Monday, July 27, 2009

Color My World

I've never thought much of Stanley Fish as a social commentator, but he sets a new personal low with his piece on Henry Louis Gates. Without going into any of the evidence (from what he writes, it seems doubtful he's even conversant with what happened), he simply assumes Gates was treated the way he was because of his race.

He even has a big finish:

Gates and Obama are not only friends; they are in the same position, suspected of occupying a majestic residence under false pretenses. And Obama is a double offender. Not only is he guilty of being Housed While Black; he is the first in American history guilty of being P.W.B., President While Black.

I don't believe in guilt by association, but if I were trying to argue the whole story is about race, it'd be embarrassing to know Fish is on my side.

PS There's a comment from Jane Smiley, who I'm guessing is the writer/crazy person:

The police officer would be gracious and generous were he to apologize. He doesn’t have to be “in the wrong” [why the quotation marks, Jane?] to understand that his actions caused pain and that community relations would be benefited if he were to indicate that he regretted that pain. But he has refused to do the generous thing. Whether or not he was acting by the book, he clearly appears to be a jerk.

Sure, he could do a non-apology apology where he regrets any pain he caused, but even if you think that would do any good (and how would it if he continues to believe he did what a cop should do in that situation) the real question is should the community honestly be feeling pain, and for the reasons they do? Giving in to people whom you think believe false things might be a good strategy in the short run, but does it really get us anywhere? We know a lot of cops (and others) are offended by the accusations of Gates, the Governor and the President. Is Smiley demanding they apologize, even if they're not "in the wrong"? (Or does the offense taken only count if it comes from people Smiley agrees with?) If we accept the Smiley standard, doesn't it pay to be easily offended?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

web page hit counter