racismBlackWhite, a new six part "reality" series which premiered on the FX Network March 8, 2006 attempts in a novel form to understand the state of contemporary race relations in the United States. It may be, however, that more traditional methods, the use of historical and sociological analysis, "social audits," and public opinion polls might prove to have been a wiser choice.
The program involves two middle class families whose adult members are in their forties. One, a black family from Atlanta, Geogia consists of Brian, his wife Renee and their seventeen year old son Nick. The white family, from Santa Monica, California has husband and wife Bruno and Carmen and their eighteen year old daughter Rose. Through extraordinary cosmetic makeovers the families have been transformed so that they can easily "pass" to the other side of the racial divide.
Once the race reversal is accomplished each family tries to experience aspects of daily life as "the other." Moreover, everyone lives under the same roof in Tarzana, California, an affluent suburb of Los Angeles, nearly devoid of blacks, where the series has been filmed. This living arrangement allows them to provide tips to each other designed to facilitate smooth behavioral adjustment to their adoptive racial identities. In the initial episode,Carmen, now passing as black, is cautioned by Renee not to ask too many personal questions in her interactions with blacks; Bruno asks whether a walking style he is affecting seems authentically "black" and counsels Brian on what he might expect working as a bartender in an all-white community.
Co-habiting also permits the participants who have lived their entire lives with one racial identity to offer interpretations of the experiences those passing are having. In what may well become an ongoing dialogue, for example, Brian urges Bruno to be more sensitive to racist undertones in what may appear to be benign interracial encounters.
Bruno is a strong believer that one's demeanor, politeness and affability, not their race, determines the course of all social interactions. When a salesman is friendly to him in a store he sees this as a confirmation that race need not matter. But Brian is equally convinced the salesman is simply "sizing him up" to make sure Bruno isn't a potential troublemaker. Perhaps Brian is correct in general, but there is no way of knowing in this case. If Bruno in blackface had been ignored it could just as likely been indicative of blacks receiving poor customer service.
From the 1947 film (based on a Laura Hobson novel), Gentleman's Agreement , in which Gregory Peck pretended to be Jewish, to John Howard Griffin's 1959 classic book Black Like Me ,"passing" experiences have been employed to inform the public about the nature and extent of prejudice and discrimination in our society.
An alternative and far superior method, the so-called "social audit", involves having members of two social groups, one of which might face prejudice and discrimination, sequentially engage in identical activities (e.g., looking for a job). During their activities they deliberately interact with the same "gatekeeper" (e.g., a potential employer) who comes from the dominant group. The back-to-back encounters allows for an assesment of any disparities in treatment.
In 1991 Diane Sawyer hosted a startling Prime Time Live program using the social audit format in which two twenty-something well-groomed and articulate males, one black and one white, went through a gamut of activities in St. Louis, Missouri. They looked for housing, jobs, and shopped for an inexpensive used car and shoes. They hailed cabs. Both acted as if they were locked out of their cars in a busy intersection. Cameras, safely hidden, recorded their encounters with identical landlords, would-be employers, salesmen and cabbies. They not only revealed the quality of the interactions in terms of affability between the two men and those they encountered but whether the men were able to achieve their goals (e.g., be offered an apartment; a chance to apply for a job; the same car for the same price; good customer service; get a taxi to pick them up).
The outcome of the social audit revealed dramatic disparities in regard to whether the two men were able to achieve their goals in the encounters with whites: the white male, for example, was offered apartments to rent which the black male had earlier been told had been taken; a store manager confirmed the availability of a job in a cleaners to the white applicant. Previously he informed the black one that the position was already filled; a used car salesman offered the black man an opportunity to buy the same car as he would later offer to the white one. But in the former case there would be a larger downpayment and additional $500 cost for the vehicle; a taxi passed by the black man waving him down and picked up the white one further down the street; passersby in droves offered assistance to the white subject seemingly locked out of his car and completely ignored the black one.
Ironically, in light of the discussion between Brian and Bruno about the meaning of a salesman's affability towards the latter, in the St. Louis experiment a shoe salesman totally ignores the black man and lavishes attention on the white one. In that instance indifference was perceived as the racist response, which testifies to the difficulties in interpreting demeanor as opposed to goal achievement in measuring prejudice and dsicrimination.
Perhaps the most surprising finding in the Prime Time show was not discrimination (which host Sawyer indicated happened very often but not always) but the warmth and friendliness that often accompanied it. In fact, if one did not see the back-to-back difference in outcomes of the interactions it would be impossible to imagine the black man was not being given the same opportunities as his white counterpart. Watching the program I realized that while it may be true that blacks, as many whites believe, erroneously see instances of racism in many situations, they must also fail to see it in many other circumstances when it has occurred.
BlackWhite will apparently not be using social audits in their series and that means whatever happens to the members of the two families cannot be interpreted with certainty regarding the role, if any, race plays. I have no advance knowledge of what this experiment will produce in terms of the experiences of the participants or how they evaluate them. But I will be watching and commenting on this site with updates throughout the series.
