Zwarte Piet

bodice ripper

wexie wrote: »

and you get this information from an English newspaper.....right...I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I am getting my information from seeing it in person. The Piets generally speak with an insulting caricature of a Surinamese accent, totally unconnected from the mythos, but mocking a good chunk of the Netherlands' black population.

bodice ripper

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Bringing slavery into it now. How very American. With the Zwarte Piet character there wasn't any intent of creating an offensive racial stereotype, let alone create a representation of slavery. After all, in Holland, it would make more sense for the character to be of Indonesian descent if that were the case. Perhaps his character originated as a Moor in order to scare children into thinking he would take you away if you misbehaved, but there's no confirmed reason as to why exactly Zwarte Piet is black, which is probably because there isn't one.

There is a history of these type of characters all across Europe: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_Man

As far as most people are concerned, Zwarte Piet is Sinterklaas' servant that according to an old children's book, simply happens to be a Moor because he lived in Spain and it would make for a pretty distinguishable character.

Wearing blackface in America, however, while bearing similarity to the Zwarte Piet character in facial make-up, has completely different origins. Instead of originating from a children's book as a character that simply happens to be black, it originated as a theatric, exaggerated racial stereotype of an African slave worker. That's a big difference.

so before, I didn't get an opinion because I am foreign, now its because I am american. with those criteria, and my background, I never get to hold a view on anything, anywhere.

In Amsterdam, they are trying to move away from the big red lips and earrings, which regardless of whether you think that is only insulting to americans, is clearly a racist stereotype.

Nodin

wexie wrote: »

and you get this information from an English newspaper.....right...I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Is there a list of approved nationalities that can provide information on the topic to hand?

bodice ripper

Nodin wrote: »

Is there a list of approved nationalities that can provide information on the topic to hand?

and do the opinions of black Dutch citizens count?

Nodin

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Bringing slavery into it now. How very American. With the Zwarte Piet character there wasn't any intent of creating an offensive racial stereotype, let alone create a representation of slavery. After all, in Holland, it would make more sense for the character to be of Indonesian descent if that were the case. Perhaps his character originated as a Moor in order to scare children into thinking he would take you away if you misbehaved, but there's no confirmed reason as to why exactly Zwarte Piet is black, which is probably because there isn't one.

There is a history of these type of characters all across Europe: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_Man

.

I'm not seeing a pile of golliwogged faced helpers in there, tbh.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

golliwogged faced

[Raises eyebrow]

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

[Raises eyebrow]

That's what they're done up like.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

That's what they're done up like.

Is that what they look like TO YOU? Hmmmm.

Don't get me wrong. I'd be happy to accept that when Zwarte Piet was invented, its inventors may have been raging racists who were simply being a shower of knuts. But acknowleding that historical fact is not the same as attributing "racism" to those in the Netherlands who now simply include the character in their Sinterklaas celebrations because it has become a cultural artefact, and without ever thinking about "black people" when they see a Zwarte Piet. THAT is where the PC kneejerking has gone too far.

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

Is that what they look like TO YOU? Hmmmm.

Don't get me wrong. I'd be happy to accept that when Zwarte Piet was invented, its inventors may have been raging racists who were simply being a shower of knuts. But acknowleding that historical fact is not the same as attributing "racism" to those in the Netherlands who now simply include the character in their Sinterklaas celebrations because it has become a cultural artefact, and without ever thinking about "black people" when they see a Zwarte Piet. THAT is where the PC kneejerking has gone too far.

I agree completely. I don't think the people who are into zwarte piet are racists. And I can see why they think "I am not racist, so Piet isn't racist", but I don't understand why there is quite a stubborn refusal to see how a black Dutch person might find it offensive.

rozeboosje

bodice ripper wrote: »

I agree completely. I don't think the people who are into zwarte piet are racists. And I can see why they think "I am not racist, so Piet isn't racist", but I don't understand why there is quite a stubborn refusal to see how a black Dutch person might find it offensive.

I would understand it if - like you pointed out before - the person playing the Zwarte Piet character mocks a Surinam accent or something like that. Then I can see it as being "racist" as the person doing it would be parading it as such. But simply dressing up in the outfit including the face paint and handing sweets to the kids? Nah.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

Is that what they look like TO YOU? Hmmmm..

It's what they look like, the clothes, hair and exaggerated lips.

rozeboosje wrote: »

Don't get me wrong. I'd be happy to accept that when Zwarte Piet was invented, its inventors may have been raging racists who were simply being a shower of knuts. But acknowleding that historical fact is not the same as attributing "racism" to those in the Netherlands who now simply include the character in their Sinterklaas celebrations because it has become a cultural artefact, and without ever thinking about "black people" when they see a Zwarte Piet. THAT is where the PC kneejerking has gone too far.

I'm sure most don't see it as racist, nor have I attributed racism to the population of the netherlands. That, however, doesn't mean it isn't.

rozeboosje

... and I think that that is also why it has provoked such a visceral reaction. Nobody likes to be tarred with the broad brush.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

That, however, doesn't mean it isn't.

