July 6, 2001

10:43 PM

Talking the talk: An interview with John McWhorterSpeaking of linguistics and whatnot, I've been thumbing through the new-look East Bay Express. I read this, and I feel like McWhorter's never gotten over some black people wrongly labeling him as an Oreo cookie (never had someone assure him, in response to epithets like those, that there are 35 million ways of being African-American -- and that many of them involve fluency in "totally ass-kicking SWE," to reference David Foster Wallace's essay on Bryan Garner's new usage book in Harper's a couple of months ago).

I appreciate his iconoclasm (hell, like myself, he voted for Nader) and I'm willing to concede points of his basic argument and that I agree with him on some (the whole "niggardly" thing; the Ebonics controversy) points.

But after reading this, I wound up feeling irritated with him -- and especially put off by allowing himself to be misrespresented marketed as a conservative and, despite his vaunted speaking ability and academic credentials, his inability to get his points across in the media.
posted by allaboutgeorge (13 comments total)

Interesting article, although the authors unfamiliarity with the majesty that is Urkel was a bit funny.

I'm not too familiar with McWhorter, but reading this it also seems like the media is also a bit guilty of wanting the novelty of "ooh, a black conservative" that he gets (willingly) put into this role.

There's also the matter of "the black left" who automatically labels you a "conservative" if you don't toe the party line on many racial issues.
posted by owillis at 11:26 PM on July 6, 2001

Is it just the *black* left? I suspect a large fraction of MeFi is white, but the same thing happens here (imho).
posted by andrew cooke at 11:35 PM on July 6, 2001

In my experience, yes. Center-lefters like myself get screwed because those on the left say we aren't compassionate enough, while right wingers say we're commie pinko liberals. Oh well, I'll buy Bill and Al a beer and chill out.
posted by owillis at 11:43 PM on July 6, 2001

[But after reading this, I wound up feeling irritated with him -- and especially put off by allowing himself to be misrespresented/marketed as a conservative ]

First I'm amazed someone this smart didn't think this was going to happen and wasn't prepared with a PR firm.

Second, It really isn't possible to discuss things in america anymore is it? You either recite one party line or the other. Anything else is heracy by both camps.
posted by revbrian at 1:12 AM on July 7, 2001

I think the problem is that no one can wait long enough for all the facts in any given issue to come out before forming an opinion.
For example, can you imagine what all the Sunday morning pundit shows would be like if those highly-paid talking heads were forced to admit that most of the time they really don't have a clue?
McWhorter did make some valid points...but nothing (the more media savvy) Stanley Crouch hasn't said. Obviously he has trouble spotting those who would use his works to fit their agenda both left and right.
McWhorter should stay off the talk shows and let his work speak for itself.
posted by black8 at 2:07 AM on July 7, 2001

I'm a liberal with conservative personal values (or perhaps a center-left with occassional liberal outbursts), and I don't necessarily believe the heracy claim...

1) I agree with allaboutgeorge in that I think I agree with a lot of McWhorter's views. His problem is that he allowed himself to be a conservative poster child when they were just using him. ("See? Racism doesn't exist anymore!! A Black professor says so!" Even though this was not his belief.)

2) It's completely untrue that everyone has to line up with party line. In fact, people can frequently switch over to another party for certain issues and not get called out. (Hell -- recently we even saw some Republicans go pretty liberal on health care.)

What is true is that people are afraid to have open-minded discussions about race. Occasionally we hear a new viewpoint about race -- perhaps in an article, perhaps a viewpoint that's contrary to what we were expecting -- and we gasp. We freeze. We don't know whether to nod our heads in agreement, or whether to scream "racist!!" We're too afraid to go with our instinct or opinion because we fear we might be called racist. Too many ideas are immediately tossed out because they lie too close to that grey line.

That's not to say that racism doesn't exist, or that it still doesn't hurt me. But I think I am ready to hear some more creative, perhaps controversial ideas, in order to heal our communities.
posted by jennak at 6:46 AM on July 7, 2001

Sorry, jennak, but at least as evidenced by MeFi (which is, for all intents and purposes, a pretty liberal hangout), your second point just doesn't hold up. Liberals are as dogmatic as conservatives, which is perhaps a bit more disconcerting since the Left seems to be all about "diversity" - except when it comes to actually disagreeing with them.

McWhorter, on the other hand, is an imbecile. That's what I'd call someone so obviously intelligent who would allow themselves to, first, be positioned and marketed as he has with no control over himself as product and, second, enter in to a pubic forum - in Berkeley, for heaven's sake - so utterly unprepared for the pre-destined outcome.
posted by m.polo at 8:42 AM on July 7, 2001

After reading the nearly 5'700 word McWhorter interview, I glanced at the 18'000 word David Foster Wallace article. Do you think anyone actually reads all this stuff before commenting?
posted by swipe66 at 9:49 AM on July 7, 2001

I'd just call him ... naïve. Not only was he unprepared for the media rollercoaster, he was unprepared for the stiff debate he'd face even within academia. A lot of the people writing on either side of the fence in this genre of just-so politics have had a lot of experience playing the game. He wrote a personal account that wasn't based on the academic political record, and when he's asked to defend his liberal credentials, he doesn't have the intellectual underpinnings that are more or less required, cynically, canned responses to what other writers have said.

I know what I'd do with an opportunity like this. I'd try to ride it to the top, to FOX News, where I can skewer the idiots who thought I agreed with them (realistically, I know I couldn't hold back that long, but you know). This doesn't seem to have occurred to him. He is letting himself be used, and as a smart man, I'm not sure but what he's doing it for the obvious reason: book sales, even without admitting it to himself.

(polo, I know that Berkeley had that naked guy, but I wasn't aware their forums were so ... personal. And before someone else vectors the misspelling: heresy.)
posted by dhartung at 9:50 AM on July 7, 2001

Sorry, m.polo...but don't most people (in the US -- it's ridiculous to use MeFi as an indicator since you admitted it's skewed) consider themselves independents? Aren't they by definition refusing to line up on party line?

Party line has nothing to do with Americans' inability to have intelligent, open-minded race discussions.

*Phew* I though heresy was misspelled....but I was too scared to question it. Hahaha.
posted by jennak at 9:56 AM on July 7, 2001

I am disappointed that the article is all about McWhorter, not about his theories. Most of the criticism I see is knee jerk and ill informed, and here it's all about his media manipulation, which if any of you had read the article you would recognize as a PR ploy to get his book publicity. Which is exactly what any one of you would have done too. Admittedly he has played up the controversial aspects of his writing, as in this article, which is far more informative about his thoughts than that long winded, clueless article was (I mean, the huffy way the author dismisses an Urkel reference? hello??).

As for the popular position that everyone on MeFi is divided into liberals versus conservatives, I argue that the loudest people on MeFi are so divided, and everyone else is in the middle. Or in my case, far out in left field. And that still probably won't get me a nomination to be on one of the MeFi trading cards.
posted by norm at 7:10 PM on July 7, 2001

There are MeFi trading cards?
posted by sudama at 10:28 PM on July 7, 2001

There are MeFi trading cards?
Mine is going for $150 on ebay.
posted by thirteen at 11:35 PM on July 8, 2001