First, however, I would like to do something the program has not, namely place it within the larger context of what we know about the evolving nature of race relations throughout American history. Only by doing this can we assess the value of the series in illuminating where we stand today.
The history of race relations in the United States has gone through immense changes and continuities throughout the centuries. Slavery, in the north as well as the south, of course, institutionalized white supremacy in its most pernicious form for about 250 years. Ira Berlin's Generations of Captivity (2003) is the best introduction to the current state of historical knowledge about this era.
The abolition of slavery in the 1860s is believed by many to have fundamentally altered the opportunties of the former slaves, but, in fact very few abolitionists let alone ordinary citizens in any part of the nation were committed to a racially integrated society with equality of opportunity. Eric Foner's Reconstruction:America's Unfinished Revolution: 1863-1877 (1988) tells this story of missed opportunities and how hostility towards racial integration set the stage for the establishment of legal segregation in the south to co-exist with its long-standing de facto counterpart in the north.
Because white supremacy in its various forms never truly disappeared blacks were not allowed to compete for the dramatic new economic opportunities that rapid industrialization brought in the post-Civil War era. Instead immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, along with whites who had lived here for generations, were beneficiaries of what amounted to massive "affirmative action" policies, by law and/or custom, that deliberately prevented black advances.
The era of white supremacist ideology lasted well into the twentieth century. Unforgivable Blackness, the powerful PBS documentary on Jack Johnson's quest to become world heavyweight boxing champion in the early 1900s, is one of the best portraits of this era when white society, including its most respected members, were determined to avoid even a symbolic challenge to the reigning view that blacks must be kept in a permanently subordinate station.
Johnson finally officially became champion in 1908 by defeating Tommy Burns, but his triumph was discounted because he had never beaten the undefeated but retired former titleholder, Jim Jeffries. Jeffries had refused to allow any black challenger to attempt to become world champion. It was an honor that he and white society believed belonged exclusively to the white race. Coming out of retirement to restore the crown to its rightful racial group, Jeffries was systematically destroyed and humiliated by Johnson in an epic 1910 fight billed as "The Fight of the Century." In its aftermath whites throughout the nation rioted and scores of blacks were killed. Leading newspapers editorialized that blacks should not take Johnson's victory as any indication they were any less inferior than before.
During the 1930s when the New Deal under Franklin Roosevelt's policies brought unprecedented economic opportunities and security to ordinary Americans blacks benefited as well, but in many respects they were still left out. Segregation laws for example, were never challenged in an era when Democrats depended on the "solid south" voting for them. Republicans, in those days, were still associated with the hated Abraham Lincoln but were not in fact notably interested either in dismantling segregation.
What is most telling perhaps is that much of the New Deal and WWII economic program bypassed most blacks. As Ira Katznelson shows in When Affirmative Action Was White (2005), Social Security and minimum wage laws, because of pressure from southern Democrats, initially excluded agricultural laborers and domestic servants at a time when these were the two most common black occupations.
The 1944 G.I. Bill, was hailed as a revolutionary attempt to create equality of opportunity for all veterans. The Bill provided full college tuition to veterans admitted to colleges as well as helping them obtain loans to purchase first homes, start businesses or enroll in job training programs. Katznelson shows, however, that the Bill's promises were often empty in practice because local officals not the federal government administerd the programs. Most blacks, for example, lived in the south and were not allowed to attend colleges with white student bodies. Black colleges were underfunded and simply did not have the resources to admit all black applicants. Thus, tuition was paid almost exclusively to white veterans even if black tax dollars helped support the program.
The discriminatory administration of the above policies might not have been known to most white Americans, but public opinion polls as late as the 1940 showed a majority of them did not believe in racial integration and equality of opportunity for blacks whether in housing, education, or jobs.
It was not until the mid 1950s that things began to change and the power of the civil rights movements and urban riots in the 1960s eventually led to a profound alteration in the attitudes of most white Americans towards blacks' desire for equal rights and opportunities.
By the late 1960s the public expression of racist stereotypes and white supremacist ideology dramatically diminished and segregation by law ended. Exclusion by custom, however, still affected black opportunities for advancement in many quarters and the modern affirmative action programs, designed to compensate for past racial discrimination, were ultimately adopted.
Today, according to a January 2006 nationwide Associated Press/Ipsos poll 66 percent of blacks believe that significant progress has been made towards "Martin Luther's Dream of racial equality." But, numerous economic indicators suggest that striking gaps between whites and blacks remain. Black family income is still about 60 percent of whites. Whites' average total assets are about ten times as great as blacks largely because of huge discrepancies in the rate of home ownership, the relative value of their respective homes and the far greater white ownership of stocks and other non-residential assets. Black unemployment rates are double that for whites.
The explanation for these discrepancies has been the subject of much analysis. There is little doubt, however, that even if white supremacist ideas have been discredited and are now found only among a distinct minority of whites, prejudice and discrimination do play a significant continuing role in preventing greater equality of opportunity.
In 2003 Gallup poll. for example, a nationwide sample of whites believed that about 35 percent of their own race "disliked blacks." (When asked about their own views, an earlier 1999 ABC poll found that 32 percent of whites acknowledged holding "at least some racist feelings.") These perceptions would be compatible with another finding, from the Gallup poll cited above, that 40 percent of blacks believed they experienced discrimination at least once a month and another 35 percent felt it happened to them less than once a month, but more than once a year.
