.png)
Author Information
Angela Davis: 40 Years and She Keeps On Keeping On
Normally, not plussed by famous people, last night was definitely a high in life for me. How terrific to go to see one of the most important women in the 20th century. (I will now rant about the conditions....a broken down auditorium, one security guard, incompetent tech assistants, bad screens, no crowd control, and a 50 minute wait to have technical assistance, which never worked)...btw, it was sponsored as a Media series. methinks McGill University needs to stick to medicine and stay out of media.
OK, now the discussion.
There is never enough time when someone of this genius and power is able to speak. This dynamic woman, who suffered prison time under trumped up capital charges, who has traveled the world speaking for disenfranchisement and brutality, and who has written words that far too many have never read...was humble and confident. A product of the sixties, Davis was/is instrumental as a voice against racism, for feminism, for gay rights, and prison conditions.
Angela's presentation surrounded the discussion of media and the historical memory of how Blacks have been depicted since the early 1850s..position of camera, mug shots, etc., and was drawn to current police brutality events, including the execution-style murder of Oscar Grant. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK1DXQRQ5ZU A murder caught by many cellphones this past January.
Pointing out how even Obama, himself, has silenced the conversation on race, she gave us thoughts to explore. Read some of her work, this experience was not to be missed.
Sometimes I feel like giving up...seeing Davis, who knows so much more, has experience so much more...gave me hope
One thing I know....post-racist era...wtf?
Check out this program to get to know her: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU-PNWxhjr8
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| index.jpg | 2.38 KB |
Printer-friendly version
- Topic Tags:
Comments
Stereotyping-The Culprit!!
<!--StartFragment-->
Unfortunately I had to leave a little earlier than expected since a small emergency came up, but I had the opportunity to listen to Angela Davis' lecture until they started cutting her off. I agree with Shirley, in that the conditions for this renowned woman in this day in age were embarrassing. It didn’t seem so bad when I first walked in, but to be honest I didn’t even know who Angela Davis was. After she began to speak, I realized her importance and the influence she has had our society. For McGill to host such an honorable guest and have the mishaps they did during the presentation was not professional in my opinion. The over-flow room should have been forecasted way earlier and competent tech facilitators should have been there to help with the presentation. Hopefully we didn’t turn her off from such a so-called ‘distinguished’ educational institution. During her talk, I kept hearing how times have changed for minority groups. Compared to the way things were 40 years ago, we have definitely made progress, but in the end of it all I really don’t believe we are as advanced as we should be when it comes to recognizing minority groups and respecting them for their value in our society. I guess the concept of stereotyping has a lot to do with the way we see the world, and unfortunately it is a deteriorating factor to the potential we can attain with respect to our social acceptance. Having spent a month in this course, I have realized how much the media influences its viewers, and how much it helps feeds the problems at times rather than help. One comment I remember Angela talking about was the first times African-Americans appeared on television. She talked about how her whole family would scream and they would all convene in one room to watch the big event unfold. How far have we really come though? The shooting she talked about right after the inauguration of the first Black President of the United States made me realize that we still have ways to go when it comes to this issue. I will admit honestly that I have been a culprit in stereotyping, I don’t think anyone can say that they haven’t at least once in their lifetime, but I think its important to consider its affects on society and be conscious about avoiding it.
<!--EndFragment-->
Racial Profiling in Saskatcheawn
The sort of blanket racial profiling that pervades the American justice system isn’t limited to our friends south of the border. I spent the better part of Angela’s speech on Thursday thinking about Darrel Night, Lloyd Dustyhorn, Rodney Naistus, Lawrence Wegner, Neil Stonechild, and the other Aboriginal men in Saskatoon who have fallen victim to mistreatment at the hands of the police on account of little more than racism. Her discussion of the American penal system “claiming black bodies” reminded me that in Canada 75% of the male prison population and 90% of the female prison population is Aboriginal, even though they comprise less than 4% of the total Canadian populace.
The twisted logic of the whole sorted Saskatoon story is simple. Saskatoon Police officers, by their recent admission, were taking intoxicated Aboriginal men three miles south of the city to the outskirts of the Queen Elizabeth power station and leaving them there to walk home, even in the dead of winter (if you have experienced a Saskatchewan winter before, you know that -50 C is not out of the question on a cold night and -30 C is the daytime high in the doldrums of January and February). The men were often jettisoned from the police car with only a t-shirt. This informal practice (known around town as the “midnight blue tour”) was meant to circumvent paperwork and the “time constraints” of bringing the men in for processing downtown, and thus became a simple “solution” for a number of officers.
Some of the victims survived. Darrel Night, abandoned in November with only the shirt on his back, walked several miles to the power station for help, where he was able to tell his story. Not everyone was so fortunate. The next night, the body of Rodney Naistus was found in the same area, frozen to death. A similar fate in the frigid outskirts of the city met Lawrence Wegner, Lloyd Dustyhorn and D’Arcy Dean Ironchild.
This pattern of abuse finally came to light with the tragic freezing death of Neil Stonechild, a seventeen year old teenager whose body was found frozen miles south of Saskatoon. Stonechild was seen in police custody by a witness who testified that Stonechild was in the backseat of the cruiser, shouting “They’re gonna kill me!” and bleeding. Despite Stonechild’s mother’s protestations, the initial investigation into his death was almost non-existence and later acknowledged as wholly inadequate. An eventual inquiry (2004) into the matter would see the firing of both officers from the Saskatoon Police force, but no charges laid in the negligent death of Neil Stonechild.
Angela asked about the tragic death of African-American Oscar Grant at the hands of a white Oakland police officer, “What convinced this man that it would be okay to shoot a young black person like that?” We need to ask the same question at a systemic level in Saskatchewan and Canada. What would convince a segment of the police force that an Aboriginal life is disposable enough to risk the freezing death of a person on the outskirts of the city? What would convince someone to shove a person out the door in a t-shirt in the dead of winter and drive off? The Stonechild Inquiry had a number of recommendations to stop the midnight blue tours as a practice, but this injustice is only the manifestation of a deeper, imbedded racism that continues to pervade. Snuff out one unjust practice and another will rise up in its place if we do not address the root cause of these very practices.
But how do you do that?
Positions of Privilege
I agree completely with Robert. In listening to Angela on Thursday it would have been easy to say "yeah but up here..." Which up to a year or two ago, I would have believed. Robert brings up a great point about our treatment of the First Nations peoples on this side of the border and reminds me of a Jane Elliot special on CBC that I saw in another course. (try the link I put here) http://www.cbc.ca/passionateeyesunday/indecentlyexposed/profile.html
Ms. Elliot brought her famous "blue eyes/brown eyes" exercise that she was using in California originally with her primary school class and applied it in a Saskatchewan town to First Nations and white people.
As I grew up in a town surrounded by 6 Firt Nations reserves, this TV special gave me an entirely new perspective on some of the ways I saw things as I grew up. I had always claimed that I had no prejudicial ideas and did my best not to demonstrate any, there are aspects of my culture growing up that are prejudicial and don't paint a fair picture for First Nations people.
It is my belief that we all see the world from our own perspectives and unless we are constantly reflecting on what we see and what we do, we run the risk of making decisions or acting in such a way that could be seen as inconsiderate on an individual level or have even larger consequences in a group context.
I am not advocating for political correctnes, on the contrary, I believe that frank and honest conversations between people is the only way to learn from one another and that sometimes trying to be too careful or polite is almost as bad as not engaging at all.
Anyways, I enjoyed the CBC special and learned a lot about myself from it. If anyone else has or knows about similar resources please pass them on.
See you on Thursday!
My Angela Davis blog was posted in another section so I have dec
I had the same question...
Other racially profiled groups
Abolishing Prisons
Good Morning Ladies
I have to agree with the both of you this morning about the topic of abolishing prisons. My main concern is definately what would we do with those sex offenders, rapist, etc. I have to admit that I understand the concept of reforming the criminals that are salvable, but I really dont believe that sex offenders and child molesters can be cured, they are simply crazy and with no hope. I am not willing to the chance on having them lose on my turf. Has H_Craig said: I also heard that hard core criminals have a major chemical imbalance that can never be fixed. It is really important to keep in mind that sex offenders cant be educated and/ or transformed. I have to believe that it is a dead end for those criminals, but maybe Angela would come up with an alternate plan that could be succesful. Until the new plan as been put foward and its proven to be succesfull, we need to keep those prisons alive to lock up those crazy and dangerous criminals.
Angela Davies
What a great and amazing women!! She has come so far and done so much in her life. Yet as I heard her speak she was ever so humble. Although I had heard of Angela Davies and of her imprisonment before, it had been so long ago (probably in the 70’s) when I attended McGill, I too came home and googled her. It is hard to believe that a women who experienced the humiliation of racial segregation at an early age, in Birmingham, Alabama, and then her notoriety on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitive list (incidentally only being the third women to appear on this list-at that time) being charged with kidnapping, accomplice to conspiracy and homicide of Judge Haley, could remain calm yet passionate about her activism with regards to racial justice and the abolishment of prisons. Interesting enough, she was acquitted by an all white jury.
I too agree that I’m not sure we could abolish prisons totally but I think we need to look at “who” we are placing in our prisons. In one of the “you tube” videos that I watched, she mentions how one gets a 5 year prison term for drug possession, yet doctors prescribe Prozac, I highly addictive medication to make you feel better, on a daily basis. Something seems wrong with this picture.
Just a side bar- I realize technology is not “fool” proof but you would think in this day and age we could at least be able to show video clips with sound. How embarrassing to have such a distinguished guest and no technical “know how”.
I was born in a small town.
I am with the group who had never heard of Angela Davis. In the Townships (an hour and a half from Mtrl) we have been unfortunately isolated from much of the multicultural world. Fifteen years ago when I was finishing high school I had not ever had one person from a visible minority group, not one person of a different faith other than protestant or catholic or had some one who spoke another language other than French in any of my classes. It was not until I went to a vocational school on the south shore that I encountered difference. I was in a class with Native Americans, students from Jamaica, Trinidad, Haiti, Greeks, and Italians, during the first week I realized that my elementary and high school education had not prepared me for life outside my bubble. I had culture shock. For the first time I was the minority. Working in the schools in the Townships today little has changed. There may be one or two students with dark skin, or of a different faith out of the total student population in a school. The hall talk is has changed little in fifteen years as well. I really feel that words of hate spoken by students are a result of how little diversity there is in this area. I have even heard stories of children crying out of fear of being on the Champlain Bridge on class trips to Montreal. I cry on the bridge at times also, however; for different reason.
<!--StartFragment-->
When I hear talk of a post-racist world I have to wonder what part of the world the speaker is discussing.
<!--EndFragment-->
I understand what you mean.
I understand what you mean. There are areas in Montreal that are very similar. I went to an elementary school in Montreal that only had Italian and Portuguese students. There was one coloured person in the whole school. Later on as I moved on to High School. The picture didn't change. We were only white, European kids who didn't know other people existed. It was only when I went to Dawson College that I received a culture shock of how many other people existed.
Go figure and I was born and raised in Montreal !!
Relegating Race to Small Venues
On October 1, 2009, McGill University offered a public lecture by Angela Davis on Media, Race and Power. The organization of the lecture was deplorable. The lecture, which drew an extraordinary amount of students, was held in an auditorium classroom in one of the Campus buildings. By the time I arrived at 5:50 p.m., people were no longer being allowed into Room 132 where the lecture was taking place. Instead the university had all the “extra” people corralled into a room upstairs where they stated the lecture would be streamed. In yet, another classroom over 250 people, if not more, were crammed into a tight space like sardines, many being forced to stand or to sit on the floor. Ten, twenty, thirty, forty minutes passed before the video finally began to stream. Once it did begin to stream there was no sound! We sat in a packed room waiting desperately to hear Davis speak and instead were confronted with negligence and a clear inability to fix the problem. Twenty minutes into her presentation there was no way to know what Davis was saying.
While I have no idea what Davis said for the first half of her lecture, due to the reasons stated above, the whole experience itself speaks volumes, pun intended, about race and media. Davis a woman of color represents a double minority; she is both black and female. The venue that she was offered at McGill was much too small for the capacity of the crowd. It is hard to speak to the reasons why McGill would choose to book such a small space as their location, but one can beg to ask the question whether a white male academic lecturer wouldn’t have garnered a bigger room? While the crowd assembled in Room 232 was multicultural it included many racial minorities; is this the reason why it seemed to be an acceptable solution to usher us into a non-operational, crowded space? Would McGill have adopted the same solution if the lecture were being attended by white male conservative, donation bearing businessmen as opposed to liberal minded, multi-ethnic students?
The lecture only became audible at 7:00 pm upstairs. Why? A student managed to get the video to stream on his Mac Book and then a microphone was placed up to the speaker of his laptop. The solution to the problem was found due to student resilience, not university staff, in fact not one important faculty official came into the room, leaving only two frantic student university technicians to deal with a crowd that was increasingly frustrated. If the crowd had been composed of a different socio-economic grouping or an alternate cultural one would the same situation have occurred?
When we finally had sound the room burst into applause and then into laughter when Davis herself commented on the technology problems present in the room, she was in, stating that she could not explain the circumstance of the Oscar Grant case because the video she had could not be presented. Why did the university not test their equipment to make sure that it worked prior to Davis’ lecture? Would this lack of preparation have been present if Bill Gates had come to lecture? At roughly 7:25 when Davis was going to speak about how Henry Louis Gates dealt with his potential arrest a battery power shortage began to appear on the screen and we watched the next 10 minutes of Davis’ lecture on racial profiling and public conversations in the media with a yellow battery sign blinking on her head. It seemed that the media was sending a powerful message, black women, albeit brave and powerful civil libertarians, don’t garner the same respect that white, conservative academics do. Lectures on economic reform, law and capitalism tend to be well-thought out, planned and scheduled, yet those that deal with touchy subjects like race, capital punishment and inadequate educational opportunities for people of color, are relegated to a more laisser-faire approach.
How ironic that a lecture on race and the media became a mirror to the problems of race within the media. How interesting that a university’s inability to prepare and to plan coincides with the gender and the color of the guest speaker. How amazing that in 2009 we still place so little importance on audiences of multi-cultural and multi-ethnic backgrounds and relegate them to crammed quarters and poor service. How sad that media quality and distribution is still determined by race. How pathetic that a university, a center for learning, has not risen above these limitations but chosen rather to propagate them.
Media sponsored conference
I have to admit
Incarcerating people for profit
While remarkable activists like Angela Davis are fighting to abolish prisons, some businessmen are trying to set up the ultimate business: private prisons. Can you imagine the justice system being operated by private interests? How is it right for anyone, other than the state, to imprison criminals? In an attempt to reduce costs, local, state, or federal agencies are contracting private businesses to lock up criminals and offenders. And if you think private prisons provide better treatment for inmates, you’re wrong, it appears to be exactly the opposite. In order to reduce costs & maximize profit, they cut down on expenses; every penny they do not spend on food, medical expenses, or guard training is a dime they can pocket. Moreover, they have the right to choose what inmates to accept, or refuse, and usually take only the cost-effective ones. They say that violent offenders are cheaper, and I don`t understand why. Aren`t inmates supposed to be treated equally, above all as human beings? I wonder what the inmates think when they look at a guard`s uniform and instead of seeing an emblem that reads State Department of Corrections (or something similar), they see one that says Sterco Prison Corporation. Do they feel that they are serving a sentence, or that they are just some merchandise that some rich corporations benefit from? And in some countries they are even trying to introduce private prisons where inmates can pay for certain privileges. Then, I wonder, what`s the purpose of being in prison? Has the phrase `being incarcerated` changed its meaning?
I have to agree that Angela
Great People Never Give up!
Keep fighting! Keep moving! Get knocked down and get up! The courage it takes and the determination in the face of the hardest challenges of real-life (NOT A REALITY SHOW) is where the true heros are born. Nelson Mandella, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, jr., Malcolm X are just a few people who put their lives on the line to speak out against blatant injustices. They inspire us even today to speak out and move our own little world forward.
Now, what about the everyday heroes?
(...aside for the unacceptable conditions of the media presentation...I will not waste this blog on reiterating the frustration we felt sitting upstairs straining to hear this important presenter's speech) Angela Davis has made and continues to make her mark on society. She grew up living discrimination. She could have bowed down and accepted the unfairness of society and never made a "ripple". But she didn't. She spoke out and continues to do so. How many of us have the courage to REALLY speak our minds...in any setting in front of any group? How courageous are we?
One last point: Getting rid of prisons...not so sure about this concept. What is our goal when we incarcerate individuals?...reforming prisoners or simple punishment? Sometimes, I confess, I must vote for the latter...especially when the crime targets innocent children!
Great People Never Give up!
Keep fighting! Keep moving! Get knocked down and get up! The courage it takes and the determination in the face of the hardest challenges of real-life (NOT A REALITY SHOW) is where the true heros are born. Nelson Mandella, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, jr., Malcolm X are just a few people who put their lives on the line to speak out against blatant injustices. They inspire us even today to speak out and move our own little world forward.
Now, what about the everyday heroes?
(...aside for the unacceptable conditions of the media presentation...I will not waste this blog on reiterating the frustration we felt sitting upstairs straining to hear this important presenter's speech) Angela Davis has made and continues to make her mark on society. She grew up living discrimination. She could have bowed down and accepted the unfairness of society and never made a "ripple". But she didn't. She spoke out and continues to do so. How many of us have the courage to REALLY speak our minds...in any setting in front of any group? How courageous are we?
One last point: Getting rid of prisons...not so sure about this concept. What is our goal when we incarcerate individuals?...reforming prisoners or simple punishment? Sometimes, I confess, I must vote for the latter...especially when the crime targets innocent children!
Gotta Hate Tech Issues
I wonder how we can be best prepared for a presentation considering that the technology will fail.
Let me tell you about last year's presentation, we were three in a group, we brought in two lap tops, and we had our power point presentation ready as a back up on slides for a projector. Of course the power point for some reason did not work and we were left to use teh projector. . what a boring presentation.
We sent the professor the power point via email, and we thought he would be proud that we were efficient and had everything organized so that we could still run a smooth presentation.
We received our mark and feedback included: technology was not working therefore marks deducted. .So although we were proud of ourselves and felt that we did not waste our classmates time, we were dissappointed in the university professor who could not see beyond the fact that the technology wasn't working. Besides, we gave over the same presentation, maybe without the lights and bells but it was still a prsentation filled with information and insight. What do you think about that?
Is PowerPoint a blessing?
Lisa, the fact that you were prepared for any case scenario shows that you are a well-organised student and I really don’t understand why anyone should lose marks because they don’t use PowerPoint to do a presentation. Have we, as consumers, become so accustomed to staring at a screen that we can’t appreciate the qualities of a good orator? Do we need to be continually entertained with colourful visuals so that we don't get distracted?
PowerPoint is very good at creating visuals, and we all know that a presentation with visual aids is more persuasive and keeps the audience’s attention alive. But an effective presenter may be just as persuasive. Some people are such good orators that technology would actually interfere with their discourse. On the other hand, PowerPoint is a blessing for shy people as it shifts the attention away from the presenter; sometimes it even saves bad presentations, as it becomes a replacement for the speaker. And there are so many students and teachers that abuse it! Too many slides, too much text, and so on. The balance is difficult to find but I guess the ideal is to keep it simple and use it only as reinforcement. And at the end of the day it's still a matter of personal choice, isn't it?
Davis was a treat
As the auditorium quickly filled and we reached full capacity, a second and third viewing room was opened. Judging on the number of participants, I knew that I was in for a treat! But how come I had never heard of Angela before? Was I the only one in the crowd that was unfamiliar with her? There were posters of her circulating, I was feeling out of the loop......she must have been a known person. I was eager to learn all about her.
Despite the technology problems and the many complications we had with her presentation, I was surprised that everyone remained seated in the auditorium and did not leave. As we waited, I was eager to know who she was. She mentioned that she was in jail for something she did not do. I was disappointed that she did not explain what she did and how she was saved. (I decided I would goggle and find out when I got home). I quickly learned by the end of her speech that the focus was not what she did but how her experience allowed her to change things for others. It was clear that her misfortune with law lead her to help others and improve their situation. I found her to be inspiring, motivating and open-minded.
Should jails be abolished? Although many may agree and others disagree, there is no right answer because of the risks implicated if someone is falsely charged. I do believe that the mentally ill people need to be looked after and not released back into society because media has proven time and time again that their actions are always repeated again. Is it fair for the victims to suffer?
Angela Davis
Angela Davis is a renowned professor of history of consciousness and an activist who now works for racial, gender equality, gay rights, and prison abolition. There is much controversy around Angela Davis because of her involvement in demonstrations of differing sorts that took place around the world. She has made a reputation for herself in many communist countries for her positive support of the cause of the people.
The Magical World of Daytime Soap Operas
Soap operas have been around since the invention of T.V. they remain a part of our culture and devout fans cling to each episode as though it was their religion. Many soaps have become some household daily rituals.
Teaching Popular Music
So I listen to the music and try to understand what the lyrics mean. Growing up in the 80’s does not seem all that much different except for the fact that sometimes you couldn’t even understand the lyrics since they were drowned out by the sound of drums and electric guitars. A different time, a different place, a different culture.
The interesting thing about teaching Computer Graphics is that you can put a different spin on any project that students get to work on through the use of color, images and fonts. Style or genre is created through a visual appearance. This appearance can then be interpreted as a style from the culture of which it descends. Like Hip Hop music which depicts an era, mood and culture from which it descends. It’s here for now so lets embrace and try to understand its message. Do I think that Hip Hop music can be incorporated within a curriculum? Most definitely yes.
Advertising, Gender, and Sex
True ads can be neither true nor false. Ads try to represent the product in the best possible light. It is true that sex sells. It always has and always will. The dynamics have changed since early psychologists analyzed the parameters of advertising. Gender behavior has caused and upset the most orthodox beliefs in the sexual content of ads. As Sut Jhally pointed out, true gender culture is culture specific and the rituals performed within the culture around the world are changing.
The perception is greater than the reality. All advertising is an image of our reality projected and enhanced. Today even the feminists have difficulty with their arguments of male chauvinist dominance. Sut refers to Wendy Chapkis, a lesbian, who doubts her own place in a sexual world. The dynamics of gender is no longer male/female but so much more diverse. It now encompasses both genders as well as gays, lesbians, transsexuals, and other forms of life styles.
Chapkis in Sut’s article would like to dispel the word sexuality and change it for erotica. It is only a label. Grey lines can be found in both terms. I do not find that the question “what lies behind the considerable power that advertising seems to have over its audience” was clearly answered. Sut quoted different authors but never really answered the question. The power in advertising lies in the audience. What sells the product the best and most efficiently is what will be the “hyper-ritualization” or the reflection of reality.
Barbie
<!--StartFragment-->
I love Barbie. Always have, always will. My sister played street hockey with the guys on the street where we lived. She was somewhat of a tomboy and I was the total opposite. Could not play sports, had two left feet and was totally fragile. Never really even spoke much.
The year I got my first Barbie for Christmas, I remember my sister getting a wood burning kit. Unlike her, I was not interested in smoking up a storm on planks of pine. Instead, I was one of those daughters who got one doll and stayed true to her throughout my childhood years. She had red hair and the most beautiful blue eyes. So why such an attraction to a doll you ask?
In retrospect, I do believe that a part of me idolized her because she was simple. Whatever clothes I dressed her in—and these were home made clothes, she looked great. She could do no wrong and on top of that she didn’t even have to speak.
I also think that I idolized her because I could speak through her when getting together with friends. It didn’t matter what I said because it was coming from Barbie. I wonder if any studies have been made to show the possible correlation between the amount of time children spend playing with Barbie and their ability to verbally communicate with their peers and/or with adults. What do you think?
Post new comment