Cultural Appropriation
While reading the Chelsea Handler book, PG started to think of things to write about. A list appeared on the back inside cover. A few of these have hit the innertubes already. Today, three more are going to be incorporated into one post. If this is not to your liking, you are encouraged to skip over the text and look at the pictures. These images today are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
This monolog will include items four, five, and seven. Number four is people who don’t like quiet. Number five is stupid phones. Number seven is a question. Is it cultural appropriation for white people to get upset about racism? All three items involve people making needless noise.
Some people don’t like quiet. Whenever there is a break in a conversation, they feel obligated to fill in the dead air. Whether of not they have anything worthwhile to say is beside the point. The idea is to not let there be any silent time.
This is more than dead air in a conversation. Some feel the need to listen to canned entertainment at all times. The earbud riders miss the background sounds of the world. Especially when in motion outdoors, there is a steady background of sound. Crickets, birds, wind make a pleasing aural backdrop. In addition, there is the sound of automobile tires whooshing against the pavement, getting louder and louder, then softer and softer. It is also good to hear these sounds if you are sharing a roadway with these steel behemoths. They are bigger than you.
Often the listening device of choice is a smart phone. They are not good for conversation, so many resort to text messages. PG, on the other hand, is a hold out. He has a twelve button stupid phone. The time cards are purchased every three months, and cost about seven dollars a month. If you get lost on your way somewhere, you can call for directions. With a bit of effort, you can send a text message. It is a handy device, even if you can’t play angry birds on it.
Angry birdbrains birds leads us to our final subject for this morning. Some white people just love to talk about how horrible racism is. Outside of defriending people who do not share their outrage, these people often do little, other than talk, to actually fight incorrect racial attitudes. Could it be cultural appropriation for white people to get so worked up about racism?
If any of these privileged characters were to read this feature, someone would probably say that PG does not understand cultural appropriation. Fair enough, as the uncertain umpire might say. The odds are that these self anointed progressives don’t understand cultural appropriation. CA has a fluid definition, like racism. It boils down to being something the accuser does not like.
There has been a lot of angry talk about race this year. A white woman filed a bad boss lawsuit. Her lawyer proceeds to slander the celebrity sister of her former boss, about saying the n word thirty years earlier. A cereal company makes anonymous comments about a commercial, and gets truckloads of free publicity. None of these incidents will make improve the lives of color. Mostly, people just want a cheap, easy way to feel superior to their neighbor. When you look at the history of race relations in amerika, you have to wonder what race started it.
Slavery And The Star Spangled Banner
There is a terrific Backstory episode about the War of 1812. This is a conflict that is not much thought about, even during its bicentennial. It was not a good war for people of color. Native tribes fought with the British in Michigan, and were soundly defeated. After this war, the attitude of the white man towards the natives got worse.
Perhaps the most famous product of the War of 1812 is The Star Spangled Banner, a.k.a. the national anthem. There are a few legends about writing this song that skeptical bloggers like to shoot down. At the 43 minute mark of the backstory episode, another aspect of TSSB is discussed.
It seems as though slaves were escaping their owners, and fighting with the British. Washington lawyer Francis Scott Key was a slave owner, and thought that the slaves would be better off with their owners. This is the sentiment behind the third verse of TSSB.
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore,
That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wash’d out their foul footstep’s pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave,
And the Star-Spangled Banner in triumph doth wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
The image of F.S. Key has been cleaned up over the years. This biography omits the third verse of TSSB, and does not mention his slaves. Wikipedia tells a different story.
In 1836, Key prosecuted New York doctor Reuben Crandall, brother of controversial Connecticut school teacher Prudence Crandall, for “seditious libel” for possessing a trunk full of anti-slavery publications in his Georgetown residence. In a trial that attracted nationwide attention, Key charged that Crandall’s actions had the effect of instigating enslaved people to rebel. Crandall’s attorneys acknowledged he opposed slavery but denied any intent or actions to encourage rebellion. In his final address to the jury, Key said “Are you willing gentleman to abandon your country, to permit it to be taken from you, and occupied by the abolitionist, according to whose taste it is to associate and amalgamate with the negro? Or gentleman, on the other hand, are there laws in this community to defend you from the immediate abolitionist, who would open upon you the floodgates of such extensive wickedness and mischief?” Crandall was acquitted.”
