I attended a lecture at the Graduate Center this evening after work. The subject was “Black Females and The Commercialization of Beauty.” The three female panelists were
Dana-Ain Davis,
Deborah Willis and
Eisa Nefertari Ulen. Each of them gave excellent presentations of very relevant, very thoughtful aspects of Black female beauty and the broad based way it is portrayed, perverted, negated and interpreted in the media.
Davis spoke about the projections of Black female stereotypes in the media such as the “welfare queen” and Mammies particularly in the image of President Clinton signing the welfare reform while being flanked on each side by two black women. She also discussed the frighteningly similar way in which
Semeyana, the South African Female runner, was treated as a modern day
Venus Hottentot by being subjected to a humiliating examination of her black body and organs in order to substantiate her abilities as an athlete. Davis also discussed the way in which the black female stereotype of hyper sexuality was projected on Nadya Suleman or the
“Octomom” by the media, particularly the internet blogosphere before they even knew what her race or class was.
Willis discussed and presented some incredible images from her book
“Posing Beauty” a wide range of images portraying not only images but ideas of Black female beauty which she understands as being connected to desire and the desire to be desired, the seeking of empowerment through access of that desire. The first among these images and one I found quite compelling was a want ad for a slave called Dolly. A picture of her was posted along with certain attributes of her character. She was one of the only slaves sought by her owner who had seven slaves run away. This ad was posted after emancipation.
Ulen came at the topic from of all places a discussion of
“Knocked Up” a movie I was thrilled to learn she loves as much as I do. What she brilliantly pulled from it was a turn of play on Hollywoods usual treatment of male Jewish characters as nebbish, docile and weak in this humorous, quirky and positive heroic treatment which has become signature of Judd Apatow's direction. His treatment of the loser as hero and freaks as front runners may be one of the things I love most about Apatow’s movies. She then began to discuss how there is no comparable representation of Black Females in the media. She read from her book
“Crystal Mourning” which tells the story of the Black female main character’s journey to reconnection with her own past and it’s cultural implications and linked that to a discussion about the lack of “social consciousness and mission” evidenced on shows like
“A Different World” which is so absent from black programming today.
I have to say that they did not have the best moderator for this panel. Although a very pleasant man I took great pleasure in speaking with after the lecture, Jerry Watts could not seem to grasp that these women were not trying to win some debate over exactly what beauty is or trying to define it necessarily, but having a discussion on the ways in which they have observed its workings in the media and what that may mean about those who create these images and about us, those who perpetuate or challenge them.
When the floor was opened to questions, many statements were made, few questions asked, which to me is the sure sign of an audience, which is not really “open” to discussion. In all fairness, I may have set the ball rolling when I asked for comments on the latest cover of Elle featuring
Gabby Sidibie which I had encountered at a newsstand on my way to the Grad Center this evening and which I stood in the street and comtemplated for a minute before moving on. Did they feel there was there any correlation to the Mamie stereotype? What did they think about her embracing of her size and how might potentially be played out in the media.
Seeing an image in Deborah’s image slideshow of
Hattie McDaniel, smiling, draped in white fur and jewels on the cover of a magazine called “Silhouette” made me think of Gabby, made me raise the question. The audience, predominantly women of color, would keep coming back around to the subject of
Gabby and to a discussion of the most literal definitions of that which is considered physical beauty. I might say that this could only be expected but the females on the panel had given such broad presentations, there has to be another reason why we as women still can’t get seem to get beyond the skin when we talk of beauty. And I wish we could have talked about that more. There were some great comments and observations made but I’m not sure there was much discussion. Insecurities that many Black women have about beauty may indeed be very much tied into skin tone and hair as one audience member stated but I’m afraid the motivators of our self hatred are much more subtle, more complex and more nefariously self replicating than that.
One young woman behind me, clearly offended at one of the polyptych photographs in the series presented by Willis where the creator fused actual black bodies with Barbie parts got on a soapbox about how positive Black Barbie is and how they now come in a range of size and colors and so on. Really? All sizes? Even if I had not done my own research on Barbie and race I would know this is not true. I don’t believe she understood the photographic project at all. A doll is not a person. And as Black Females, our ideas of beauty are rarely our own. Many of our ideas of beauty have also been manufactured by Mattel. Earlier on, as a response to my question the young woman had also stated that Gabby could have been portrayed better on the cover of Elle. In a low voice I turned to her and asked exactly what she felt could have made Gabby look better. She said she felt that there were “better” images of her they could have used. Later, I also heard her mumble that they could used some airbrushing and styling on her. Right. So more negation of what’s really there. Who are we to take the place of image makers and claim that our own vision of someone is their actual truth? But I quietly forgave this reasoning. I love Barbie as well. But I know who Barbie is. And I know what she’s done. Gabby is not Barbie and she’s not Beyonce. Beyonce is not even Beyonce. How do get to see who we are if we keep looking for reflections in plastic or on the cover of Elle?
As women of color often still seeing ourselves through the eyes of the oppressor, measuring ourselves in many ways with the tools of the dominant culture, we lose a connection with ourselves and each other which perhaps we have never had. How to find our way to a place often never seen? I feel that the polyptych image shown by Willis of the sections of Barbie parts fused with the parts and features of actual black women was one way of using the tools of the oppressor to begin to see an undeniable reality. It was a great example of an artist and cultural critic using the tools of the media to interpret what’s being left out rather than letting these dictates canvas our black bodies with hatred, perversion and psychosis and what we often call “beauty.”
