Lehe: Terminology not a Black and White issue
By Lewis Lehe / Columnist
published: Sun, 25 Oct, 2009
In 2004, Alan Keyes was running against an upstart lawyer named Barack Obama in a U.S. Senate race. Down for the count, swinging wildly, Keyes made the following accusation:
“Barack Obama claims an African-American heritage ... Barack Obama and I have the same race — that is, physical characteristics. We are not from the same heritage ... My ancestors toiled in slavery in this country.”
Obama not an African-American? It is hard to argue that you are an African-American only if your great-great-great-great grandfather was born in Africa, but not if your dad was. Are you only an Irish-American if your ancestors fled the potato famine? The denial rings especially false from Keyes’ lips: He believes Obama was born in Kenya.
Keyes is clearly fumbling for a word, though. His quip illustrates the need for a word that means more than “an American of African descent” — something like what W.E.B. Du Bois had in mind when he titled his book “The Souls of Black Folk.” Fortunately, we do have such a word. The word is “Black.” As in “Black people.”
Today I endorse saying “Black” sometimes, instead of saying “African-American” in every case. Here is what I mean by Black:
First of all, Black is a capitalized word. Black people are not black.What makes Black people Black is that they participate in Black culture — the culture that has evolved from the culture of West Africans who were brought over to the New World as slaves.Black people aren’t just Americans, if by “American” we mean “United States of America.” Black people live all over the Western hemisphere.
Here are a few reasons to embrace “Black” over “African-American:”
First, it takes a long time to say “African-American.” The phrase has seven syllables — one more than just outright saying “of African descent.” It’s rare that a noun elongates its own definition.
Second, because of how awkward it is to say, “African-American” has become a phrase White people use when they are afraid of offending Black people. It says, “Look how much effort I’m spending to show I respect you.” But respect is something better revealed in actions, not word choice. Black and White friends nearly always say “Black.”
Third, replacing “Black” with “African-American” implies that all people of African descent participate in Black culture, and thereby cut-and-pastes an identity onto African immigrants. These people are African-Americans, but might not want to be Black.
Fourth, if we use “African-American” to denote exclusively what I call “Black,” as Alan Keyes does, then what will we call recent arrivals from Africa? We would have to call them “African-African Americans,” or “American-Africans” or something else stupid that no one will ever actually say.
Fifth, “Black” preserves conformity across languages and places. “Negro” is the word used in Latin American Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. it translates directly as “Black.” These are two of the three languages that Black people speak in numbers, so they should influence the English usage. In the United States, we have gotten away with confusing “African-American” and “Black” only because the United States happens to not share borders with countries that have many Black people — all the Black people we meet are also African-Americans. But elsewhere, Black cultures span national borders. Should we expect Colombians to call a woman Afro-Colombiana when she is in Colombia and then Afro-Venezuelana when she crosses the border 10 miles to visit her sister in Venezuela on the weekend?
Finally, cutting “Black” from the language leaves an asymmetry, since no one actually says “Caucasian-Americans.” I could never explain to my child that he is White — at least half — but that his friends are African-Americans. And if you can’t explain such a common word to a child, to hell with it.
Now for the question you’ve been waiting to take offense at. Is Obama a Black man? I say that Obama is, today, a Black man. He has become Black by moving to Chicago’s South Side, marrying a Black woman, joining a Black church and immersing himself in Black culture. So, he participates in Black culture. But he grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, outside of Black culture. So, I would say that, before he was in his 20s, no, Obama was not Black.
However, there is plenty of room for ambiguity. Who’s to say for sure a man is African-American, African, American, Caribbean, Latino or Black? Words are just useful tools we have. And language, therefore, is never African-American or White.
E-mail Lewis at ljl10@pitt.edu.
RECENT VIDEOS
Comments
Dear Pitt News, Come Harder
Dear Pitt News,
Why have there been misspellings in every issue? Why is there no substantial content? Why do you allow your staff to write album reviews (rock, rap, and pop) when they barely listen to the albums and only seek to have their names in the byline for future portfolios? Why do you allow your staff to write columns on deep issues that they do not EXPLORE or RESEARCH? Why do you print stories that are of no interest to your constituents?
These are rhetorical questions. We all know the answer: you don't care. You could care less about someone criticizing your paper because you know that you will never go out of business. You could care less about squandering the great legacy that has been passed down for ninety nine years because you love to see your byline under a misspelled title. You could care less about covering THINGS THAT PEOPLE ACTUALLY WANT TO READ because you know that people will pick up your issue regardless--even though ten seconds later it will inevitably find itself in the nearest trashcan. You could care less about hiring GOOD WRITERS because to you, anyone who can properly hold a pen and type a few characters on a keyboard is qualified enough. YOU DON'T CARE.