The Huffington Post has a story about F.S. Key, ‘Land of the Free?’ Francis Scott Key, Composer of National Anthem, Was Defender of Slavery.
Buying and selling humans remained a respectable business in Washington City. The slave holding elite of the south had a majority in the Congress and a partner in President Andrew Jackson…
To reassert the rule of law, Key set out to crack down on the anti-slavery men and their “incendiary publications.” Informants had reported to the grand jury about an abolitionist doctor from New York who was living in Georgetown. Key charged Rueben Crandall with bringing a trunk full of anti-slavery publications into the city.
In the spring of 1836, Key’s prosecution of Rueben Crandall was a national news story. In response, the American Antislavery Society circulated a broadsheet denouncing Washington as “The Slave Market of America.” The abolitionists needled Key for the hypocrisy of using his patriotic fame to defend tyranny in the capital: “Land of the Free… Home of the Oppressed.”
Key shrugged off his liberal critics. In front of courtroom crowded with Congressmen and correspondents Key waxed eloquent and indignant at the message of the abolitionists. “They declare that every law which sanctions slavery is null and void… ” Key told the jury. “That we have no more rights over our slaves than they have over us. Does not this bring the constitution and the laws under which we live into contempt? Is it not a plain invitation to resist them?”
Pictures today are from The Library of Congress. This is a repost.
Who Is The Racist?
A few weeks ago, this blog published a feature, James Baldwin And The Six Letter Word. At the center was selection of James Baldwin talking about the n word. There was a transcript available, which makes today’s exercise a lot easier. Pictures for this adventure are from The Library of Congress.
Mr. Baldwin was discussing this nasty word, and offered an insight into who the user of this nasty word was really talking about. Now, there is another nasty word being casually tossed about these days. This other nasty word is racist. What would happen if you took Mr. Baldwin’s talk, and substituted racist for nasty? It is an interesting way to look at things.
Who is the racist? Well i know this…and anybody who has tried to live knows this. What you say about somebody else (you know) anybody else, reveals you. What I think of you as being is dictated by my own necessities, my own psychology, my own uhm fears…and desires. I’m not describing you when I talk about you…I’m describing me.
Now, here in this country we got somebody called a racist. It doesn’t in such terms, I beg you to remark, exist in any other country in the world. We have invented the racist. I didn’t invent him, white people invented him. I’ve always known, I had to know by the time I was seventeen years old, what you were describing was not me and what you were afraid of was not me. It had to be something else. You had invented it so it had to be something you were afraid of and you invested me with it.
Now if that’s so, no matter what you’ve done to me I can say to you this, and I mean it…I know you can’t do any more and I’ve got nothing to lose…and I know and I have always known you know and really always..…I have always known that I am not a racist…but if I am not the racist…and if it is true that your invention reveals you…then who is the racist?
I am not the victim here. I know one thing from another. I know that I was born, am gonna suffer and gonna die. And the only way that you can get through life is to know the worst things about it. I know that a person is more important than anything else. Anything else. I’ve learned this because I’ve had to learn it. But you still think, I gather, that the racist is necessary. Well he’s not necessary to me, so he must be necessary to you. So I give you your problem back. You’re the racist baby, it isn’t me.
Leo Frank And George Zimmerman
About this time one hundred years ago, Leo Frank was convicted of murdering Mary Phagan. Within two years, with the sentence commuted to life imprisonment, some people kidnapped him from a state prison. Leo Frank was taken to Marietta, and hung from an oak tree.
George Zimmerman is the object of the mob’s fury today. The two cases are different. There is little doubt that Mr. Zimmerman fired the weapon, that killed Trayvon Martin. There is considerable doubt about the guilt of Leo Frank. Much of the venom directed at Mr. Frank was because he was Jewish. Trayvon Martin was the unpopular minority in the current case.
The common thread in the two cases is media fueled demands for vengeance. The Supreme Court took note of this in the Frank case. “Mob law does not become due process of law by securing the assent of a terrorized jury.”
Tom Watson was one of the leading rabble rousers in Mr. Frank’s case. A politician and newspaper owner, Mr. Watson led the anti semitic charge. Today, a large bronze statue of Tom Watson is in front of the west side of the State Capitol. This side is the preferred site for rallies. Tom Watson is seen shaking a finger behind the speakers stand.
So far, the mob has not executed George Zimmerman. It is not out of the question. Pictures today are from “The Special Collections and Archives,Georgia State University Library”.
Hair
There is a tasteful feature on the innertubes now, A Few Good Reasons Why White People Should Not Wear “Mohawks” or Dreadlocks. Yes, this is another polemic about cultural appropriation. If you want to skip the text, and look at the pictures, no one will get mad. Or get even. If you read the text, you might get odd. It is your choice.
The gist of the tract is “When white people wear “Mohawks” or dreadlocks it twists those hairstyles into symbols of privilege rather than symbols of survival and resistance.” Little is known about why the Natives of Upstate New York wore their hair the way they did. Isn’t calling this hair choice “symbols of survival and resistance” playing into the game of misunderstanding non European cultures?
The tract is not well written. Maybe the author feels like using good grammar is appropriating someone else’s culture.
There is one part of the tract that had PG shaking his buzz cut head. This is a free country. Can’t I do whatever I want? This country has never been free for people of color/non-white people. Certainly, you can choose wear your hair however you want. Historically, however, people of color have not been able to make that choice. This is not why the Bronner Brothers are multi millionaires. Black Americans spend more on hair care products than the gross national product of many African countries.
Both mohawks and dreadlocks are high maintenance affairs. After his struggles with shoulder length redneck curls, PG is not about to shave the sides of a beaver tail every day. And dreadlocks have always seemed to be just a bit on the dirty side. The rastas are welcome to wear dreadlocks, as long as they pass the spliff.
One thing PG has wondered was answered as a result of this polemic. Did the Mohawk tribe really wear their hair that way? When you type “Did the Mohawk… ” into google, the rest of the phrase to pop up is “Did the Mohawk Indians have mohawks?” Someone else has wondered the same thing. Wikipedia has more information.
The mohawk (also referred to as a mohican in British English) is a hairstyle in which, in the most common variety, both sides of the head are shaven, leaving a strip of noticeably longer hair in the center. Though mohawk is associated mostly with punk rock subculture, today it has entered mainstream fashion. The mohawk is also sometimes referred to as an iro in reference to the Iroquois, from whom the hairstyle is derived – though historically the hair was plucked out rather than shaved. … The Mohawk and the rest of the Iroquois confederacy (Seneca, Cayuga, Onondaga, Tuscarora and Oneida) in fact wore a square of hair on the back of the crown of the head. The Mohawk did not shave their heads when creating this square of hair, but rather pulled the hair out, small tufts at a time. … Therefore a true hairstyle of the Mohawks was one of plucked-out hair, leaving a three-inch square of hair on the back crown of the head with three short braids of hair decorated.
They didn’t shave the sides of the head, they plucked the hair out. That does eliminate the need to shave the sides of your head every day. This is not the way the fashion conscious hair people do the modern mohawk. The question arises if this non authentic hairstyle is really cultural appropriation.
Wikipedia goes on to add that this do might not be an Iroquois invention. “The hairstyle has been in existence in many parts of the world for millennia. For instance, the Clonycavan Man, a 2000-year-old male bog body discovered near Dublin in 2003, was found to be wearing a mohawk styled with plant oil and pine resin. Artwork discovered at the Pazyryk burials dating back to 600 BCE depicts Scythian warriors sporting similar mohawks. The body of a warrior occupying one of the kurgans had been scalped earlier in life and wore a hair prosthesis in the form of a mohawk. Herodotus claimed that the Macai, a northern Libyan tribe, “shave their hair so as to leave tufts, letting the middle of their hair grow long, but round this on all sides shaving it close to the skin.” Amongst the Pawnee people, who historically lived along in present-day Nebraska and Kansas, a “mohawk” hair style was common.”
Part of the polemic took a question and answer format. “But, I wear my hair this way as a statement against oppressive cultures and governments. How is that racist?” “You can take a stand against oppression and dominant cultures without appropriating the cultures of the people being hurt by them. Appropriation actually enforces oppression, it does not stand against it. Appropriation is part of the problem, not part of the solution”
To paraphrase this, you can be anti racist without proudly avoiding high maintenance hairdoos. Especially one that bears little resemblance to the actual article.
There was a statement in yesterday’s post . “Black Americans spend more on hair care products than the gross national product of many African countries.” This was tossed out in a careless moment, which is not a good thing to do. Today’s post is an investigation. For purposes of this report, America’s gross national product is the republican party.
Finding out how much African Americans spend on hair care is more google intensive than this slack reporter imagined. Madame Noire has a feature, Black Women Spend Half a Trillion Dollars on Haircare and Weaves! Why? “Black women spend half a trillion dollars to keep our hairstyles tight, our weaves looking good and our “kitchens” tamed. Why do we do this?” The $500 billion figure might include pain and suffering. Target Market News is more conservative, reporting “Personal Care Products and Services – $6.66 billion”.
In the chatter about a Chris Rock movie, Good Hair, the phrase “9 billion dollar hair trade industry” is used. The Magazine Publishers of America report that advertising spending on “Hair Products & Accessories” was $1,242,700 in 2007.
The short answers are “a lot”, and “we don’t know”. It is probably less that $500 Billion. For the purposes of this feature, we will go with a conservative estimate. This would be Target Market News. Since not all “Personal Care Products and Services” are hair related, we will call our number Five Billion. This is probably a conservative figure, but for our purposes it will do.
The second part of the statement was “Black Americans spend more on hair care products than the gross national product of many African countries.” The numbers come from Wikipedia and the International Money Fund. There are sixteen African countries with GNP less than $5 billion. They include: Mauritania, Swaziland, Togo, Eritrea, Lesotho, Burundi, Sierra Leone, Central African Republic, Cape Verde, Djibouti, Liberia, Seychelles, The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Comoros, and São Tomé and Príncipe. The last seven have a GNP less than the amount spent advertising hair products and accessories for Black Americans.
Today’s double feature about hair is a repost. Pictures are from The Library of Congress.
Sunday Racial Polemic
PG was spending a productive sunday morning. He created a map to the Living Walls grafitti festival. He was in a good mood. Even this link on facebook did not bring our slack blogger down.
Out of a masochistic sense of fairness, PG took a look at the link after he finished the map. “That’s Racist Against White People!” A Discussion on Power and Privilege is the usual headache producing polemic. Here is the third paragraph.
These are White folks who are claiming that the Obamacare tax on tanning beds is “racist” against White people. These are White folks who are claiming that affirmative action is racist against them. These are the White folks who honestly believe they suffer more racism than people of Color.
Lets take a look at those three links. In the first, Republican Congressman Ted Yoho complained to John Boehner about what is sometimes called the “Snooki tax”. The second link, about affirmative action, is linked to a feminist blog. The money quote “Ask any White person how they feel about Affirmative Action, and you’re almost guaranteed to hear that it is “racist against White people” and that it is “unfair” or “reverse discrimination” and that they oppose it.” This article is used as a source for the comment ” These are White folks who are claiming that affirmative action is racist against them.”
The last one, about PWOC thinking they suffer more discrimination than POC, is linked to an article in a British tabloid newspaper. Somebody did a study once, and that was one of the results. The study also showed “Blacks also perceived that racism against themselves had steeply declined from 9.7 in the 1950s to 6.1 in the 90s.”
One of the main points in the Everyday Feminism post was that the word racist is often misused. PG will not argue against that. The article was posted two days before a curious tweet by Chris Brown. “N**** done 6 months community service wit police and the DA racist ass crying to the judge that I didn’t do it. Fuck the SYSTEM! “
The entertainer, who is a POC, got in trouble for publicly beating up his girlfriend. He has had problems with his community service requirment. The amusing thing about this tweet is that the “DA racist ass” is a POC.
Pictures today are from The Library of Congress. These images are Union soldiers from the War Between the States.
Conservative Liberal Racist
The management of this blog is not responsible for brain damage incurred while reading this post. If you cant take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Those threatened by this discussion, or just are not interested, are encouraged to skip over the text, and look at the pictures. These images, of Union Soldiers of the War Between the States, are from The Library of Congress.
