Showing posts with label gender. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gender. Show all posts

Monday, November 6, 2017

Tate Modern Talk: Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People about Race Reni Eddo-Lodge, in conversation with curator Zoe Whitley. 3 November 2017 - 19.00–20.30

Tate Modern Talk: Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People about Race

We made it in! But unfortunately hundreds more did not.
We made it in by the skin of our teeth, and only thanks to two wonderful (White) women who stepped aside to give us their tickets. I may have been crying. However, I am not sure if that was sheer anger and frustration at how badly handled we all were by the event hosts. Those trying to keep us safe did a great job, as best they could under the circumstances. Giving us whatever small pieces of information they had. However, that, and the marginally bigger venue they produced, does not take away from how utterly poorly and mismanaged the event was (see Reni’s answer to this below). Warning had been given about the popularity of the event. 100 capacity allocated. 500-600 arrived. Only 230 made it in to see Reni Eddo-lodge.

I had promised an absent friend that I would make notes of the night. She was the one who initially pressed the book into my hands. But I realized that many people were left outside and not able to listen to the talk promised… and maybe not able to make or afford the next ticketed talk of Reni’s in the coming weeks.

My friend Kemi, and I made notes.

They are disjointed. There are changes between narrators, changes between quotes, general summaries, and also tenses. Apologies if some of it doesn’t make sense. But hopefully enough of it will.


Author of Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People about Race, Reni Eddo-Lodge, in conversation with curator Zoe Whitley.
3 November 2017 - 19.00–20.30


Eddo-Lodge began the talk with the conclusion that white people just don't care.
There is talk of “Diversity” this and that.  And then I came to the conclusion that most white people at the top, really don't care.  And once you accept that. Then things will be easier for you. White people talk but take no action and White feminist talk but there was no action. Within the feminist circles, that once race began to be questioned, in opposition to the accusations of racism, there began the creating the narrative that "I am the problem".

The other reason for the book was that the onus is always on us to do the work the psychological heavy lifting all the time when it comes to understanding and explaining racism. Referencing the film The Colour of Fear (1994). And so the book came about because this is what someone else needs to read, so that we don't have talk to people about this anymore.

Eddo-lodge talked about getting the work up and running:
She started her blog 2nd year at uni. She interned as a journalist but was aware that all black people were cleaners. She blogged, then she got attention from the establishment. But no one in the “establishment” really took a risk. Seeing how Nepotism, middle class white they get all the real opportunities. The fallacy of being colour blind. Black women’s’ voices are just not taken seriously at all. “I don't know what happening with white peoples ears but it’s not penetrating”.

She had been doing the work for years before her book. It had been in the public domain but no one cared. The standard response always seems to be "There is not a market for this kind of work!" The queues tonight are a testament against this absurd argument.  
And as the host began in her introduction, Tate Modern underestimated both this talk and the interest in the Soul of A Nation exhibition which had 60% more attendance than the Tate was expecting.

We have this idea that the internet is democratizing, but that is only if people are investing in you. "No space was given to me in the mainstream media."
There is a lack of money resources and the time. The anchors which are vital in the real world are not investing in these issues. The internet is not the answer for the minority voices. It does not develop these.  Again, this is an example of the systemic systems of racism.

#guerrillagirls
"Unless the history of art includes all our voices it's not the history of art, it's the history of power"
Then these beacons can become the only reference point. 

No one is willing to be a mentor or an advocate of black people. 

No one is offering access or a leg up and assistance. 
These are the structures that are in place that lay this bare. 

The fallacy of being "colourblind" 

Intersectionality. Black women's voices are just not being taken seriously. It's not like those work is not in the public domain. White people are choosing not to see it and listen to it. It is the silencing of our voices. 

Having to tease out some of these spaces that we can find. 
Responses to "Girls." These are not voices of "all women" only "all women like me" 

If you could talk to black people about race. What would you say?
Share out the opportunities. Attempt to increase the unity of the movement.
This work is bigger than any one person’s ego. It's about the politics and not me.
People are waiting for the book and not me. Focus primarily on the work and not the ego. Don't revel in the issue. Work out how do you do it so that we don't remain in this position. Push aside and against the culture vultures. Get like-minded people together, regardless. 

"Don't ask for permission. Get on with the work"

Focusing on the work, creates the situation means that people around you just become fascinated, even if it's to criticize. Just work with likeminded people and focus on the work. 

Why no Political involvement?
We have much more power as the electorate than we realise.  

Personal stance, on not taking a political party alignment; if it means aligning and moving and changing beliefs to fit in, then what is the point.  We don't have to be part of politics. There are opportunities of standing up in a different way, or through different means. If politics works for you then do that. Do whatever you can, as long as you do the work.

What did you think about the space we were given? 
There is a tradition of us being underestimated. 
I emailed and told them I need a bigger room. 
I was told it wasn't going to happen. 

POC interests market/audience was always underestimated. 
This is the perfect example, books like these are not written in Britain very often. 
White feminist books are ten a penny. 

Sorry that people were turned away. But I knew this was going to happen. 

What will the impact of this book in the long term? What about this book being on the National Curriculum?

The National curriculum has not notified her... not as of yet!...  J

Start the petition for colonialism to be put on the national curriculum. 

Govt have asked her in a tokenism way to contribute to Black history month. But they haven't asked ask to come and influence Policy.

The book is creating a different dialogue. The book title is really like a red rag to a Bull for White people. Then they read it, and they go away. I hope it doesn't get subsumed into merely an intellectual curiosity: but only time will tell on the impact. 


The way you write is incredibly healing. The anger is very real. In your mind, how were you able to take that anger and channel it and make it healing? 

All that anger around feeling unheard went into the book. 
I have been watching and reading feeling very angry. Looking at narratives about equality and thinking they are rubbish. So someone has to try and give it a go. Wanting to talk about race on own terms and not wanting to be in Politics, or to be employed by anyone. You have got to try and channel the anger and put it into something creative. Manage the anger by having a project to work on.  I was tired of biting my tongue and swallowing my words just talking to people. And not working for other people, having to channel it for myself. 

I don't want to be the only voice here. So channel that anger into something creative. Like the art exhibition. Artists, writers, filmmaker are all around us if you are willing to see. 


What’s the difference between American and English Black politics?

"Passive aggressive" 

The court case of the woman who put the pot plant in front of the man’s face is a good example of this. British are all very passive aggressive. 

That's why the books made waves, because it's very direct. I say what I mean.

With right winged you know where you stand but with white liberals all you get is passive aggression

Father in the audience asking for advice for his daughter as she start her career in engineering – “How does a young black woman navigate themselves in the corporate world without losing her essence?:

Have to work at critical mass to create change. Cultural change as well as a policy change. It’s not only that we are not reflected but that we don't get the opportunity to work. 

Lorraine O'Grady “We need mirrors to see ourselves.” find mentors watch, read about people you can identify with.

I wouldn't want to misconstrue that this is easy, in any sphere. Just find the likeminded people, even if different situations and different spheres. Need to build the support network. Find your critical mass of people. Just people you can call. Need a support network, find a place of sanctuary, a place of refuge.

Basically at the moment, White women have the mic on diversity. ("White woman's tears")
"White liberals, if you consider yourself to be truly liberal. Then step up to the plate."

Change is afoot; something is in the air. We are reaching a critical mass. 



Thursday, October 8, 2015

Suffragettes Revolution... for everyone?

On Monday evening, I was waiting for my date among the popcorn and beers of the Ritzy Cinema, Brixton. I was clutching the BFI festival brochure; reading the review for Suffragettes, out this week, and remembered an article a friend posted on Facebook from Stylist Magazine. Swapping paper for pixels, I pulled up and read the related article. The Politics of Being a Woman: by Romola Garai, Carey Mulligan and Ann-Marie Duff. 
 



Unaware of their own ironic position, the Stylist journalist writes, "a bittersweet celebration"of the story of those women. A magazine, which rarely falls outside the usual 'snoring' paradigms of reducing women and their "needs" to "style" (and rarely any other substance). That all said, they were here discussing the revolutionary nature of a film that was produced, directed and acted by some phenomenal women in the industry. This was fantastic, a great article vocalising how this movie has illuminated just how far... we haven't come! How there is still a battle, how we are still championing equal pay for female actors and representation in the industry. And the song they sing echos out across to all women and all industries. The inequality shown by the very fact that we still have to have these arguments and that these women still face these questions (compared to their male counterparts). No one ever gets asked; "So, why did you feel the need to tell this story about men..." they just do it. 

Yet I couldn't get this nagging tug in my brain that something is missing. As a female, as a female actor, as a female actor of colour. Yes, that is it. That was what's missing. But then (immediately) it feels wrong to knock such a powerful film. A film that (without having to even watch yet) I can see is doing and going to do (hopefully) so much in opening up huge gaping chasms for discussion on this issue of sexism and gender inequality. I cant really complain about colour representation, can I? "Besides", as my brain tries to soothe me as my date strolls in, "this was such a long time ago and things were different back then. And there probably weren't even many people of colour in the movement anyway." And so, neglectfully, we slipped into the dark womb of the cinema to watch a very bloody Macbeth.

That was Monday.
It's now Thursday - and as I read more about the Sisters Uncut protesting at the film premiere in London's Leicester Square. How they stormed the barriers and lay in protest along the red carpet.The Twitter scandal surrounding the use of the Pankhurst quote; " I would rather be a rebel than a slave" on t-shirts, and how this has been construed as disrespectful to racial sensitivities. I can't get that nagging thought to quieten down.

The actors were right about the bringing to the foreground the battles of suffrage. Although won here, but still in it's infancy, and only nominally, in Saudi Arabia for example. This film brings a glaring light to inequalities still present 100 years later. Suffrage has been attained but suffering is an ever present risk to all women. Eve Ensler has raised the cry again with her campaign 1 Billion Rising. We are still living with the statistic that 1 in 3 women are abused violently or sexually at the hands of men. That equates to 1 billion (and rising) women in the whole world. 
But fuck big statistics. Think about yourself. Pick 3 women in your life, fuck it, pick more. 
Pick 6 or 9 or 12...

And just do the maths.
Yes, think about it...
Who are they?
Do you know what is going on?
Do you suspect?
Do you help?
Ahah!
Got it? 
Enough said!
Actually no!
There is never enough said!

The protest from the the premiere was made by Sisters Uncut, an organisation which are campaigning against the government cuts to vital resources in the UK to assist and care for women in violent situations. Resources that are being systematically obliterated while we see another unchanging statistic that 2 women in the UK a week die in acts of violence from men. Bonham-Carter, Mulligan and others, shared support for this protest in their interviews to the press. Sisters Uncut also raised the point that there are disproportionate levels of non-white women in dire need of this service. That these cuts disproportionally affect "women of colour". And despite this film highlighting all the incredible issues, achievements, and battles still to be fought. It also brings up from its depths something else just as uncomfortable. How it disproportionately shows women of colour. 

And by disproportionately I mean: none.

And I am not discussing the racial implication of the promotional slogans, "I would rather be a rebel than a slave". I think most of us are grown up enough, despite any sensitivities, to see how that was meant. And personally, following the line of De Beauvoir's thoughts, women treated as property. Bodies monitored and censored with no autonomy outside the male subjective; was/is a form of slavery. But this is not my song to sing, becasue I feel it misses a bigger and more urgent issue than semantics and implied meaning. 

In terms of this film, as a non-white female actor; I have no representation and I have no opportunity for work (and selfishly is is probably the latter that bothers me most!)

In a film which, not only in its internal message but in its production values, is about the injustice of inequality: I am effectively barred from the discussion. And  I think what is most frustrating is that this is not the usual  "numbers/quotas" critisicm of film, tv and theatre. Where a mindless piece of work lacks any acknowlegement of gender/race/sexuality/disability. This is a film carefully and willfully constructed to challenge this: Both inside and out. 

I have seen the reasoning that, with very little historical evidence for ethnic minorities protesting within the Suffrage movement, it would be too difficult to place a character of colour within this story. In the first instance, as a champion Googler, I already found one. Princess Sophia Duleep Singh. Who, to quote her biographer, Anita Anand,  "despite her own personal losses to Imperalism, saw the value of the sisterhood in campagining for women's rights." Yes the history books are a bit of a blur. With the majority of minorities well within and below the working class and subject to little or no historical records. 

Yet I still can't help feel that something is amiss...

This film isn't a factual account of historical figures, despite its deeply historical context. I believe that those producing this film are keen to demonstrate this is not about the more famous conterparts of this movement. Isn't its truer aim to show the lives of normal working class women. And the problem is this then: "normal" reads "white".  

Even IF there is recorded evidence of non-white Suffragette experience, as perhaps there was more of for white women. This is a fictional tale, so why do we need historical validation as the go-to excuse for not representinng non-white Suffragettes in this movie. 

Despite the wonderful and praiseworthy roll-call of great female writers, directors, producers, actors, etc... (and I will reiterate that this shouldnt be an issue still in 2015). Notwithstanding that. I can't help but see the same pattern of sexism being played out, but this time with regards to colour.  The charge held against this and any other male-dominated industry, has been that: women, at the very best (and most optimistic way of putting this) are: overlooked.

This is exactly the same problem I can see here in the lack of representation of colour (and even sexuality, and disabilty for that matter). And is the charge here worse? That as part of a supressed group we should understand better than anyone, and be hyper-vigiliant not to commit the same mistakes as those who have subjugated us. It is not good enough to simple take hold; to regain some equality, only to use that same methods to ignore others in the same plight. To fall foul of to the same mistakes as before.

And I am aware that this puts women that I admire and am intensely proud of and awe of, in that awfully difficult female position again. That we always seem to be balancing on a knife-edge. Be it work or motherhood or family, is that we are "damned if we do and damned if we don't".

Yes, it would be more complicated to write and show and explain the relation of colour, or sexuality or disabilty in relation to the Suffragette movement. Yes, it may highlight a darker and more complicated structure of the movement, perhaps less positive, albeit still reedeemable. Yes, it may be more complicated to fit all those stories in to only two hours. 

But isnt "complicated" what we women do best?...