(Racialization – (n.) the social/historical/economic process through which people are assigned a specific race, which influences outcomes, opportunities, and experiences. [racialize – (v.)])
Very generally, we’ve discussed the racialization of people in the United States historically, mainly focusing on the way the authors describe their experiences as racialized beings. Yet, whiteness seems to be a difficult category to pin down, perhaps due to its seeming invisibility in literature. However, this topic deserves further investigation, as the majority of the writers you’ll be reading this semester are white. So, let’s provide more context to show that race as a whole is an unstable, historically-determinant category.
“Were there ‘white’ people in antiquity? Certainly some assume so, as though categories we use today could be read backwards over the millennia. People with light skin certainly existed well before our own times. But did anyone think they were ‘white’ or that their character related to their color? No, for neither the idea of ‘race’ or the idea of ‘white’ people had been invented, and people’s skin color did not carry useful meaning. What mattered was where they lived; were their lands damp or dry; were they virile or prone to impotence, hard or soft; could they be seduced by the luxuries of civilized society or were they warriors through and through? What were their habits of life? Rather than ‘white’ people, northern Europeans were known by vague tribal names: Scythians and Celts, then Gauls and Germani.” (Painter 1)
“More than 100 million U.S. residents trace some of their heritage to Ellis Island, the main processing center during the period of the new immigration. The crucial role it played in ‘remaking’ the nation’s working class during the consolidation of U.S. industrial expansion makes the new immigration very important. So too do relationships to the state, since southern and eastern Europeans and their children were the main objects of Progressive reform and nativist hatred, as well as the backbone of the New Deal political coalition. In many ways a ‘long early twentieth century’ was defined by the mass arrival of new immigrants beginning in the 1890s and by their victories and defeats in struggling for full political, cultural, and economic citizenship. Moreover, the drama of new immigrant history turns significantly on how migrants were categorized racially and on contacts with people of color. . . .[W]hat happens when we think of assimilation as whitening as well as Americanizing, and when we view the deeply gendered clash between first-generation immigrant parents and second- generation children as being in part about who commanded knowledge of the U.S. racial landscape[?] (Roediger 9)
Notice the authors both describe people who in our world, at this moment, would be thought of as white. Yet, in their historical times and places were not recognized as such. We’ve discussed in class Bacon’s Rebellion, an event that threatened the economic system of slavery and served as a hardening of its race-based nature. We’ve also discussed slightly the racialization of ethnic whites through European immigration to the U.S., reflected in Roediger’s discussion of the racialization of the then-new immigrant working class. Race is not, and has never been, a binary system in the U.S., and we must keep that in mind to avoid undue demonization/canonization of the authors, their works, and people as a whole. With all that and a bit more background in mind, let’s apply this knowledge to this week’s readings, maybe other weeks as well.
To truly survey American literature, we do need to account for the strange phenomenon of race, but we cannot ignore whiteness, whatever that means and/or is. So, where do we see the authors using racialized language in their works? How are the authors illustrating cultural whiteness through their literature? Think of the description of the “hot Armenian slut” that protagonist “took” from a British soldier after a fight. Consider Charles’ sister-in-law’s dislike of him not only because of her sister, but because of his now? then? Wealth. Remember Colonel Sartoris’ “gentleman’s agreement” with Emily’s father to release her from paying taxes. What exactly are these examples, and others you find in the text, designed to tell their audiences about whiteness in the U.S.?
Works Cited
Painter, Nell Irving. The History of White People. New York: W. W. Norton and Co., 2011. Print.
Roediger, David R. Working Towards Whiteness: How America’s Immigrants Became White: The Strange Journey from Ellis Island to the Suburbs. New York: Basic Publishing, 2006. Print.
These passages reveal the societal duties and expectations of a white person, like being a gentleman, or that beingn white designates you as being an American or having money.
These texts are saying “whiteness” is not based on skin color, but social structure and their involvement in the context of their societies.
Within the c whiteness, still a line of distinction that white people tend not to cross. Example (R for E 797) Grierson of South won’t take Northerner seriously
These examples from the text portray “whiteness” as something with good value or held to a higher then average standard in society.
Terms we see throughout the text such as hot, wealthy, and gentlemen are terms to describe something in a relatively positive manner.
In Babylon Revisted, I believe the author shows this comparison of American cultures juxtaposed with the European aesthetic. The protagonist mentions
the difference in retrospect when he was in France as compared to America. This is an example of whiteness being included in literature when authors include
the application of social class, language, and culture to the white characters in the respective literature.
Whiteness in the US can perhaps be defined as wealth and power to be exempted from rules or take advantage of others, where other nationalities resent you.
The authors are using “whiteness” in the texts to show the standings of society. “Whites”, no matter what kind was still higher than being African American.
Furthermore, whiteness is primarily not based on skin color, but more likely on wealth, social standing, power, and maybe education.
With “whiteness”, you have some type of obligation to uphold. You can considered full American and not an immigrant, though many were at that time.
Whiteness is more than just color.The citations view it as a social standing that nobody can escape comparison to.
In the example of Colonel Sartoris, what is being said about “whiteness” is that a man like Sartoris has the authority to do such good deed, unlike others
Like many have said, whiteness overall has more to do with your economic and social stance in society above all else.
Authors use “whiteness” to show audiences the standings and virtues white males had in general. White men felt they had the upper hand over other races.
In the mention of “the hot Armenian slut” the man felt he could have any woman because its their right.Charlie wasted money because he felt he had the right.
But these men still show some class like Sartoris, who turns out to be a gentleman. Authors show us these characters to show the different sides of whiteness.
Class consciousness seems to be a determinate for race. A Rose For Emily is an example of playing roles. A gentlemen has to show a woman courtesy.
It also seems race is determined by how bourgeois someone is, as seen with Charles and his sister in law.
“Whiteness” is interconnected with the ideas of class and social identity more over race and ethnicity.
In Babylon Revisited Charles’ wealth and lack of wealth poses the ideology of class being intertwined with “whiteness”
Also the Colonel’s gentlemen like characteristics can be seen as a form of imagery of wealth and the upper class, which associated itself with “whiteness”
In these examples, whiteness isn’t a clean cut definition of race or skin color so much as it is what is expected from a white person by society.
Ex: A Rose For Emily, the colonel feels the need to cut her a break from taxes to be a gentleman because that’s what is expected of him.
In Snows Of Kilimanjaro, Henry’s “parisitism” doesn’t equate to whiteness but in a sense, contradicts what it means to be a white man.
In the example “whiteness” is not just identified through color but also class identification by society.
Depicts how “whiteness” can be applied outside the realm of color and into class and social statuses. But with that, comes a responsibility to become a reputable white person.
Whiteness has been shape by history of cultural beliefs, and economic policies. e.g. Rose For Emily, demonstrates that whiteness and blackness are reversible.
whiteness is an expectation of society. In some of the readings the expectation of whites made people act a certain way that was deemed correct.
‘Christ in Concrete’ shows that whiteness doesn’t necessarily equate to superiority and privilege as many believe. Whiteness, like blackness, is also complex.
In my opinion, these works all lead back to this very important point: that race is no more than a social construct (it has no scientific or biological basis).
“whiteness” is the default standard by which society is based off of, and yet despite this, “whiteness” is not limited to one class or behavior.
This non-limitation of “whiteness” to being synonymous with “privileged” is seen especially in “Christ in Concrete,” as capitalism sees no racial boundaries.
The notion of ‘whiteness’ in the US touches on the behaviors and mannerisms that were perceived as high-class, for ex. in “A Rose for Emily” Sartoris denies Emily the right to pay taxes because he is a gentleman.
The citations from BR and RforE are commentating on the social expectation placed upon whites, particularly white males, and the obligation that comes with it.
This expectation is featured through the interaction of Emily and Homer in RforE, when they were expected to be married because they were always together.
The townspeople show a certain expectation of the two of them as proper folk because it was considered a “bad example” for E and H to be together sans marriage.
In these various stories, the authors use ‘whiteness’ to show the readers the differences between white people. Not all whites are the same, some are good and some are bad just like the characters they used. Not all the whites are good in the world.
In “Christ in Concrete”, Di Donato uses derogatory terms such as “dagos” and “young wop” to show that whiteness and current racial implications dont always correlate.
This is because the people being referred to are Italian. They are treated badly as well, which leaves us questioning “What is whiteness?!”
Also, we immediately assume whiteness=richness. However, the Lean says “For America beautiful will eat you and spit your bones into the earth’s hole!” (p 909)
If these “white” people are unable to achieve the American dream, then that overthrows all definitive qualities of whiteness.