There is a meme, with the text a conservative is a liberal who has been labeled a racist. A few comments followed publication. Someone was paying attention. Uhm…WTF?! ~ its a long story ~ All three labels are useless and misleading. I try not to let the labels of others describe me, but sometimes it happens. It is a bit of poetic license.
The words liberal and conservative are useless. When he started to make the comment, PG intended to refer to those two expressions. Then he started to type.The realization hit … the word racist was just as obsolete as liberal and conservative, and probably misused more often.
The next day at work, PG began to think. If you saw a mushroom cloud rising over Jimmy Carter Boulevard, that is what you saw. Random thoughts began to emerge.
A- The popularity of con, lib, and rac, derive from America’s blind allegiance to the belief paradigm The general thought is that what you believe is more important than what you do. The dominant religion in America is Jesus Worship, which is based on beliefs rather than practices. While America is not officially a Christian country, their thought processes dominate the way things work here.
B- The belief paradigm filters down to the popularity of silly labels.We have people who claim to be small government conservatives, and who support sending 200k troops to a war eight time zone away. You can treat your black neighbors with kindness and grace, but if you say the wrong things on facebook you are considered a racist. It is a funny system.
C- Conservatives use liberal as an insult. Liberals use racist as an insult.
D- No one is certain what the words conservative, liberal, and racist mean. You should beware of anyone who claims to be certain of what these labels represent.
What World Do You Live In LOL
.
It was a lovely sunday morning, until this graphic appeared on facebook. The all caps text proclaims “5 TIMES AS MANY WHITES ARE USING DRUGS AS AFRICAN AMERICANS, YET AFRICAN AMERICANS ARE SENT TO PRISON ON DRUG OFFENSES AT 10 TIMES THE RATE OF WHITES.” Somebody did not want “WHITES” to have peace of mind on this sunday morning. A facebook smackdown comment discussion followed.
Statistics, semantics, and rhetoric are a formula for disrupting a peaceful sunday morning. ~ Mass incarceration can ruin your whole day (Like · 1) ~ See The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness by Michelle Alexander (massive documentation) (Like · 2) ~ This should not be a race issue. The war on drugs affects all americans. When you make something a race issue, you make enemies of the white people who should be your allies. ~ I respectfully suggest you read the book or at least a precis before you opine on this issue Luther. You do not know the facts and your ignorance of them is painful to me. (Like · 1) ~ Luther, what world do you live in? LOL
By this time PG was very angry. The sign offended him on a number of levels. All caps is considered yelling. The statistics are tough to believe, and probably improperly used. The semantics of the text are annoying. (Is alcohol considered a drug? If not, why not? Your liver does not know that it is legal.) The text has an insulting racial slant. Why is one group hyphenated americans, and the other group the absence of color? Two wrongs do not make a right.
The racial events of the last year probably multiplied the impact of the sign. Also, the criminalization of some drugs has long offended PG. The fact that tax money is used to house drug criminals affects everyone. The disrespect for other laws that is created by the drug laws is a major problem. To have this seemingly blamed on “WHITES” is just a bit much.
Lets break it down. Is that per capita usage, or the totals consumed by the population? Is that the total numbers sent to prison, or the percentage of the population? Why were the handy numbers five and ten used? How was the data collected and tweaked? Were averages involved? If there were averages used, was it the mean, the median, or the mode? Were any inconvenient numbers ignored by the author of the “massive documentation”? How do we know that Michelle Alexander is a person of integrity? Who paid for the study? Is there another study that came to a different conclusion?
The statistics might be accurate. Black people are incarcerated more than white people. This is a problem for everyone. The people who are “out of town” suffer. The tax payers pay to support them. When the prisoners get out, they are going to be better criminals. The criminalization of drugs has too many problems to list here. While black people may be affected worse than white people, there is plenty of suffering to go around.
Nonetheless, this meme is not helpful. There is little benefit to going for the divide and conquer tactics of race war. The people that will benefit are the ones who support the war on drugs. This includes the alcohol industry, media that sells alcohol advertising, and the prison industrial complex.
White people are tired of being “called out”. While we are not perfect, we are not the devil. When you introduce race into an issue, you are going to alienate white people. If the drug laws are going to be changed, then the support of white people will be needed. You will lose this support when you shout about race. Even if the statistics are accurate, and properly used.
