Thesis-ing is for people who know stuff. I just have opinions.
I like poking my head into fandom, even fandoms for which I haven't seen the shows/read the books/whatever because I enjoy reading stuff. This means that every once in a while I get splashed with the latest blow-up. I usually don't comment, as it isn't usually worth it for me to do so.
So, in Supernatural fandom, someone wrote a fic in post-earthquake Haiti wherein Jared Padelecki and Jensen Ackles (the actors for the lead roles) are a doctor and a journalist. The story is about how they find love with each other.
Let me say that again: The story is about two white men who find love during the horrific aftermath of an earthquake in the poorest country of the Americas, while black people are dying all around them.
As I understand it, the story has since been taken down and an apology has been extended. Discussion, however, doesn't end. You can go here for a round-up of links of commentary. You can go here for a list of quotes from the story which are... um... clearly written from a priviledge perspective (see how polite I am?). And here is a link to one perspective of how it's possible for anyone to write something like this in utter ignorance of how it could be hurtful or racist.
That last point is worth exploring, and it's really tied up in the culture we grow up in and the things that we take for granted. Two examples, one related to racism while the other isn't.
Example the first:
People I know have heard this story a thousand times, so skip down if you've seen this before. The first year that I taught a lab course, one of the prevalent comments I got was that the students were appreciative that I spoke English fluently. They said it as a compliment, without even realizing that they would never consider handing a compliment like that to someone who was white.
Example the second:
During the recent Winter Olympics, Nodar Kumaritashvili was killed during a luge practice. My girl, at some point, mentions to me that the crash was horrible to watch. I didn't get it at first, thinking she was speaking speculatively. Turns out she had heard the news and searched for a video of the crash, as she couldn't understand how it had happened. On the one hand, this is pretty innocent - she went to get more info on something that she'd heard about in the news. I was horrified because she had gone out of her way - put in effort - to watch a man die. And then I was more horrified to think that there were many many people who didn't even have to make the marginal effort to do a search - that that footage would have been ferried to them for their casual consumption.
In both cases, it's very very easy to acknowledge only the immediate situation - hey, a TA who speaks fluent English! Hey, a video of the news! It takes actual effort to take another step and examine why that immediate assessment of the situation may hide something kind of horrible, especially when everyone else around you is responding only the superficial aspects of that situation. Who wants to fight the herd?
Grar. I'm barely coherent. That's what I get for relying on sweet, carbonated sugar to keep me ambulatory during the day.
ETA: My girl has pointed out that another good example (and probably more universal) is the 9/11 footage. Yes, we were watching history in the making. Yes, we were tuning into news as it happened. Yes, we were watching unbelievable terrorist attacks. We were also tuning in to watch people die. But to say it like that is offensive, horrible and implies some unsavoury things about who we are as people. So we turn away from that kind of characterization, as though not characterizing what were doing like that will make it not true.
But we were still watching people die. We're still racist. We're still... well, everything we don't want to be.
So, in Supernatural fandom, someone wrote a fic in post-earthquake Haiti wherein Jared Padelecki and Jensen Ackles (the actors for the lead roles) are a doctor and a journalist. The story is about how they find love with each other.
Let me say that again: The story is about two white men who find love during the horrific aftermath of an earthquake in the poorest country of the Americas, while black people are dying all around them.
As I understand it, the story has since been taken down and an apology has been extended. Discussion, however, doesn't end. You can go here for a round-up of links of commentary. You can go here for a list of quotes from the story which are... um... clearly written from a priviledge perspective (see how polite I am?). And here is a link to one perspective of how it's possible for anyone to write something like this in utter ignorance of how it could be hurtful or racist.
That last point is worth exploring, and it's really tied up in the culture we grow up in and the things that we take for granted. Two examples, one related to racism while the other isn't.
Example the first:
People I know have heard this story a thousand times, so skip down if you've seen this before. The first year that I taught a lab course, one of the prevalent comments I got was that the students were appreciative that I spoke English fluently. They said it as a compliment, without even realizing that they would never consider handing a compliment like that to someone who was white.
Example the second:
During the recent Winter Olympics, Nodar Kumaritashvili was killed during a luge practice. My girl, at some point, mentions to me that the crash was horrible to watch. I didn't get it at first, thinking she was speaking speculatively. Turns out she had heard the news and searched for a video of the crash, as she couldn't understand how it had happened. On the one hand, this is pretty innocent - she went to get more info on something that she'd heard about in the news. I was horrified because she had gone out of her way - put in effort - to watch a man die. And then I was more horrified to think that there were many many people who didn't even have to make the marginal effort to do a search - that that footage would have been ferried to them for their casual consumption.
In both cases, it's very very easy to acknowledge only the immediate situation - hey, a TA who speaks fluent English! Hey, a video of the news! It takes actual effort to take another step and examine why that immediate assessment of the situation may hide something kind of horrible, especially when everyone else around you is responding only the superficial aspects of that situation. Who wants to fight the herd?
Grar. I'm barely coherent. That's what I get for relying on sweet, carbonated sugar to keep me ambulatory during the day.
ETA: My girl has pointed out that another good example (and probably more universal) is the 9/11 footage. Yes, we were watching history in the making. Yes, we were tuning into news as it happened. Yes, we were watching unbelievable terrorist attacks. We were also tuning in to watch people die. But to say it like that is offensive, horrible and implies some unsavoury things about who we are as people. So we turn away from that kind of characterization, as though not characterizing what were doing like that will make it not true.
But we were still watching people die. We're still racist. We're still... well, everything we don't want to be.