Actually, I think most people in the US are programmed to think that that style of illustration is racist. But, really, what's so racist about that picture? So it's a caricature-ish little black kid sittin in the middle of some tigers. So? I don't think that's any more racist than a Kewpie Doll:
Which is why I think this ish catches on in Japan. You still see those black sambo style illustrations, and plush dolls and shit...
But all their damn characters are like that. "Super-deformed", exaggerated... to them, I think it's just cute (especially since they don't have the same context regarding that stuff that we do).
Hell, even ramen shops in Japan often have bucktoothed, slanty-eyed, pony-tailed caricatures of a Chinese person on the ad or sign
Which is why I think this ish catches on in Japan. You still see those black sambo style illustrations, and plush dolls and shit...
But all their damn characters are like that. "Super-deformed", exaggerated... to them, I think it's just cute (especially since they don't have the same context regarding that stuff that we do).
Hell, even ramen shops in Japan often have bucktoothed, slanty-eyed, pony-tailed caricatures of a Chinese person on the ad or sign
But that's my point though. It represents something culturally in the US but not elsewhere. If you can manage to divorce yourself from the history behind it, it's just a style of art. Just like the Kewpie doll... same style, same time period.
Of course, day[/b], it does represent something culturally in the US, which is considered to be offensive. However, in Japan, that mindset in relation to that style of artwork probably doesn't exist.
The sad thing behind this all is the revisionist aspect, the classic American denial of how African American stereotypes were an accepted part of mass culture for at least a century, really from the Declaration of Independence until only the late 20th Century. Sambo represents more than just a children's story, even if the original was bastardized in the US to fit their constant lampooning of the segregated Black race.
All you need to see to understand the fact that Sambo the book is something to be removed from our culture yet is not a method of "censorship," is to ask if it would be acceptable for Quaker Oats to bring back this famous brand:
It's that same bullshit denial of the racist culture that was so prevelant from the late 19th century to the end of World War II in America that was used when the owners of "Sambo's" restaurant claimed the name was "just an amalgam of Sam & Bob, the founder's names" as if the use of a small black boy with huge lips and bugged eyes was irrelevant.
I'm not saying we should ignore or deny America's shameful cultural history, I'm just saying we should NOT perpetuate it, which plenty of people would try to do, if allowed.
I hear you... And to an extent I agree.
I think my original intent was missed... I was more talking about the book, and it's story, in it's original Indian incarnation.
Should the story itself be buried? What if you slap in illustrations from some African artists or something... Or how the Japanese writer changed it to the story of a dog outwitting the tigers...
Anyhow... this whole thing reminds me of how I wanted a buddhist swastika tattoo for awhile, but once something has been sullied, no one can view it correctly anymore... which is a shame, IMO.
Actually, I think most people in the US are programmed to think that that style of illustration is racist. But, really, what's so racist about that picture? So it's a caricature-ish little black kid sittin in the middle of some tigers. So? I don't think that's any more racist than a Kewpie Doll:
Well, if you strip the image of all its cultural context, then that's all it is. But there's a lot more behind it than that; it's an extremely loaded depiction. Stepan Fetchit is not just a character in old films. It seems to be hard for ruling classes to understand that the stereotyping of minorities represents more than just a face-value comedy item - like "whitey" - because it is usually used as a subjugatory device. No racial term for English/whites is respectively as offensive to them as it is to African-Americans, because they (we) have a distinct advantage in this country. It's not like calling the average white man "honkey" reminds them of their ancestors' forced, unpaid servitude and sub-human categorization. THAT'S the issue. Using respectful terminology is the very least whites can do, considering the not-so-distant American past.
Well, if you strip the image of all its cultural context, then that's all it is. But there's a lot more behind it than that; it's an extremely loaded depiction. Stepan Fetchit is not just a character in old films. It seems to be hard for ruling classes to understand that the stereotyping of minorities represents more than just a face-value comedy item - like "whitey" - because it is usually used as a subjugatory device. No racial term for English/whites is respectively as offensive to them as it is to African-Americans, because they (we) have a distinct advantage in this country. It's not like calling the average white man "honkey" reminds them of their ancestors' forced, unpaid servitude and sub-human categorization. THAT'S the issue. Using respectful terminology is the very least whites can do, considering the not-so-distant American past.
