Obama & Race: Is This Play on Words Discriminatory?
Published in TAZ
(Germany) on 6 June '08
by Dominic Johnson & Bernd Pickert (link to original)
Is This Play on Words Discriminatory?
The title of our article on Thursday set off a hot debate – not only in U.S. blogs, but also in the taz: Was our play on words using "Uncle Tom’s Cabin” racist in the context of Senator Barack Obama’s candidacy? Two opinions.
Yes, says Dominic Johnson.
At the time Barack Obama was born, most of the blacks in the United States couldn’t even vote – today, a black man is few steps away from holding the highest office in the country. Nothing could be farther from this brilliant triumph than the title figure “Uncle Tom” – a well-intentioned, devout slave from the 19th century U.S. South, who accepts his fate in life, feels at home in his small cabin, forgives his masters even after their most brutal torture, and who would rather die than report fellow slaves who escaped or join them in their flight.
The book “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” is actually a burning treatise against slavery, but in the African-American community, the name of the hero is used to mean the embodiment of the obedient Negro, who accepts what fate deals him, instead of trying to change it. The term “Uncle Tom” is used pejoratively today in political discourse in the United States to mean a traitor: a black person who only works to please the white man. It’s an insult to call someone this name. This characterization has a disturbing historical connection: in the late 19th century, when the Democrats in U.S. South wanted to keep racial segregation, “Uncle Tom” was used as a derogatory term for blacks who changed parties, leaving the Republicans, who were more progressive in terms of civil rights at the time and joining the Democrats.
What does it mean to call the White House an “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” should the Democrats win the election? The talk of unsophisticated ultra-leftists perhaps, or that of cast-off pastor Jeremiah Wright, who could say that Obama becomes a traitor simply because he functions within the system?
If “Uncle Barack” is being used to characterize Obama’s politics, it makes no sense whatsoever, because Obama is not descended from slaves, but from a black Kenyan and a white American. The literary reference to “Uncle Tom” is fundamentally incorrect – unless you agree that his being (half) black is sufficient. Outside of that, the only thing they have in common is actual skin color and the only frame of reference a racial stereotype.
Then "Uncle Barack" is being used similar to the conservative right’s equation of "Obama = Osama,” or Bin Laden, because of Obama’s time spent in an Islamic country (Indonesia) and the fact that his second given name is “Hussein.” Why not use “Hussein’s Cave” as a title then? Not permitted? Interesting.
It’s reflects an extraordinary degree of thoughtlessness if the first thing to come to mind following the success of a black politician in the United States is “Uncle Tom.”
No, says Bernd Pickert
The taz on Thursday triggered fierce debate with its headline “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.” People reproached us for printing a racist headline, that any comparison of the Democrat candidate for U.S. president Barack Obama to the figure of “Uncle Tom” in the 1852 novel by Harriet Beecher Stowe is an affront to Obama and in fact, to all African-Americans.
The Uncle Tom in the novel is a black slave who tries to get along with his white masters and would rather find refuge in godliness than rebel against slavery. He relinquishes any power over his destiny – well almost. He helps two other slaves to flee and because he does not betray where they have gone, allows himself to be murdered.
The author was fervently against slavery; her novel is revered across the globe as a denouncement against the crime of slavery – not as a book about the foolishness of blacks. In the United States above all, the reception of "Uncle Tom’s Cabin” has changed since the black civil rights movement in the 1960s. As the black population broke free of the role of oppressed victim, “Uncle Tom” became an insult, especially in the black community.
This is exactly where the criticism was leveled at the taz – that to describe Barack Obama as an “Uncle Tom” was the worst possible thing to print. But what about calling the White House a “cabin”? That’s exactly the point, though, and that is why the huge photo of the seat of political power in Washington was spread across the entire page – along with that headline. What greater contrast is there than that of an oppressed, acquiescing slave with a candidate for the highest office in the United States? It is this grandiose story, the gradual defeat over racial oppression in the United States – a milestone represented without a doubt by Obama’s nomination – that is being talked about in our pages. “Uncle Tom” and his slave cabin are part of the past.
Must a headline about Obama be linked to his skin color anyway? To reduce Barack Obama, an exceptional politician, to the fact that he is black would indeed be racist. But would we really do the world a favor if we pretended that his skin color didn’t matter? What was that conflict over Pastor Jeremiah Wright all about then? We used the headline and the magnificent photo of the center of power in Washington to demonstrate the victory that Uncle Tom is passé – in the Uncle Barack era, everything has changed. It’s a shame that could be misunderstood.
