I found a
very interesting article on the New York Times website that discusses the
outcry over an article printed in the magazine Philadelphia. The article is entitled “Being White in Philly: Whites, race, class, and the things that never get said”.
This is the first time I have come across a recently printed article that
addresses the taboo subject of how racism affects Caucasians. The
article in Philadelphia Magazine consists
of stories about an encounter ten white residents of Philadelphia have had that
involved the issue of race. One story describes the hypersensitive awareness
that many white people have about being courteous to those of African-American
descent. However, another makes the comment that “Blacks use skin color as an excuse. Discrimination is
an excuse, instead of moving forward. … It’s a shame—you pay taxes, they’re not
doing anything except sitting on porches smoking pot ….” Comments like this last one make it easy to see
why there was such an outrage over the article.
The New York Times article also presents to
different views: one I believe is stretching toward the radical and another
that puts forth a good point. The first criticism of the article comes from a
columnist named Karen Heller who charges the author of “providing anonymity to all of his interview
subjects and painting a portrait of a city devoid of any voices other than
white residents.” First of all, I am confused on why it is wrong to
provide anonymity for the people he interviewed when the subject he is
addressing is extremely sensitive, and many of his interview subjects lived in
racially diverse neighborhoods. Second, the article is titled “Being White in
Philly”; of course it’s only going to tell the story from one point of view. I
do not believe the author of “Being White in Philly” is trying to say that the “white”
point of view on racism in Philadelphia is the only point of view. I think he
was trying to explore a side of racism that is usually not addressed. The
second view presented in the New York Times article explains that the staff of Philadelphia Magazine is predominantly
white. In fact, there is only one full-time African-American on staff. The
argument is that a magazine which clearly does not employ a diverse staff has
no qualifications to present an unbiased discussion on race.
Is Philadelphia
Magazine justified in publishing the article? Is the responsive outcry to
the article justified? This is a very hard subject to breach. I think the article
“Being White in Philly” addresses an interesting topic that should be explored
more, but I do not believe the author went about addressing the topic in the
right way. I think there need to be more intensive studies, not just interviews
with ten white people one finds on the street. Also, I understand why there was
such an outcry to the article. Many of the stories presented a very racist view
that only encompassed a small population of the enormous city. Although I think
this is a topic that should be explored more, but in a more reliably academic
sense, I realize that there is a very fine line to walk when discussing the
subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment