Monday Zen

On my way back home from the market this afternoon, I took a detour through Marcus Garvey Park. It was all day today as it has been often recently, pleasantly and unexpectedly warm despite reports of rain I walked slowly by the childrens' playground and watched small children running across the kiddie bridge. One of a pair twin boys was sitting at the top of a very short yellow spiral slide on one side of the bridge with a pacifier in his mouth. The woman who was taking care of him called out "Hold on!" but I was thinking Let go. And he did hold on. He held on at the top and in the middle and all the way down. I laughed as I passed him by. "He doesn't wanna let go," I said aloud to myself. I was just like that when I was a little girl in the playground as well. On the slides, the swinging rope, the sliding pole. I didn't wanna let go either.

Beautiful Strangers

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.”

Tango!

This is the only reason I watch "Dancing with The Stars."
I just get transported whenever I watch the Argentine Tango done really well. I think I need to see some live shows soon. There is so much precision, so much sexiness, so much artfulness,drama and theatricality. It's hypnotic. It's like watching a perfect equation of motion and stillness. An art.

Avatar (No, Not that one!)

Business meeting or lynch mob?

I might as well just say right off that I am an avatar freak. I like making up people, personalities creating outfits, decorating, telling a story using the constraints of visual media. Hence my overindulgence in games like Superpoke pets, and Pet Society. Mercifully there are along list of acquaintances that do not know this about me and are spared the the Facebook updates but the small handful who really know me understand that it is something that engages my imagination perhaps far beyond what the marketing intends. I like my playtime.

I have never had any interest in watching AMC’s “Madmen.” I tried to watch it once but aside from the appeal of the fashions of that era, I have come to regard it suspiciously merely as a show about a bunch of arrogant masochistic white guys and the women who tolerate them. This may be a huge generalization but for the most part nothing pulls me into that program. Combine my trite summary with the terrible racial climate of that era and how that figures in advertising of the 20s and 30s and I’m even less inspired to watch it.

When the “Madmen Yourself” icon maker came out a few years ago as a way to promote their first season, I was surprised at how much fun it was to create male and female characters of that era using all the same constraints and gender biases that kept me from ever watching the show. The clothes of that era tell such a clear story about that time that no one would have a hard time knowing where they fit. The clothes are glaringly codified with social status and gender role function of the time.

 Have a drink honey! You'll feel better in no time.

Women's clothes are super form fitting or sheer, reminiscent of the ever pervasive corset for that uniform tiny waist and tell you if they are going to work, dining, meeting someone for a drink, lounging at the pool, working as a stewardess or typist, baking a cake or entertaining a party.  The men’s clothes tell you whether he is going to work, lounging at home, making a presentation, dining, schmoozing, etc. That being said, creating “Madmen” avatars of color is quite a trip. I have to say that I’m impressed by the available choices in skin color that vary from pale to tan to brown, to very dark brown, almost black. They also have three body types, skinny, "fit," and heavy.

 I suppose the point for actual "Madmen" fans is to create someone who resembles a version of them, as they would be represented in this world. It is also not without a twisted sense of humor of which I highly approve. A very jazzy loop plays continuously on the website as you zip through each step of creating your "Madmen" icon. Among the various accessories for men is a shotgun and an accordion. For women there is a maternity dress, complete with baby bump. I am toying with the idea of pairing the baby bump with a cigarette in hand or a nice cocktail. Real cute, unless you happen to be black or Latina or any of the various groups represented by color. Then it’s a bit surreal. Because although I can appreciate that they make these color options available, all the “scenes” they appear in are a sobering reflection of exactly whose world it is. No matter who your avatar is you are surrounded by a sea of white faces, the secretary, co-workers, the guy who meets you for a drink.  Regardless, I spent hours one evening last week creating my own cast of “Madmen” characters with a new set of looks promoting the latest season. I like playing around with the stereotypes, creating situations that would be highly improbable in the 1920s or 30s for people of color.  Isn’t this how we start to have important conversations? Isn’t this why we play?