How is it racist? Assuming the person who dresses up as such doesn't start talking with a Surinam accent or something like that. Assuming that, please explain how it's racist.

rozeboosje

I mean, have you ever met an actual living person who actually looks like a "golliwog"?

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

How is it racist? Assuming the person who dresses up as such doesn't start talking with a Surinam accent or something like that. Assuming that, please explain how it's racist.

It's a caricature of African/Black features.

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

I would understand it if - like you pointed out before - the person playing the Zwarte Piet character mocks a Surinam accent or something like that. Then I can see it as being "racist" as the person doing it would be parading it as such. But simply dressing up in the outfit including the face paint and handing sweets to the kids? Nah.

Again, I agree completely. Its the stereotype lips/earrings/accent that are jarring. Other than that, isnt it nice that somewhere has any imagery including black characters in the lead up to Christmas?

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

It's a caricature of African/Black features.

Again ... that association appears to be happening in YOUR mind, not mine. Not in the minds of many people in the Netherlands that celebrate Sinterklaas either.

BTW - not saying that there isn't racism in the Netherlands. Just look at Geert Wilders and his merry bunch of fukkwits

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

I mean, have you ever met an actual living person who actually looks like a "golliwog"?

I have never seen a hunched, wizened, hook nosed jew before either. It doesnt mean that caricature isnt racist. ..

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

Again ... that association appears to be happening in YOUR mind, not mine. Not in the minds of many people in the Netherlands that celebrate Sinterklaas either.

I remember a similar conversation like this about Lawn Jockeys. You don't see it as racist because you've seen it all your life, and zwart piet means zwart piet to you the same as everyone else.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

I remember a similar conversation like this about Lawn Jockeys. You don't see it as racist because you've seen it all your life, and zwart piet means zwart piet to you the same as everyone else.

Well then, why kill the tradition off?

rozeboosje

bodice ripper wrote: »

I have never seen a hunched, wizened, hook nosed jew before either. It doesnt mean that caricature isnt racist. ..

Of course. And if you present that as "a Jew" then you'd quite rightly be accused of racism. But what if you had a tradition that features a hunched, wizened and hook nosed person in a positive light without any reference to what religion or ethnicity they are supposed to be, and then people who observe the tradition start telling you that you're being racist against Jews? That would be ludicrous.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

Well then, why kill the tradition off?

Because it's a racist depiction.

And certain aspects of it need to be changed, rather than kill the whole thing off. I'd say ditching the red lips, the hair and acting the idiot as well as the accent would make it grand.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

Because it's a racist depiction.

You can repeat that until the cows come home, but I'm not buying it. A racist depiction of WHAT?

Nodin wrote: »

I'd say ditching the red lips, the hair and acting the idiot as well as the accent would make it grand.

Nobody has lips or hair like that. Acting the idiot is part of the act. But yes, I agree, the accent is crossing the line.

EazyD

Nodin wrote: »

Because it's a racist depiction.

And certain aspects of it need to be changed, rather than kill the whole thing off. I'd say ditching the red lips, the hair and acting the idiot as well as the accent would make it grand.

Is it really racist though? While it may be of questionable taste I think labelling it simply as that is a bit of a stretch.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

You can repeat that until the cows come home, but I'm not buying it. A racist depiction of WHAT?.

It's how black people have been stereotyped for as long as black people have been stereotyped.

rozeboosje wrote: »

Nobody has lips or hair like that. Acting the idiot is part of the act. But yes, I agree, the accent is crossing the line.

See above.

Acting the idiot is part of the problem, unfortunately.

Beaner1

Ask the surinamese what they think.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

It's how black people have been stereotyped for as long as black people have been stereotyped.

See my observation about the hunched, wizened and hook nosed person, above.

Nodin wrote: »

Acting the idiot is part of the problem, unfortunately.

And "black people" are .... idiots? Is that what you're alluding to here?


I agree that anything that clearly identifies a "Zwarte Piet" as a member of any particular ethnicity, such as a Surinam accent, should be dropped. For obvious reasons. But I would argue against dropping other attributes just because they sometimes get used by racists in their caricatures. Instead we should slap racists with the clue stick every time they do it, until their own caricatures become an embarrassment to them.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

See my observation about the hunched, wizened and hook nosed person, above..

You aren't going to see it, as I alluded to before.

rozeboosje wrote: »

And "black people" are .... idiots? Is that what you're alluding to here?
.

No, I am obviously referring to what they've been stereotyped as. That's not the first time you've made that kind of remark in this thread and its getting insulting at this stage.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

it's getting insulting at this stage.

It's just as insulting to be told you're doing something "racist" just because somewhere in the world actual racists are doing it for racist reasons.

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

It's just as insulting to be told you're doing something "racist" just because somewhere in the world actual racists are doing it for racist reasons.

I don't believe the reasons are racist. The portrayal on the other hand...