The facebook exchange was starting to get out of control. PG wrote another comment, but chose not to post it. 1- I was a serious pothead for thirty years. All that time I was an outlaw because of the war on drugs. To suggest that I am at fault for this useless endeavor, or that I somehow benefit from it, because I am European American is appalling. 2- I was having a pleasant sunday morning until I saw that horrific graphic. It pushes all my buttons. It is sleazy use of semantics and statistics. It is in all caps, which is shouting. I do not have the time, or the interest, to read a book about this depressing subject. 3- If you consider alcohol as a drug, then the figures will probably be very different. 4- “Luther. You do not know the facts and your ignorance of them is painful to me.” This is an insult. 5- I have seen the damage done by the war on drugs except alcohol. I have quit using the one legal drug, that is endlessly promoted in the corporate media. I do not need to read a book to know this. It is not my fault because I am european american. I do not benefit from it because I am european american.
White Student Union
Some kids, with too much free time, have started a White Student Union at Georgia Straight State University. They sent a press release to Creative Loafing and the fishwrapper. Both responded, to the slow news day crisis, by reporting on the group. CL was in high octane liberal umbrage mode. “WSUs, on the other hand, are a reactionary movement born out of the festering sentiment that minorities have gained too much of an edge due to affirmative action, campus diversity, and … immigration reform.”
CL tosses a curious quote into the mix. It is from a discussion of the movie Fruitvale Station. “We don’t yet live in the world the Supreme Court thought we did when it struck down parts of the Voting Rights Act and weakened the case for affirmative action. More than ever, we live in a time of racism without racists, just racist laws, racist policies, and racist ideas.”
That same feature has a dandy quote from our half white POTUS. “Am I wringing as much bias out of myself as I can? Am I judging people as much as I can based on not the color of their skin but the content of their character? That would be, I think, an appropriate exercise in the wake of this tragedy.”
At first glance, it seems like WUSS WSU does not have much of a chance. GSU is mostly a school of people who work their way through college, and don’t have time for flakey organizations. Most white people don’t spend much time contemplating their caucasianality. This may, or may not, be a function of white privilege. Others say that WSUs are bastions of white privilege. When you live in a time of racism without racists, it is easy to get confused. Pictures today are from Gwinnett County.
Babe, Hank, Barry, And Joe
It is summertime. The Braves, and the Dodgers, are leading divisions. Players are getting in trouble over using steroids. The living is easy. It is time for a summer baseball repost.
Barry Bonds was about to break the lifetime record for home runs. Folks said the record was tainted because of steroid use, and because Mr. Bonds was not a nice man. There were calls for an asterisk in the record book. This was odd to PG, who was in Georgia when Hank Aaron broke the home run record in 1974. Back then, the line was that Babe Ruth had fewer at bats than Mr. Aaron. A lot of hateful things were said about Mr. Aaron before home run 714.
PG decided to take a look at the metrics, and see what he saw. This post is the result. As a bonus to the reader(s), Joe Torre and Hank Aaron gets a summer rerun. It is based on a column by Furman Bisher, who went to the press box in the sky March 18, 2012. Pictures are from The Library of Congress. .
There is a certain controversy these days about the eminent breaking of the lifetime home run record. Currently held by Hank Aaron, the record is threatened by Barry Bonds. Before Mr. Aaron held the title, Babe Ruth was the owner.
Controversy about the lifetime home run record is nothing new. In 1974, when Hank Aaron was about to break the record, the admirers of Babe Ruth said that Mr. Ruth had fewer at bats than Mr. Aaron did. Many attributed this criticism to racism, with a black man besting a white man’s record. The current controversy is two fold. There are allegations that Mr. Bonds took steroids to make him stronger, and that he “cheated”. There are also some concerns about the overall personality of Mr. Bonds.
PG does not think steroid use is a big deal. Ballplayers are abusing their bodies to perform, and if they take the risk of using steroids, that is their business. Many people disagree.
A good question to ask is, would Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron have used steroids if they had the chance? Mr. Ruth was a wildman, who drank during prohibition, and was known for undisciplined behavior. Mr. Aaron played in an era where steroid use was not as common as it is today. The answer to the first question is (Mr. Ruth) probably and (Mr. Aaron) who knows.
While you are keeping hypocrisy statistics, Mr. Aaron and Mr. Bonds played on television, where beer commercials were constant. While alcohol is legal, it is a very damaging drug. Any ballplayer who plays on television promotes its use. This is both steroid users, and non users.
As for personalities, there is the widely circulated story about the college team that Mr. Bonds played on voting 22-3 to kick him off the team. At the very least, he does not charm sportswriters.
In 1917, Babe Ruth was suspended for hitting an umpire. He was known for his outlandish behavior throughout his career. It should also be noted that he played in an era when the press did not scrutinize the behavior of players as much as they do today. How would today’s media treat Babe Ruth?
PG once heard a radio show caller say that Hank Aaron was a mean racist, who would just as soon cut your throat as look at you. He had never heard this said out loud before, but had heard hints about Mr. Aaron’s personality over the years. People, in any field, who achieve great things are not always friendly.
Mr. Aaron is the only one of the three that PG met, however briefly. In July of 1965, the Milwaukee Braves came to Atlanta to play an exhibition game in Atlanta Stadium. After the game, PG was allowed to wait outside the clubhouse, to get autographs from the players as they left. Joe Torre saw the crowd, hid behind a truck, and made a quick getaway. Hank Aaron came out, patiently signing every autograph, while smoking a cigarette.
The fact is, all three men played in different eras. Babe Ruth never played at night, never flew to California, and only played against white players…many of the most talented players of his era were in the Negro League. Hank Aaron played before free agency, interleague play, the DH, and widespread use of steroids. The only way to determine who is the home run champion is to count how many homers are hit, and award the prize to the man who hits the most.
Which of the three made the most money? Barry Bonds, by a wide margin. He played in the free agent era. Babe Ruth had the best line about his salary. In 1930 Ruth was asked by a reporter what he thought of his yearly salary of $80,000 being more than President Hoover’s $75,000. He replied ” yea, but I had a better year than he did.”
Who played on the most teams to win a World Series? Babe Ruth 7, Hank Aaron 1, Barry Bonds 0.
The career of Babe Ruth was a long time ago. He made a greater impact on America that the other two combined. He was one of the first sports superstars, as America emerged from the carnage of World War One. Mr. Ruth broke the single season home run record, he hit 29 homers. The next year, he hit 54. There is a possibility of a livelier baseball.
Babe Ruth captured the imagination of America like few personalities ever have. Playing in New York (which dominated the press) did not hurt. He was a man of his times…it is unlikely than anyone could have that kind of impact on today’s superstar saturated America. While his record has been broken, his place in the history of baseball is the same.
Furman Bisher has a piece at the fishwrapper site about Joe Torre . The punch line is that Mr. Torre “grew up” when the Braves traded him to St. Louis. PG was a kid when this was going on, and did not hear a lot of what went on.
In 1965, the Braves played a lame duck year in Milwaukee before moving to Atlanta. One night, there was an exhibition game at Atlanta Stadium, the Braves against the Yankees. PG got his oh so patient dad to take him to the clubhouse after the game, to get autographs. In those days, you could go into the bowels of the stadium and wait outside the locker room. Hank Aaron came out and signed dozens of autographs while smoking a cigarette. Joe Torre came out, hid behind a truck, and took off running.
Mr. Torre was a raccoon eyed catcher for the Braves. In the first regular season game in 1966, he hit two home runs, in a thirteen inning loss. Soon, the novelty of big league baseball in a toilet shaped stadium wore off. Mr. Torre got at least one DUI, and a reputation as a barroom brawler. He was traded to St. Louis in 1968. Mr. Torre hit .373, and won the national league MVP in 1971.
The comments to the feature by Furman Bisher were interesting. Cecil 34 contributes “The reason that Torre was traded is because on the team’s charter flight back to Atlanta back in 68, a drunken Torre got into a fistfight with Aaron. Aaron popped off to Torre, and thus the fight was on, broken up by the other players. Since Aaron was the face of the franchise at the time, Torre was traded. There had been bad blood between them for years before this incident anyway. Reasons vary. But the final nail in the coffin was this fistfight. I was told Torre could pack a punch and Aaron came out on the worse end of it.”
There has been whispering for years about Hank Aaron and his attitude. Furman Bisher made hints once or twice, but there was never anything of substance. It seems that Mr. Aaron does not lack for self confidence. Mr. Aaron was the subject of much racially based abuse while chasing the home run record in 1973, and some anger is justified.
Hank Aaron was known to not get along with Rico Carty. Mr. Carty is a dark skinned man from the Dominican Republic, who was popular with fans. Mr. Carty was eventually traded. Rico Carty had a barbeque restaurant on Peachtree Road in Chamblee, next door to the Park and Shop.
Joe Torre was the manager of the Braves in the early eighties. The team won a divisional title in 1982, but lost the NLCS. This was after Ted Turner bought the team. Mr. Turner fired Mr. Torre in 1984.
Getting back to the comment thread, Misterwax contributes “Turner cut Joe Torre loose because Ted was in love with Henry Aaron and Aaron thought Joe Torre was a white supremacist….A hangover from the clubhouse days when they were teammates…still does today. And THAT is the only reason he was cut….beause Hank Aaron said so.”
Hank Aaron was recently quoted on Barry Bonds and Steroids. Joe Torre is managing the Los Angeles Dodgers, and is leading his division. Furman Bisher outlived Bear Bryant by 26 years, and finished his columns “selah”. Mr. Bisher passed away March 18, 2012.
Changes In Modern Life
Old people like to talk about things that were better back then. PG is going to talk about some things that are better today. This is a repost.
During the Vietnam war, there was talk about “back our boys in Vietnam”. In the current war in Babylon, the troops are an integrated fighting force of men and women. You do not hear these brave people referred to as “boys”.
A person who goes into combat, to kill or be killed, is not a boy. He is a man, or a woman. This is an improvement over the way things used to be. We still have wars, and have to refer to soldiers as something. Mankind is a work in progress.
A second way society has improved is the attitude towards cigarettes. In older times, almost everyone smoked, and they lit up wherever, and whenever, they wanted. No one asked for permission. Today, people routinely go outside to smoke.
One way in which our attitudes about cigarettes is changing can be seen in the way two presidents are treated by the press. Franklin Roosevelt was never photographed with his leg braces, or struggling to walk. Many people did not know he was crippled. However, his cigarette holder was a part of his image. He was photographed with that constantly. Has ANYONE seen a picture of Barack Obama smoking?
The election of a dark skinned man as POTUS brings us to our final issue of the day, racial (and other) slurs. It is just not considered polite to use insulting terms that refer to race, religion, national origin, etc. etc. (PG got an email at work once cautioning about discussing hair color.) In many ways, this is like the thing with cigarettes…people have not changed the overall attitudes, they just go outside.
Political correctness can be a nuisance. The excesses are well known. However, the basic concept of having concern for the feelings of others is a good idea. Things are different in 2013. Pictures for this discourse are from The Library of Congress.
Defriended
PG has fewer facebook friends than he used to. This is not the same as having fewer friends in real life. The custom of referring to social media contacts as friends has always seemed a bit peculiar. When someone defriends you, presumably of your opinions (although you can never be sure of this), you have to wonder what the value of having that person as a friend was.
Most of the current umbrage taking appears to be about racism. Since no one seems to say anything directly, it is tough to know what the offending comment was. It is even tougher to see how either the comment, or the defriending, can have any impact on the oppression that people of color face in *2013*.
The most recent exchange went like this. “Does anyone else feel like a fat-positive clothing-optional pool party would be awesome? Or is it just me?” “In a “fat-positive clothing-optional pool party” there would be no judgement and shaming about bodies. This is a good idea. Maybe we could extend this acceptance of our neighbor to include attitudes about race.”
There is a difference between “attitudes about race” and racism. Just because a person does see things the same way as you, that does not make that person a racist. Nobody is saying that racism should be encouraged. It is just that people who are not as virulently anti racist as you should not be shamed for having a differing opinion.
One wonders what difference this is going to make in a struggle against oppression. Is defriending a person going to stop gun violence, or single parent households? Is going off on someone, about a facebook post, going to make New York terminate the stop and frisk program? Is a facebook status picture going to have any impact on economic opportunity? If you answer in the affirmative, please give details in the comments. Pictures from The Library of Congress.
Chamblee54 
leave a comment