Well spoken. It's like the kid who's the butt of all the jokes; it's funny for everyone else but not to him. And true, being called a honkey calls nothing to mind except for the vague image of a hick in overalls. I'm just saying that like the article said, they're not going to get it, the cultural context isn't there. That's why I said to try to divorce yourself from the American context of it.
But my point was to view it from a Japanese perspective. They don't have to divorce themselves because that context never existed there.
Which is what the post was originally about. Basically, Japan censored it at after Americans got upset, and this was in the 80's, when there was more tension between Japan and American, in the sense of ecomnomic competition. Now that they don't have anyone to appease, they want to bring it back... And that's because they didn't understand why it was so offensive to everyone in the first place.
Anyhow... I am against the caricitures... I chalk it up as ignorance when I see it here, though part of me understands I am probably being a bit ethnocentric, by holding them to the same racial context we have in America. It's a different world here...
Anyhow... again. I was more concerned initially with the actual story... WHich is why the pics I posted, at least the first three, are of an indian, and not the caricature we know in America as Sambo.
I have never read it... I don't think any of you have either.
It just sounds to me like a Kipling story or something... And I was questioning as to whether it being sullied by subsequent illustrations should result in it's being off-limits forever, despite any new illustration treatment it may get.
And I was questioning as to whether it being sullied by subsequent illustrations should result in it's being off-limits forever, despite any new illustration treatment it may get.
Probably, like the Swastika. Well, maybe not forever, but certainly in the next couple generations.
Speaking of the Swastika (I know it was mentioned above), wasn't it a religious symbol?
But my point was to view it from a Japanese perspective. They don't have to divorce themselves because that context never existed there.
i'm sorry but i don't have this image of the Japanese as being naive,uninformed people....
they know everything else...they know more about present day black culture than me....but they dont know Sambo is offensive and racist?....not buyin' it
And I was questioning as to whether it being sullied by subsequent illustrations should result in it's being off-limits forever, despite any new illustration treatment it may get.
Probably, like the Swastika. Well, maybe not forever, but certainly in the next couple generations.
Speaking of the Swastika (I know it was mentioned above), wasn't it a religious symbol?
Yeah, it's found in lots of cultures, including Native American. I usually associate it with Indian religion, and Buddhism in asia, at least Japan, maybe China. In Japan, it's all over, and is used on maps to indicate Buddhist temples. Lots of buddha statues and pictures portray him with a swastika on his chest, or forehead, or hand...
Yes, the story - interestingly, the whole "Sambo's" issue comes back, in that, when pressured to change their iconography from the african american grotesque, they started using the images from the original Indian (by way of GB) tale:
So this brings to mind the question of stereotyping and caricature sensitivity: is the use of essentially the same cartoon image to depict a young Indian boy (and the indicator devices such as his headwrap and scarab) less offensive than the original African character?
I don't really have an answer here, I just think it's interesting that when called on the racism of their corporate imagery, they reverted it back to the source material...does this mean it's ok to stereotype Indian people but not Africans? Or does restoring the story to it's original intent remove any stereotyping from it's context?
Also, it's clear to see the "Indian" is really more of a caucasian (seemingly related to Grafwritah's Kewpie Doll) in "Indian" gear...
But my point was to view it from a Japanese perspective. They don't have to divorce themselves because that context never existed there.
i'm sorry but i don't have this image of the Japanese as being naive,uninformed people....
they know everything else...they know more about present day black culture than me....but they dont know Sambo is offensive and racist?....not buyin' it
Well, I'm no Japanese expert, but from what I've seen/read the black fixation in Japan and only of a group of people, and from that it's all media-based (right or wrong).
I get why people in the US have a negative view of the book, view of those classic black characatures, all of it. But to expect a country across the globe wherein there is no history and virtually no people of African origin to have that same disgust ingrained in their culture is ridiculous. That's textbook ethnocentrism... er, country-centrism.
That's like having a kneejerk reaction to the Korean discrimination in Japan as a person from the US.
I have never read it... I don't think any of you have either.
It was read to me as a child. I know the story well. At the time, I didn't attach any demeaning racial symbolism to it or to "Just So Stories," but I was also about four or five and still had no idea why white people would hate black people just because of their skin color (I mean, The Cosby Show was so funny).
(edit: I do not believe that the original story, per se, of "Sambo," is racist or carries a negative message towards Indians or Africans, but the image of the main character has long since been co-opted by opportunists as a blatant racist image. This necessarily tarnishes the story for future generations.)
