Skip to main content

Dayyum, Governor Northam



Let me put this together to see if I understand.

On February 1, 2019, the Virginian Pilot brought to light a yearbook photo from the Eastern Virginia Medical School class of which Virginia's Governor Ralph Northam (D) is an alumnus.  The photo, on his yearbook page, showed two young men, one in minstrel show style blackface and the other wearing a KKK hood.

Northam's immediate response was to admit that he was one of the two young men pictured. It was not immediately clear which one, but he was clear that he was one of them.

"I am deeply sorry for the decision I made to appear as I did in this photo," he said. That wording doesn't leave a lot of room for misconstrual. There were only two persons who appeared in that photo. Thus only two people made the relevant "decision," and Northam was saying he was one of them. He doesn't say which one, but that mattered little given how offensive either of them was.

In the hours that followed, a number of important people, inside and outside of Virginia, inside and outside of the Democratic Party, gave notice that the apology was inadequate without a resignation.

In the evening of Feb. 2, Groundhog Day, Northam held a press conference. He denied at this point that he was EITHER of the figures in that photo, and gave inconsistent explanations of why he had cleary said otherwise the day before. And he refused to resign.

It was a deeply weird conference in a number of ways. Most markedly, Northam took a digression into talking about a dance contest at which he had participated (and won!) dressed as Michael Jackson. This was by way of admitting that he HAD once appeared in what one might call blackface, although far short of the full-on minstelry of the party photo under discussion, which of course he was saying WASN'T him.

In the Michael Jackson connection, the deepest two points of the deep weirdness here were as follows:

1) he said he used only a little bit of polish in two small stretches under the eyes, because shoe polish is very hard to wash off -- it seemed that he was conveying a hard-earned piece of empirical knowledge. No one pressed him on the experiences that had caused him to learn how difficult that was BEFORE the dance contest incident; and

2) he seemed seconds away from showing off the contest-winning dance moves, actually looking about the stage as if judging whether the space was sufficient. Then his wife in a stage whisper said "Inappropriate circumstances." And he gave up the idea.

Dayyum Governor Northam. Can't wives be spoilsports! Video of you showing off your moonwalk would have "gone viral" in seconds. It might have broken the internet for real.

Comments

  1. It seems odd that Northam would use blackface to resemble Michael Jackson, when Jackson had bleached his skin white. Can we say that he used whiteface?

    ReplyDelete
  2. That struck me also. If I understand correctly, Jackson had a skin condition, vitiligo, which whitened his skin in patches. He bleached it to make it more consistent. But the idea that someone would darken skin (ordinary Caucasian-pinkish skin) as part of a Michael Jackson costume suggests just how socially constructed our idea of skin color, as a marker of 'race,' is.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Or race is a socially constructed marker of skin color. That is, a person of the Negroid "race" is viewed as black even if he or she is white. I am reminded of Mark Twain's "Pudd'nhead Wilson," which is about two boys born at the same time who both look white and have the same slave master father, but one's mother is the slave master's wife and the other's mother is the slave master's slave, who is descended from a long line of slave mothers and slave master fathers.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak