|
'Kramer's' Racial Tirade (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dr. DAS
...
14:59 Michael, and counting. |
you've got to be kidding, lol.
I can't stand Seinfeld and don't really care for Richards either, but he's been part of one of the most successful shows in sitcom history...not exactly 15 minutes of fame ;)
the guy crossed the line, especially for a general comedy club audience. But was it a racist outburst? Inconclusive.
If I had to bet either way, I'd suggest that he snapped and obviously didn't think it through before opening his mouth to say something *really* extreme that would cause the heckler to STFU. The guy is a pro...as if he hasn't dealt with hecklers before.
still...this type of humour (giving him the benefit of the doubt that it was intended as a bit of a venomous reply to heckling and not a racist rant) ought to be reserved for an audience that is both expecting it and can take it in the context in which it's intended (again, assuming his intent wasn't malicious).
e.g. you might get away with a AIDS joke in front of an audience of *very* liberal college students...but you're not going to make it at a more mainstream AIDS charity function.
It's tough to say what his motivation and true feelings are on the subject. He did catch himself and settle down...and made a rather astute comment towards the end, "you see? you see, there are still those words...those words...those words".
i.e. words to which people still assign far too much power when the intent of the speaker ought to be the primary consideration along with the context in which the words were uttered.
bad taste, yes...but a racist tirade? I'm a bit skeptical of going that far.
I'm curious...has he publicly stated anything on this yet? |
|
|
| Kytracid |
How exactly is Richards being astute ? You don't need to be the sharpest tool in the shed to know that when a white, privelaged man gets up on stage and calls a couple of black guys niggaz half a dozen times he's going to get a raction.
That's not being clever. That's admiting you realized the full implication of what you said, before you said it. It's like getting up and saying that all fags deserve to get AIDS and die...and then quickly adding, see, see - that's why everybody needs to wear condoms.
I'm sorry, but Richards had a meltdown. The reaction of the crowd tells the story - most people laughed the first time he dropped the N bomb, then as he continues his diatribe people got more unsettled by what was being said and the harsh tone in which it was being delivered.
As a pro, you'd expect Richards to deal with a heckler better then he did. Calling out an entire race for what a couple of jerks said is going way beyond the line of decency. |
|
|
| E2EK1EL |
| Don't know what to say about this ... it's ed up in all areas. |
|
|
| Dr. DAS |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
you've got to be kidding, lol.
I can't stand Seinfeld and don't really care for Richards either, but he's been part of one of the most successful shows in sitcom history...not exactly 15 minutes of fame ;)
i.e. words to which people still assign far too much power when the intent of the speaker ought to be the primary consideration along with the context in which the words were uttered.
I'm curious...has he publicly stated anything on this yet? |
You're right on the 14:59...I overuse that to flag the end of someone's hirability as a performer. Let me re-direct: 14:59 K-Fed.
Sweet.
The primary focus ought to be that a grown man, who witnessed the civil rights movement (he's 57), should damn well know better than to use that word in anger. Like I said, once, he may get away with it but not like this. I tend to give the benefit of the doubt and I can't see this as anything but disgusting.
He apologized via sattelite on Letterman, while Seinfeld was on...the audience was laughing at him and Jerry apparently had to scold them for it.
hehehe...K-fed. Let's rag on him for a bit. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kytracid
How exactly is Richards being astute ? You don't need to be the sharpest tool in the shed to know that when a white, privelaged man gets up on stage and calls a couple of black guys niggaz half a dozen times he's going to get a raction. |
what if a black privledged man does it? |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kytracid
How exactly is Richards being astute ? You don't need to be the sharpest tool in the shed to know that when a white, privelaged man gets up on stage and calls a couple of black guys niggaz half a dozen times he's going to get a raction.
That's not being clever. That's admiting you realized the full implication of what you said, before you said it. It's like getting up and saying that all fags deserve to get AIDS and die...and then quickly adding, see, see - that's why everybody needs to wear condoms.
I'm sorry, but Richards had a meltdown. The reaction of the crowd tells the story - most people laughed the first time he dropped the N bomb, then as he continues his diatribe people got more unsettled by what was being said and the harsh tone in which it was being delivered.
As a pro, you'd expect Richards to deal with a heckler better then he did. Calling out an entire race for what a couple of jerks said is going way beyond the line of decency. |
I'm not so sure...
although I'm thinking he did say that a bit too much out of anger and not from a 'clever' standpoint of silencing a heckler in an outrageous manner.
It's astute in that he's demonstrated that some words still carry too much power vs. the intent behind them.
What I'm getting at is this: Is it his use of the word that is offenseive...or should it be that he appears to have used the word in anger or frustation, thereby hinting that his intent behind it's use isn't as innocent as could otherwise be argued?
using the word "ni*ger" isn't racist...but using it in a condescending, hateful manner would be. In fact, it doesn't even have to be that word...you could sneer at someone and refer to them as a worthless piece of and convey the same emotion.
IMHO, the word needs to lose it's power...and the focus should be on Richards' intent, rather than his choice of words, however poorly chosen they were. |
|
|
| Kytracid |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
what if a black privledged man does it? |
does what ? call a couple of white men Niggaz ? I dunno, I'd expect the white men to feel pretty proud they were being given hood credibility by a homie.
seriously though. It's just as bad if a black man does it. But be careful here. The N bomb is a loaded term, it has a history of 300 years of oppression and hatred.
A black priveldged man getting up and calling white people 'honkey' or 'cracker' to me isn't the same as a white guy ranting and raving about a past when blacks were lyched. I have no problem with a white comedian getting up and poking fun at sterotypes : blacks love watermelon, chicken, fat white bitches etc...that's ok, that's within the boundries of comedy. But lynching ? I dunno, maybe i have a warped sense of humor - but there's nothing funny about bringing up a past where people where hung simply for being a different color.
There is simply no humor to be found in that remark - and to me, all it says is - "hey, we've come a long way from those days...but at the end of the day i'm still white, and you all are still a bunch of niggaz!". |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
if the way in which he used the word "n8gger" is so bad... then why isnt the reaction "cracker ass" just as offensive? They worth both said (apprently to some) with the same intent of malice. So why does the black heckler get off with his hateful slurs while richards does not?
The fact that they bleep n*gger on the tv broadcasts and not cracker (and the fact that the word gets edited on here) speaks volumes when it comes to this double standard. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kytracid
does what ? call a couple of white men Niggaz ? I dunno, I'd expect the white men to feel pretty proud they were being given hood credibility by a homie.
seriously though. It's just as bad if a black man does it. But be careful here. The N bomb is a loaded term, it has a history of 300 years of oppression and hatred. |
And I am proud to say that Canada is one of a handful of american countries that did not operate the slave trade. I am also proud that Canada was the destination for so many on the underground railroad. We were not perfect in the past, but it was not nearly as bad or institutionalized as it was in the US, Jamaica, Brazil, etc etc.
As for the "N bomb", dont you see that the true road to equality means that everyone should be entitled to act in the same manner? If a black man can say a word but then says a white man cannot, i have a problem with that. Its no different then telling a black man he cannot go somewhere because he is black. And thats the main point i am trying to make here.
| quote: | | A black priveldged man getting up and calling white people 'honkey' or 'cracker' to me isn't the same as a white guy ranting and raving about a past when blacks were lyched. |
aaaah to YOU! But you aren't white. The slur isn't directed toward you. What about the people he does offend? I personally think that the N bomb shouldnt be used at all. But if its socially acceptable for a black man to say it, then my arguement is that its now socially acceptable for anyone to say it. Any other variation is in fact racism.
| quote: | | I have no problem with a white comedian getting up and poking fun at sterotypes : blacks love watermelon, chicken, fat booties etc...that's ok, that's within the boundries of comedy. But lynching ? I dunno, maybe i have a warped sense of humor - but there's nothing funny about bringing up a past where people where hung simply for being a different color. |
well thats a question of personal taste i guess. And ill accept that considering you obviously CAN take a joke. A lot of people do have a problem with that, a lot of the same people who dont mind when black people do it.
Can we at least agree that in our society there is quite a bit of a double standard when it comes to how certain races can behave? |
|
|
| Kytracid |
what double standard ? There's no comparison to be made in the use of both words.
Cracker isn't on par with nigga as a racial slur. Cracker wasn't used by an entire race of black people to keep the whites down. It wasn't used by a race of people in power to deny another race the right to vote. It wasn't used to label bathroom stalls. It wasn't raised in anger by hood wearing ghouls who rode on horses and burnt people while they slept in their houses. You need to read up on the history of both words if you think they are equivalent.
Next you'll argue that Chris Rock called White people stupid...so Richards should be justified in calling black people niggaz.
Here's just a brief excerpt of the wikipedia entry for 'cracker'
- if it's too long to read, i'll summerize by saying that the origin of the word wasn't a racial slur, it was used to denote what a man did.
Simply put --- there are very few words in use today that carry the weight that the N bomb does. All your claims of reverse-racsim don't change the fact that white people DID oppress blacks for over 300 years, and they DID use that word to dehumanize them.
The term "cracker" was and is used most frequently in the southern U.S., especially in Georgia and Florida. Since the 1870s a nickname for Georgia is "The Cracker State", which is displayed proudly with no hint of insult or irony.
Historically the word suggested poor, white rural Americans with little formal education. Historians point out the term originally referred to the strong Scots-Irish of the backcountry (as opposed to the English of the seacoast). Thus a sociologist reported in 1926, "As the plantations expanded these freed men (formerly bond servants) were pushed further and further back upon the more and more sterile soil. They became 'pinelanders,' 'corn-crackers,' or 'crackers.'" [Kephard Highlanders] Frederick Law Olmsted, a prominent landscape architect from the northern United States, visited the South as a journalist in the 1850s and noted that some crackers "owned a good many negroes, and were by no means so poor as their appearance indicated." [McWhiney xvi]
The "cracker" would be similar to the accepted term of cowboy in the Western United States. (Smith. A Land Remembered)
Usage of the term "cracker" generally differs from "hick" and "hillbilly" because crackers reject or resist assimilation into the dominant culture, while hicks and hillbillies theoretically are isolated from the dominant culture. In this way, the cracker is similar to the redneck. In the African American community, "cracker" is a disparaging term for whites. (The OED cites the 1830s origin of white trash as a word used by slaves on rich plantations to ridicule poor whites.)
Since 1900 "cracker" has become a proud or jocular self-description. With the huge influx of new residents from the North, "cracker" is now used informally by some white residents of Florida and Georgia ("Florida cracker" or "Georgia cracker") to indicate that their family has lived there for many generations. However, the term "white cracker" is not always used self-referentially and remains a disparaging term to many in the region.[1]
[edit] Etymology
There are various theories about the origin of the term "cracker."
The term cracker was in use during Elizabethan times to describe braggarts. The original root of this is the Middle English word crack1 meaning "entertaining conversation" (One may be said to "'crack' a joke"); this term and the alternate spelling "craic" are still in use in Ireland and Scotland. It is documented in Shakespeare's King John (1595): "What cracker is this . . . that deafes our ears / With this abundance of superfluous breath?"
By the 1760s, this term was in use by the English in the British North American colonies to refer to Scots-Irish settlers in the south. A letter to the Earl of Dartmouth reads: "I should explain to your Lordship what is meant by Crackers; a name they have got from being great boasters; they are a lawless set of rascalls on the frontiers of Virginia, Maryland, the Carolinas, and Georgia, who often change their places of abode." A similar usage was that of Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species, to refer to "Virginia squatters" (illegal settlers) (p. 35).
Other origins of the term "cracker" are linked to early Florida cattle herders that traditionally used whips to herd wild Spanish cattle. The crack of the herders' whips could be heard for great distances and were used to round cattle in pens and to keep the cows on a given track. Also, "cracker" has historically been used to refer to those engaged in the low paying job of cracking pecans and other nuts in Georgia and throughout the southeast U.S.
[edit] Examples of usage
Label depicting a barefoot boy eating peaches from a straw hat, clearly being referred to as a crackerThe Florida Cracker Trail is a route posted across southern Florida by the Florida Department of Transportation.
The rustic lives of crackers were the topic of the novels of Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings.
Crackin' Good Snacks (a division of Winn Dixie, a Southern grocery chain) has sold crackers similar to Ritz crackers under the name "Georgia Crackers". They sometimes came in a red tin with a picture of "The Crescent", an antebellum plantation house in Valdosta, Georgia.
Before the Milwaukee Braves baseball team moved to Atlanta, the Atlanta minor league baseball team was known as the "Atlanta Crackers." The team existed under this name from 1901 until 1965. They were members of the Southern Association from their inception until 1961, and members of the International League from 1961 until they were moved to Richmond, Virginia in 1965. However, it is suggested the name was derived from players "cracking" the baseball bat and this origin makes sense when considering the Atlanta Negro League Baseball team was known as the "Atlanta Black Crackers."
[edit] Popular culture
When used in pop culture, the term "white cracker" or "cracker" is sometimes intended to be humorous, though the distinction is not always clear.
A puppet named "Colonel Crackie" played the stereotypical Southern gentleman in the children's television show Kukla, Fran and Ollie which aired on NBC from the late 1940s to the late 1950s.
Curtis Mayfield uses the word "crackers" twice in his cautionary anti-racist anthem "If There's A Hell Below (We're All Going To Go)" - once in the opening spoken introduction ("******s, whiteys, jews, crackers/If there's a hell below...") and once in the first verse ("Blacks and the crackers, police and their backers.")
The Band briefly considered referring to themselves as "The Crackers" prior to the release of their debut album. Because of ensuing confusement and bemusement on the part of Capitol Records, an initial single was released under the moniker of Danko/Helm/Hudson/Manuel/Robertson. The intentionally inflammatory name was suggested by drummer Levon Helm, a native of Arkansas. Another perjorative, "The Honkies", was also considered.
In John Boorman's 1972 film Deliverance, Lewis, played by Burt Reynolds, derisively refers to the rural people they encounter as being "crackers," implying that they were slow-witted hillbillies who lived in a world much different from that of him and his friends from a southern city. (However, a northerner would be just as likely to call Lewis/Reynolds a cracker.)
In the 1984 movie "Tank" starring James Garner, the white, southern sheriff was derisively referred to as a "cracker" multiple times.
In the 2000 film O Brother Where Art Thou?, the upper class white character "Pappy" O'Daniel, candidate for the Governor of Mississippi and host of the radio show "Flour Hour", meets a lower class and uneducated white character as he arrives at the radio station for his program. Pappy is told that he can make $10 for singing into a can inside, whereupon he snaps, "I'm not here to make a record, you dumb cracker."
Hip hop group Dead Prez are known for using the term "cracker" in their lyrics when referring to a white person. For instance, "I'm down for runnin' up on them crackers in their city hall" in the song 'Hip hop'.
[edit] Politics
The Cracker Party was an active political party involved in city politics in Augusta, Georgia up until the early 1940's. [2]
In August 2006, California state Senator Don Perata referred to San Diego-area opponents of a bill allowing illegal immigrants to obtain drivers licenses as "crackers." [3].
|
|
|
| Jem_hadar |
I commend you Jay for arguing this point of view and statement (which I agree with you on, btw). It is a very time consuming (and frustrating) task I can tell, since most dont see the points you are trying to make here. ^5
Jem |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kytracid
what double standard ? There's no comparison to be made in the use of both words.
Cracker isn't on par with nigga as a racial slur. Cracker wasn't used by an entire race of black people to keep the whites down. It wasn't used by a race of people in power to deny another race the right to vote. It wasn't used to label bathroom stalls. It wasn't raised in anger by hood wearing ghouls who rode on horses and burnt people while they slept in their houses. You need to read up on the history of both words if you think they are equivalent. |
How about now? Cracker is being used as demonstrated in that video clip to demean white people with the same loaded hatred as ******. 300 years or not is moot. The point is that whether it started yesterday or 300 years ago, cracker is being used to demean and humiliate white people and those who use it that way are allowed to get away with it. Some would argue that it's payback for slavery (as some have). But I have 3 problems with this. 1) Didnt mom ever teach us that 2 wrongs dont make a right? 2) I did not enslave anyone personally nor did my family. 3) in the canadian context, most of not all of that "white history" does not apply to us. 4) making an entire race feel bad for something they had nothing to do with in the past is indeed racism. Its why i have grown indifferent to it. Im sick of people pointing to me and saying "its your fault". How could it be? Slavery ended in 1800's, segragation in the 1960s, all in a country i wasnt even born in! I was born in 1975 in CANADA and have been an adult since 1993. How can any of this be my fault?
Yes, the HISTORY of cracker is not on par with ****** as a racial slur. But the intent of the people using it today is every bit as negative and malicious as the word ****** has been.
| quote: | | Next you'll argue that Chris Rock called White people stupid...so Richards should be justified in calling black people niggaz. |
no, but if rock can make fun of white people then he and others should expect the same in return. |
|
|
|
|