The title of our article on Thursday set off a hot debate – not only in U.S. blogs, but also in the taz: Was our play on words using "Uncle Tom’s Cabin” racist in the context of Senator Barack Obama’s candidacy? Two opinions.
Yes, says Dominic Johnson.
At the time Barack Obama was born, most of the blacks in the United States couldn’t even vote – today, a black man is few steps away from holding the highest office in the country. Nothing could be farther from this brilliant triumph than the title figure “Uncle Tom” – a well-intentioned, devout slave from the 19th century U.S. South, who accepts his fate in life, feels at home in his small cabin, forgives his masters even after their most brutal torture, and who would rather die than report fellow slaves who escaped or join them in their flight.
The book “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” is actually a burning treatise against slavery, but in the African-American community, the name of the hero is used to mean the embodiment of the obedient Negro, who accepts what fate deals him, instead of trying to change it. The term “Uncle Tom” is used pejoratively today in political discourse in the United States to mean a traitor: a black person who only works to please the white man. It’s an insult to call someone this name. This characterization has a disturbing historical connection: in the late 19th century, when the Democrats in U.S. South wanted to keep racial segregation, “Uncle Tom” was used as a derogatory term for blacks who changed parties, leaving the Republicans, who were more progressive in terms of civil rights at the time and joining the Democrats.
What does it mean to call the White House an “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” should the Democrats win the election? The talk of unsophisticated ultra-leftists perhaps, or that of cast-off pastor Jeremiah Wright, who could say that Obama becomes a traitor simply because he functions within the system?
If “Uncle Barack” is being used to characterize Obama’s politics, it makes no sense whatsoever, because Obama is not descended from slaves, but from a black Kenyan and a white American. The literary reference to “Uncle Tom” is fundamentally incorrect – unless you agree that his being (half) black is sufficient. Outside of that, the only thing they have in common is actual skin color and the only frame of reference a racial stereotype.
Then "Uncle Barack" is being used similar to the conservative right’s equation of "Obama = Osama,” or Bin Laden, because of Obama’s time spent in an Islamic country (Indonesia) and the fact that his second given name is “Hussein.” Why not use “Hussein’s Cave” as a title then? Not permitted? Interesting.
It’s reflects an extraordinary degree of thoughtlessness if the first thing to come to mind following the success of a black politician in the United States is “Uncle Tom.”
No, says Bernd Pickert
The taz on Thursday triggered fierce debate with its headline “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.” People reproached us for printing a racist headline, that any comparison of the Democrat candidate for U.S. president Barack Obama to the figure of “Uncle Tom” in the 1852 novel by Harriet Beecher Stowe is an affront to Obama and in fact, to all African-Americans.
The Uncle Tom in the novel is a black slave who tries to get along with his white masters and would rather find refuge in godliness than rebel against slavery. He relinquishes any power over his destiny – well almost. He helps two other slaves to flee and because he does not betray where they have gone, allows himself to be murdered.
The author was fervently against slavery; her novel is revered across the globe as a denouncement against the crime of slavery – not as a book about the foolishness of blacks. In the United States above all, the reception of "Uncle Tom’s Cabin” has changed since the black civil rights movement in the 1960s. As the black population broke free of the role of oppressed victim, “Uncle Tom” became an insult, especially in the black community.
This is exactly where the criticism was leveled at the taz – that to describe Barack Obama as an “Uncle Tom” was the worst possible thing to print. But what about calling the White House a “cabin”? That’s exactly the point, though, and that is why the huge photo of the seat of political power in Washington was spread across the entire page – along with that headline. What greater contrast is there than that of an oppressed, acquiescing slave with a candidate for the highest office in the United States? It is this grandiose story, the gradual defeat over racial oppression in the United States – a milestone represented without a doubt by Obama’s nomination – that is being talked about in our pages. “Uncle Tom” and his slave cabin are part of the past.
Must a headline about Obama be linked to his skin color anyway? To reduce Barack Obama, an exceptional politician, to the fact that he is black would indeed be racist. But would we really do the world a favor if we pretended that his skin color didn’t matter? What was that conflict over Pastor Jeremiah Wright all about then? We used the headline and the magnificent photo of the center of power in Washington to demonstrate the victory that Uncle Tom is passé – in the Uncle Barack era, everything has changed. It’s a shame that could be misunderstood.
Previous article![]( "Obama on Top")