Looking back, is seems obvious to me that, for the sake of racial harmony, the story must be read in the context of its aquired meaning. I wonder: if the title of the book had simply been "Little Sambo," the story may have simply faded into the amalgam of dusty Indian/African folk tales.
So this brings to mind the question of stereotyping and caricature sensitivity: is the use of essentially the same cartoon image to depict a young Indian boy (and the indicator devices such as his headwrap and scarab) less offensive than the original African character?
Not in the US.
Or similar to the religious conflict in SerbiaBosniaetc. Everyone here is like, so what? We didn't grow up with it. But it's a big deal to them.
But my point was to view it from a Japanese perspective. They don't have to divorce themselves because that context never existed there.
i'm sorry but i don't have this image of the Japanese as being naive,uninformed people....
they know everything else...they know more about present day black culture than me....but they dont know Sambo is offensive and racist?....not buyin' it
Man... I don't think understand Japanese culture very much.
Great people, great country... pretty darn uninformed as a whole. Especially in regards to american cultural issues (as could be expected in any country).
You say they know more about present day black culture than you? Man, half of those kids are 1 step away from being in black-face. It's embarassing.
Speaking of Japanese black face... man, the Chanels... black face stares back at me from every dollar bin in Japan...
hard to see in this pick, but half of those dudes are chillin in black face.
But my point was to view it from a Japanese perspective. They don't have to divorce themselves because that context never existed there.
i'm sorry but i don't have this image of the Japanese as being naive,uninformed people....
they know everything else...they know more about present day black culture than me....but they dont know Sambo is offensive and racist?....not buyin' it
Man... I don't think understand Japanese culture very much.
Great people, great country... pretty darn uninformed as a whole. Especially in regards to american cultural issues (as could be expected in any country).
You say they know more about present day black culture than you? Man, half of those kids are 1 step away from being in black-face. It's embarassing.
I get why people in the US have a negative view of the book, view of those classic black characatures, all of it. But to expect a country across the globe wherein there is no history and virtually no people of African origin to have that same disgust ingrained in their culture is ridiculous. That's textbook ethnocentrism... er, country-centrism.
I'm just not buying this whole "there's no Black people in Japan, so they can't be racist against them" argument (not just from you, Graf, I'm quoting you but it's been expressed by a few, including the Japanese gentleman interviewed in the original article) - I mean there may be no Iraqi people living in Texas, and that probably explains why Texans may not know that Iraq is one of the most storied, learned and ancient cultures on this planet, and instead tend to think of them as expendable, ignorant, terrorist "sand niggas."
Not knowing someone's culture, or sharing a subway car or elevator with them can create racism, not render it impossible...do you not think it's possible that there are some, many, Japanese who laugh to think of the ol' Darkie stereotype and picture them grinning a mile and eating a watermelon in one bite just like so many ignorant Americans (and not just white Americans) have?
Oh, i know. People as a whole fear those that are different from them. I meant that by having few African-descended residents they didn't have the ability to generate a huge ingrained racial situation like in the US. Sure, many people are racist against Iraqsarabs, but if you can find a book or doll or anything that has as much of a negative context behind it as Little Sambo does then you get the prize. And I bet even if you found something 100% offensive, most wouldn't even care.
Not knowing someone's culture, or sharing a subway car or elevator with them can create racism, not render it impossible...do you not think it's possible that there are some, many, Japanese who laugh to think of the ol' Darkie stereotype and picture them grinning a mile and eating a watermelon in one bite just like so many ignorant Americans (and not just white Americans) have?
How is someone in Japan supposed to pick up on these stereotypes then? Japan may be classified as xenophobic but there's a huge difference between that and racism.
Japan may be classified as xenophobic but there's a huge difference between that and racism.
Are you certain? Part of the xenophobia stems from the fact that Japanese have traditionally viewed themselves as descendants of the sun god, while everyone else is basically... mud people? The idea of racial supremecy runs pretty deep in Japanese culture I think. They believe they are unique more so than other countries... half the japanese seem to think japan is the only country in the world that has 4 seasons. I think this idea of uniquness, and separateness generates not only a fear and misunderstanding of that which exists outside, as it does the belief that that which is outside is lesser.
Of course, this is a generalization. And those suck. I'm in no way saying all Japanese are like this.
How is someone in Japan supposed to pick up on these stereotypes then? Japan may be classified as xenophobic but there's a huge difference between that and racism.
I'd say they pick up on them because they immerse themselves in American culture...look at the Japanese pop band in blackface on their CD covers earlier in the thread...am I supposed to assume they are doing that without any concept of minstrelry and it's impact on american culture and racial stereotyping?
Comments
This thread shows just how far we have to go - ESPECIALLY, that last one from Grafwritah.
Why don't you ask your girl what's so wrong with those images
i believe that specific book should be kept around as simple documentation....that's far from valueable
Which is why I think this ish catches on in Japan. You still see those black sambo style illustrations, and plush dolls and shit...
But all their damn characters are like that. "Super-deformed", exaggerated... to them, I think it's just cute (especially since they don't have the same context regarding that stuff that we do).
Hell, even ramen shops in Japan often have bucktoothed, slanty-eyed, pony-tailed caricatures of a Chinese person on the ad or sign
But that's my point though. It represents something culturally in the US but not elsewhere. If you can manage to divorce yourself from the history behind it, it's just a style of art. Just like the Kewpie doll... same style, same time period.
Of course, day[/b], it does represent something culturally in the US, which is considered to be offensive. However, in Japan, that mindset in relation to that style of artwork probably doesn't exist.
and this:
is just fucking ugly.
I hear you... And to an extent I agree.
I think my original intent was missed... I was more talking about the book, and it's story, in it's original Indian incarnation.
Should the story itself be buried? What if you slap in illustrations from some African artists or something... Or how the Japanese writer changed it to the story of a dog outwitting the tigers...
Anyhow... this whole thing reminds me of how I wanted a buddhist swastika tattoo for awhile, but once something has been sullied, no one can view it correctly anymore... which is a shame, IMO.
One from Falun Gong
Peace...
FNM
That's the thing, you cannot.
exactly!!.................i'm done
I understand how it was used in the past and is obviously insulting in that context. I'm not arguing that at all.
But my point was to view it from a Japanese perspective. They don't have to divorce themselves because that context never existed there.
Nicole Scherzinger. Aaaah yeah!
Well, if you strip the image of all its cultural context, then that's all it is. But there's a lot more behind it than that; it's an extremely loaded depiction. Stepan Fetchit is not just a character in old films. It seems to be hard for ruling classes to understand that the stereotyping of minorities represents more than just a face-value comedy item - like "whitey" - because it is usually used as a subjugatory device. No racial term for English/whites is respectively as offensive to them as it is to African-Americans, because they (we) have a distinct advantage in this country. It's not like calling the average white man "honkey" reminds them of their ancestors' forced, unpaid servitude and sub-human categorization. THAT'S the issue. Using respectful terminology is the very least whites can do, considering the not-so-distant American past.
you may need to do some soul searching homie
Well spoken. It's like the kid who's the butt of all the jokes; it's funny for everyone else but not to him. And true, being called a honkey calls nothing to mind except for the vague image of a hick in overalls. I'm just saying that like the article said, they're not going to get it, the cultural context isn't there. That's why I said to try to divorce yourself from the American context of it.
In the US.
Which is what the post was originally about. Basically, Japan censored it at after Americans got upset, and this was in the 80's, when there was more tension between Japan and American, in the sense of ecomnomic competition. Now that they don't have anyone to appease, they want to bring it back... And that's because they didn't understand why it was so offensive to everyone in the first place.
Anyhow... I am against the caricitures... I chalk it up as ignorance when I see it here, though part of me understands I am probably being a bit ethnocentric, by holding them to the same racial context we have in America. It's a different world here...
Anyhow... again. I was more concerned initially with the actual story... WHich is why the pics I posted, at least the first three, are of an indian, and not the caricature we know in America as Sambo.
I have never read it... I don't think any of you have either.
It just sounds to me like a Kipling story or something... And I was questioning as to whether it being sullied by subsequent illustrations should result in it's being off-limits forever, despite any new illustration treatment it may get.
Peace...
FNM
Probably, like the Swastika. Well, maybe not forever, but certainly in the next couple generations.