And that's fine. I'm not asking for you to start caring overnight, but I will say this: COME HARDER. COME HARDER. COME HARDER.
If you're going to keep the nonchalant editor, the sub-par writers, the copy-editor that should have been fired months ago, along with the lackluster A & E section (What was the last interesting story they published?) then why don't you all sit down and come up with ways (there are a TRILLION) that you can make this publication better?
How about covering MORE student accomplishments from the non-athletic students (You are a "student-run" newspaper correct?) How about hiring a more diverse staff (How many Asians, Hispanics, or Blacks do you have on board?) so that they can offer cultural insights on various topics—Pitt strives for diversity, right? How about getting back to the basics and doing what your constitution asks you to do? (If you’ve forgotten, the most important part reads: “to prepare and publish a HIGH-quality newspaper…to provide a voice for the students of the university, and to provide a public forum for the university community.”)
COME HARDER. Get it together. COME HARDER.
That’s all we ask.
Sincerely,
Your Constituents.
Is this really what Keyes was saying?
I don't know that Keyes believes Obama was born in another country, as you've suggested.
It's true to say Obama is of African-American descent, because he is descended immediately from Americans on his mother's side, and from Africans on his father's side. So his heritage truly is a blend of African and American.
He was born in America, by most accounts (and definitely by all reputable accounts), since he was born in Hawaii a couple of years after it achieved statehood.
So, Obama is of African and American heritage. What Keyes means is American Black heritage. None of Obama's ancestors, as far as is known, were slaves in America, since his American ancestors were white. So Keyes is saying that Obama is not descended from the line of Africans brought to the Americas as slaves, which seems to be true. This is not the same as saying Obama was born in Kenya. (Keyes may now believe this; he writes for the site WorldNetDaily.com, which has been pushing this view since Obama's candidacy began).
Kudos to you for trying to write honestly about race, which is a tough and perilous thing to do, since you have to avoid both the cliches people use to make themselves feel better about their race, and prepare to put up with critics who are upset that you dared to challenge the PC views.
Not to confuse things further, but it is true that not all persons who can trace their ancestry back many generations in Africa are black, even if you exclude those who came from Northern countries to colonize Africa, such as the ethnically Dutch, white South Africans. The Egyptians were dark-skinned, but not probably what we would call black, for example.
This is a confusing topic.
Black Identity
I personally think whoever got offended by the article needs to calm down. They need to realize that was the author's OPINION. He didn't say it's the general rule that should be accepted by everyone. Everyone has different definitions of what Black, White, Spanish, or Latino mean. The author is entitled to his opinion, regardless of how absurd it may be or how much you may disagree with him. If you have a different definition then send an editorial regarding how you define "black or white".
RT
Response from an African American Student @ Pitt
After reading the article I didn't find it offensive...just no foundation AT ALL. I sent a letter to the editor, but unfortunately it never made it to the paper. DO NOT write, comment or make presumptions on a topic you know NOTHING about without doing research, let me be the first to say that openly. If you agree with this article in its entirety I suggest you utilize the Africana Studies Department, it’s there for a reason. There were valid points made, but others not so much. This issue is often discussed amongst students and scholars with factual support, I suggest you join one of these conversations…in fact; I personally invite you to the Black Action Society’s office on the 6th floor of the union to talk to us about it.
Personally, I find it offensive to make an attempt to invalidate or justify someone’s SELF identity. Things that authenticate “Black” legitimacy, should not be characterized by white people…I apologize, White people. The real issue is “What is Black and how do we address negative connotations associated with culture defying terms in the American English language”?
Black is not a race or a nationality, it is a terminology spawned from the Black Power/Civil Rights movements. It is suppose to be a term of endearment that symbolizes unity, beauty, strength and power. Black is a positive response to the negative connotations associated with the word itself and words like Ni**er and Negro, given by Europeans/Caucasians to enslaved Africans and their decedents. Black is culture, heritage, environment and social norms.
African American is considered to be a politically correct term identifying 2 things, ‘the decedents of previously enslaved Africans residing in America’ and ‘African migrants and their decedents that have attained proper legal status to reside in the US’. If one falls into either category they can choose to identify themselves as one, the other, both or neither…that determination is not up to another individual.
With that said, Obama did, so chill out...we know he's biracial, we know his background. On a positive note, this article definitely promoted dialogue amongst students and I appreciate that.
p.s, the statement made on West Africa was historically inaccurate; once again I suggest utilizing the Africana Studies Department.
Krystal Mitchell
Political Action Vice Chair- Black Action Society
Nicely reasoned
Well done. Thoughtful treatment of a very touchy subject. Eric Holder should read this, if he has the guts.
Oh, so this is Black Culture? Oh really?!
