Cook and Dudley Moore's (1964) One Leg Too Few comedy sketch illustrates, persons with disabilities are generally limited to playing characters with disabilities.
When a non-disabled person takes one of those roles - especially the role of a title character, it is clearly unfair. This issue of fairness is at least part of the reason why a black actor taking on the role of a white character (e.g., Chiwetel Ejiofor playing Baron Mordo or Michael B. Jordan playing Johnny Storm) is very different from a white person taking on a role that would/should have been given to a black performer (e.g., Emma Watson playing Hermione Granger).
That all seems simple enough, right?
Unfortunately, ethical issues seldom are. The world is full of gray areas that have to be navigated. Consider the following questions, and how you might answer them:
- Is it okay for a white musician to cover a song traditionally performed by black artists?
- Is it okay for a white person to take a role that would traditionally have been given to a person of color, if they do not attempt to pass themselves off as a person of color (e.g., Tilda Swinton portraying The Ancient One in Dr. Strange)?
- Is it okay for a white person to cosplay as a black character if they do not wear black face (e.g., a white person dressing as Blade)? Is it okay for a white person to cosplay as a black character whose face is concealed (e.g., Black Panther or War Machine) or as a non-racial character who has been played by a black actor/actress (e.g., Gamora)?
- Is it okay for a male actor or cosplayer to take on a female role, and if it's not okay, where do we draw the line between 'wigging' and drag?
- Is it okay for a white gamer to play a video game with a person of color as the main protagonist? What if the gamer was given the opportunity to create their own character, and chose to play as a person of color (i.e., is that digital black-face)?
- Is it okay for neurotypical actors and actresses to play individuals with mental health issues?
- Is it okay for a scientist to study a human population to which they themselves do not belong?
- Is it okay for a straight white male to write a book in which the lead character is a queer woman of color?
It's often difficult to bring up questions like this, as most people seem inclined to assume that you're attempting to find a loophole or craft an argument for why black-face or cultural appropriation should be acceptable. You're likely to be accused of distracting or dismissing the issue by bringing up absurd hypothetical situations.
But... none of those things are absurd. Those are all things that can and do happen, and if we expect today's adolescents to be accountable for their current behavior thirty years from now, we really ought to be providing incredibly clear guidelines for what is and isn't okay.
Personally, I'm still grappling with the last of those non-hypothetical hypothetical situations, and have gone so far as messaging the NAACP for advice on the matter (I figure they're the closest to experts on the matter one could find). At its simplest, I cannot see any fundamental difference between a white actor playing a black character and a white writer creating a black character to present their words. If anything, it seems morally worse.
The only arguments I see in favor of a white writer having black characters are that (1) if white writers omit black characters from their work, then the quantity of representation of people of color will decline and (2) it's a slippery slope that, when taken to its logical and not really absurd conclusion, ultimately restricts me to writing characters who are straight white males. Clearly, the latter point makes it practically impossible for me to write anything worthwhile by modern standards; my only option, really, would be writing about sentient alien robots and even that brings down a fair bit of criticism when one goes into emotional intimacy or gender identity.
On the one hand, I'm inclined to think that I should be able to write without having to contend with such obstacles. I feel like I shouldn't have to eliminate 90% of the characters from my books because they don't fall within my specific demographic cross-section, especially while individuals in other demographic cross-sections don't have as many restrictions to deal with. It feels unfair.
On the other hand, I've been told that, "[My] voice doesn't need to be heard," "[I'm] a man; no one cares what [I] think," and that the field has too many white male writers as it is, and that white men need to step aside to open opportunities for women and people of color, and shift their focus from generating new content to promoting the existing work of women and people of color. My gut response is, "But I don't want to write book reviews, I want to write fiction," but that does sound like petty super-villain reasoning.
In the grand scheme of things, it's a trivial concern. I don't think more than a dozen people actually read the Rise of Azraea novels, and I don't imagine I'd have any more luck with anything else I've been working on. But what is and isn't unethical isn't dependent on one's success, right?
That being the case, I've finally decided to 'unpublish' Rise of Azraea on Amazon, remove the blog where the book and its sequel were posted, and scrap any further plans (e.g., audio recording, more sequels) involving that book series. It's painful to have to do that - years of my life went into those two books, and it's soul-crushing to have nothing to show for all of that time and energy, but then I suppose that's a pretty weak complaint coming from a white male living in a country that built its prosperity on the backs of slaves and the disenfranchisement of women.
Obviously, the same argument can be applied to Divine Retribution and Wild Justice, which both have female leads. I haven't decided where to go with that. The right thing to do would be to, as I said before, give up writing altogether. Honestly, though, if I give up the 'writer' part of my identity, all I will be is a stay-at-home husband. Eventually I will be a stay-at-home dad, but I'm not sure I'm prepared to have my identity reduced to that and only that. A great man would make that sacrifice, but maybe I'm just alright.
No comments:
Post a Comment