Speaking of the Swastika (I know it was mentioned above), wasn't it a religious symbol?
i'm sorry but i don't have this image of the Japanese as being naive,uninformed people....
they know everything else...they know more about present day black culture than me....but they dont know Sambo is offensive and racist?....not buyin' it
Yeah, it's found in lots of cultures, including Native American. I usually associate it with Indian religion, and Buddhism in asia, at least Japan, maybe China. In Japan, it's all over, and is used on maps to indicate Buddhist temples. Lots of buddha statues and pictures portray him with a swastika on his chest, or forehead, or hand...
http://www.religionfacts.com/buddhism/symbols/swastika.htm
So this brings to mind the question of stereotyping and caricature sensitivity: is the use of essentially the same cartoon image to depict a young Indian boy (and the indicator devices such as his headwrap and scarab) less offensive than the original African character?
I don't really have an answer here, I just think it's interesting that when called on the racism of their corporate imagery, they reverted it back to the source material...does this mean it's ok to stereotype Indian people but not Africans? Or does restoring the story to it's original intent remove any stereotyping from it's context?
Also, it's clear to see the "Indian" is really more of a caucasian (seemingly related to Grafwritah's Kewpie Doll) in "Indian" gear...
Well, I'm no Japanese expert, but from what I've seen/read the black fixation in Japan and only of a group of people, and from that it's all media-based (right or wrong).
I get why people in the US have a negative view of the book, view of those classic black characatures, all of it. But to expect a country across the globe wherein there is no history and virtually no people of African origin to have that same disgust ingrained in their culture is ridiculous. That's textbook ethnocentrism... er, country-centrism.
That's like having a kneejerk reaction to the Korean discrimination in Japan as a person from the US.
It was read to me as a child. I know the story well. At the time, I didn't attach any demeaning racial symbolism to it or to "Just So Stories," but I was also about four or five and still had no idea why white people would hate black people just because of their skin color (I mean, The Cosby Show was so funny).
(edit: I do not believe that the original story, per se, of "Sambo," is racist or carries a negative message towards Indians or Africans, but the image of the main character has long since been co-opted by opportunists as a blatant racist image. This necessarily tarnishes the story for future generations.)
Looking back, is seems obvious to me that, for the sake of racial harmony, the story must be read in the context of its aquired meaning. I wonder: if the title of the book had simply been "Little Sambo," the story may have simply faded into the amalgam of dusty Indian/African folk tales.
Not in the US.
Or similar to the religious conflict in SerbiaBosniaetc. Everyone here is like, so what? We didn't grow up with it. But it's a big deal to them.
Man... I don't think understand Japanese culture very much.
Great people, great country... pretty darn uninformed as a whole. Especially in regards to american cultural issues (as could be expected in any country).
You say they know more about present day black culture than you? Man, half of those kids are 1 step away from being in black-face. It's embarassing.
Speaking of Japanese black face... man, the Chanels... black face stares back at me from every dollar bin in Japan...
hard to see in this pick, but half of those dudes are chillin in black face.
i stand corrected
I'm just not buying this whole "there's no Black people in Japan, so they can't be racist against them" argument (not just from you, Graf, I'm quoting you but it's been expressed by a few, including the Japanese gentleman interviewed in the original article) - I mean there may be no Iraqi people living in Texas, and that probably explains why Texans may not know that Iraq is one of the most storied, learned and ancient cultures on this planet, and instead tend to think of them as expendable, ignorant, terrorist "sand niggas."
Not knowing someone's culture, or sharing a subway car or elevator with them can create racism, not render it impossible...do you not think it's possible that there are some, many, Japanese who laugh to think of the ol' Darkie stereotype and picture them grinning a mile and eating a watermelon in one bite just like so many ignorant Americans (and not just white Americans) have?
Are you certain? Part of the xenophobia stems from the fact that Japanese have traditionally viewed themselves as descendants of the sun god, while everyone else is basically... mud people? The idea of racial supremecy runs pretty deep in Japanese culture I think. They believe they are unique more so than other countries... half the japanese seem to think japan is the only country in the world that has 4 seasons. I think this idea of uniquness, and separateness generates not only a fear and misunderstanding of that which exists outside, as it does the belief that that which is outside is lesser.
Of course, this is a generalization. And those suck. I'm in no way saying all Japanese are like this.
I'd say they pick up on them because they immerse themselves in American culture...look at the Japanese pop band in blackface on their CD covers earlier in the thread...am I supposed to assume they are doing that without any concept of minstrelry and it's impact on american culture and racial stereotyping?