Dear Columnist,
Please completely finish your thoughts before putting them in ink. Perhaps, next time you will not appear foolish and ignorant to the blatant disrespect integrated into your assessment of African-American or "Black Culture." By no means do I mean to be presumptuous as to your intensions by claiming racism, but what exactly is meant by your statement:
"I say that Obama is, today, a Black man. He has become Black by moving to Chicago’s South Side, marrying a Black woman, joining a Black church and immersing himself in Black culture. So, he participates in Black culture. But he grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, outside of Black culture. So, I would say that, before he was in his 20s, no, Obama was not Black."
Basically, it seems that you are insinuating that, for someone to be Black, they must meet all the stereotyped images of "Black people." If this is not your intent, then please retract that statement and correct it. Black is a culture, undoubtably, but your portrayal of said culture is incorrect and offense.
Following your equation, if I cease to attend a "black" church, I cease to be black. Or, if I marry a white man, I cease to be black? Can you see the error in your logic? I am "Black" in the same way that someone else is White, and I will continue to be Black regardless of external circumstances, as will you, with whatever Nationality/Ethnicity you claim.
Also, you are actually grouping people based on an American standard. However, there is no "black culture," so to speak, in other countries. Thus, there are some conflicting points in your assessment. You are attempting to unite people under one term, but your pre-requisites for said term is a dividing factor. For example, if I were Chinese but I grew up in Norway, outside "Chinese culture," your assessment says I am only Chinese when I get back to the culture. Incorrect. I am Chinese, because I am Chinese, and I will be Chinese no matter where I am. Obama is half-black, period. Nevertheless, America, seeing things in more or less Black-or-White, assigned him a ethnicity, made him choose, so to speak, as they do to many that are half-black. He didn't marry Michelle to consummate his alliance to "Blacks." That is what your argument makes it sound like and it doesn't make sense. "Now, I'm officially Black!" Get out of here, really.
Side Note:
Whether Obama is black or not is actually not as important as people are making it out to be. The point of the matter is a feeling of vindication in the Black community that someone of African decent can achieve such success. It instills a sense of pride, something to tell our children and make they hopeful that they too can achieve something. What I don't understand is why people act that it is wrong to feel that way. Obama is a man, not God, and definitely not perfect. However, the message that his election carried is still the same.
I am not saying that you are racist, simply misguided.
Thank you. God bless.
'no "black culture," so to speak, in other countries'
This is a silly presumption with no foundation in fact. Have you been to Haiti? South Africa? You clearly miss the point of the article. Is an Arab from Morocco "African American"? Obviously not. The point of Lehe's very well reasoned article is clarity at the expense of "PC".
Having been to several
Having been to several countries in West Africa, I'd have to agree with GO in saying that the author's insinuation of there being a "universal black culture" is very false. Each of the countries I've visited, from Ghana to Senegal, from Mali to Cote d'Ivoire, has a unique culture all its own. The people I've talked with in these places consider African-Americans no more culturally similar to themselves than Americans of any other race.
As I wrote earlier, taking on such a provocative and complex issue requires more sensitivity. That begins with understanding the issue, and understanding begins with solid research and factual evidence. This column has no facts and little understanding, period.
The previous respondents have
The previous respondents have already raised objections similar to mine, so I'd like to go in a different direction- about the quality of journalism in this article, which I think reflects in a very serious way the journalistic integrity of TPN as a whole.
A good opinion columnist acquires a clear, comprehensive understanding of an issue, formulates a provocative and thoughtful opinion on this issue, then provides specific, factual evidence to support his opinion. Even as someone who is not an expert on this, it's clear to me that the author of this article is informed by only a dim, vague understanding of this issue and has provided not a single shred of evidence to support his thoughts. You clearly haven't done your homework on this.
Just because you're an "opinion" columnist does not entitle you to print the first thoughts that occur to you about anything and everything. Your job is to enlighten us, not just make arguments. Opinions that are not supported by facts and a clear, comprehensive understanding of an issue fall in the domain of Fox News, not responsible journalism.
I wish I could say this article is atypical. The sad thing is, this column is one of the more insightful ones I've seen in TPN; not for a lack of talent, I'm sure, but for a lack of commitment to sound, well-researched, informative journalism.
Bottom line is, Pitt students deserve a good newspaper, and as long as I've been here, TPN has failed to live up to that responsibility. It's time to shape up.
Thank you. I read The Pitt
Thank you.
I read The Pitt News daily in an effort to stay caught up in the current events affecting both the university and the world. Regularly I find myself appalled by the poor quality of the printed articles. They are incredibly typo ridden and constantly one sided.
I am especially disappointed with the G20 coverage. Yes it is important that you capture the student perspective. However, I have not read one article published in TPN that did not show the police in any sort of good light. Sure the police screwed up, but it's difficult to decide where they went wrong so it can be prevented in the future when all the media gives you is anti-police propaganda. Unfortunately, that is how I feel when I read most of the G20 articles.
-Josh
do spousal batterers need to be portrayed in a "good light"?
some things are wrong
police conduct during the G20 falls under this heading
for once, TPN has risen to the challenge and provided excellent coverage. if you want to see the pigs fellated in the media, turn on your TV or grab the Trib
"not entitle you to print the first thoughts"
Have you read the article with the attention and thought it deserves? Perhaps the Pitt News deserves some sensible readers... The article is well reasoned and constructed, and much more than just "first thoughts". Perhaps you should read it before you blather.
Re: Terminology not a Black and White issue
In reading this article, I was not necessarily offended. Instead, I was confused by your breakdown of what it means to be “Black” vs. “African-American.”
By your definition of Black people as those who “participate in Black culture,” anyone who listens to Hip-Hop, attends a Black church, and lives in a predominately Black neighborhood would therefore be Black. This is simply not true. I cannot disagree that to be Black is a culture. I will, however, say that it is much more than that. To me Black is a heritage, a history, a circumstance, a community, an experience, a mindset, and contrary to what you may have us believe – it is not always a choice. Being Black is often something that we are told, or a label that society uses to try to categorize us. Being Black is also something that can be given to us, passed down from one generation to the next.
As far I am concerned, the same goes for being African-American and I do not have a problem with using the two terms in place of each other (when referring to people of African descent in the United States). For many people using the term African American allows them to embrace, respect, and claim their African heritage, whether or not it is one generation removed or five. An attempt to extinguish this term, would deny those people that opportunity. In a country where history has stripped people of the African Diaspora of any and all identity – it is important to cling on to it in any way possible, even if only in a name.
For others, the term Black is all encompassing and denotes a strength borne through struggle. The term resurrects the ideas of the Civil Rights Movement, when using the term in place of “Negro” was an illustration of self-empowerment.
On a superficial level, yes African-American may be the more politically correct term. Likewise, it is true that the word “Black” defies national borders. And yes, it is true – however irrelevant – that African-American is six syllables too many for some. However, it is not true that we can sit and define others. In addition to being a culture, a “race,” and a community, Black is an identity; one that should not be assigned by you, me, or anyone else. The decision to embrace that identity, and to choose between the terminologies that depict it, ultimately rests upon the individual.
Black Identity
So you disagree that Bill Clinton was our FIRST Black president?
RE: Terminology not a Black and White issue
I will admit when I heard this column was in today's Pitt News, I cringed a little and braced myself for something extremely offensive that would warrant a letter to the editor. However, in reading this I found no offense, but rather some holes and generalizations.
I agree with you Lewis that Black is a culture that is vastly different from being an African or Afro-Latino first or second generation in America. Being Black in American stems from reclaiming terms and characteristics used against us during slavery, Jim Crow, and the Civil Rights Movement. James Brown said it best: Say it loud, I'm Black and I'm PROUD!
However, I don't think there is anything wrong with using the terms Black and African American interchangeably. As Black people we are African Americans: people of African Descent. And when we get away from that term we get away from our African heritage - something that so many Black people tend to do.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard people reject being African because their ancestors were slaves or from the South. Across our race there is a huge disconnect between descendants of slaves and the African continent. And understandably so. How can we claim a place when we really have no idea which country we come from. Claiming the entire continent works for many, but for others it just isn't enough.
Also, from my experiences - the term "Negro" in many Latin American cultures is actually derogatory. Negro is a color in the Spanish language, not a race or culture.
Despite all of this, I usually use "Black" to describe myself or my friends. It is a word that will never leave my vocabulary. And in response to "Dirty Daug" - Who are you to identify for Barack Obama? If he chooses to call himself Black then he should be able to do so without you, and everyone else coming at his neck for that decision.
For the record - I am biracial, with a white mother and a Black father, who is also part Cherokee. However, I identify with Black culture so I usually call myself Black. But, I guess since I'm less than half Black I shouldn't do that right? Wrong. I am proud to be a Black American, with a biracial background, and will be proud to raise my children that way as well.
Amanda Reed
Vice President - BLACK Action Society
Derogatory is as derogatory does.
""Negro" in many Latin American cultures is actually derogatory' So is "African American". That misses Lehe's point, with which I agree, that "African American" is a PC construct which is needlessly ambiguous.
Terminology not a Black and White issue?
Obama is maybe more than half white with a mother who was white. His American grandparents were a nice American couple from the midwest USA who moved to Hawaii. Obama's father was from Africa and was very black, but some say not 100% negro. The word is that he maybe had some middle East blood, so there you have it Obama is more than likely not even 50% black. So where does Obama and the others get off by calling Obama a black man when he is more white than black.
Pollution
Mindless repartee such as yours is painful to read. Please refrain from polluting these pages with your smarmy innuendos.
Post new comment