Social audits conducted by the Government Accounting Office, the Congress' bi-partisan chief investigative arm, have, in fact,shown that when white and black "job applicants" with comparable resumes apply to the same firms, blacks receive 25 percent fewer interviews and 34 percent fewer job offers (Cedric Herring, "Is Job Discrimination Dead?," Contexts , Summer 2002, p.14).
Discrimination can be a by-product of prejudice, but can also exist without it. Bank and mortgage companies' home loan policies have repeatedly been shown to discriminate against black applicants, though loan officers maintain they are applying neutral economic criteria. Realtors steer black clients looking to purchase homes away from certain neighborhoods, not necessarily because they are prejudiced but because they know or believe sellers are. Some employers may not hire blacks because they believe, perhaps incorrectly, that their customers and clients prefer dealing with whites. Racial profiling is ubiquitous, though the profilers themselves may not harbor prejudical feelings towards blacks in general.
This then is the historical context within which BlackWhite will try in its unique way to enlighten the members of its two familes and ourselves about race realtions in American society today. Given the complexities of contemporary attitudes and behavior on race the series' participants will no doubt experience a wide range of encounters with the residents of Tarzana.
It is important to recognize that the show's producers will probably not be presenting viewers with an unedited record of what happen to the families. Entertainment values and possible bias will lead to editing decisions that might highlight certain episodes and neglect or ignore others. The choice of Tarzana itself, with its overwhelmingly white and prosperous residents, may make the families' encounters different than would be the case if they were in a poorer community or one with a different racial composition. One might imagine that the class backgrounds of the families themselves might also skew the conclusions to be drawn from their experiences.
Although instances of blatant racial prejudice and discrimination might be shown I would imagine that most of Bruno, Carmen and Rose's enounters with whites while in blackface will be benign. But, as with the Prime Time St. Louis social audit, smiles alone might not tell the whole story. Hopefully those passing as black don't merely have informal social chit chat with whites in social settings or when shopping. They should also apply for jobs, try to get loans, rent or purchase homes, and attempt to join country clubs.
Brian, Renee and Nick, appearing white and interacting with whites, might be more inclined to be exposed to racist sentiments. But contemporary norms regarding public expression of prejudice might have an inhibitory effect.
As for times when Bruno, Carmen and Rose interact with blacks, it would not be surprising if anti-white feelings emerge. After all, the same 1999 poll that showed 32 percent of whites acknowledging some anti-black feelings found 40 percent of blacks held anti-white ones.
Viewers should be cautioned to resist saying "See, both sides are prejudiced. Why should society only focus on whites?" I believe the focus should be mainly, though not exclusively, on white racism not simply because black racism is a consequence of a legacy of white supremacist ideology and practices. More critically, whites are far more apt to have the economic, political and social power to translate racist attitudes into discriminatory action. As a college professor I may like or dislike my students and they may have identical feelings, but I alone have the power to give grades. A black person might wish to discriminate against whites but if they aren't employers, landlords or putting their home on the market their options are limited.
Of course, prejudice against groups can and should always be condemned. Moreover, black racism is often counter-productive as when it leads, for example, in some,though not most, circumstances to black academic high achievers being stigmatized by black peers for "acting white." But it is disingenuous to pretend that all prejudices have equal societal impact.
As BlackWhite proceeds hopefully the families themselves will ask the tough questions that I'm afraid the producers may not and make this series the absorbing educational experience it could be. In any case, stay tuned.
Update March 15:
Episode 2:
The episode focused primarily on the strains in the relationship between the two families, and, in particular between Carmen and Renee. Depending on one's point of view Bruno and Carmen are either misunderstood by Brian and Renee or understood all too well. The white couple believes they are sincerely trying to be open to the experience of "being black" by going to a black church or in appreciating listening to the work of young black males and femeles who their daughter Rose (in blackface) is taking a poetry class workshop with.
But Brian and Renee perceived them as "trying too hard" as when they become animated enthusiasts at the church service or, in Carmen's case,"clueless" and insensitive when she attempts to use black vernacular. Carmen is also criticized for showering excessive praise on the young black poets and presuming to know things about them, as individuals, based on their appearance, demeanor or work. From Bruno and Carmen's perspective Brian and Renee are hypersenstive, misinterpreting benign or well-meaning behavior.
While the interactions between these couples are uneasy Rose, Bruno and Carmen's daughter, seems to be having an easier time being accepted by the poets. Even when she admits passing they don't reject her and she seems to feel transformed by her interactions with them.
What to make of all this? One can simply say that the adults are thus far not achieving mutual trust and rapport and it is due to their racial differences. Or perhaps just the mixture of personalities. It's hard not to believe some other combination of white and black middle class adults might do better. Or worse. In other words, a case study involving a tiny number of subjects proves nothing useful.
It is tempting to say that Rose's different experience is expected because research shows that racial animosity is less among the younger generation, but again, one could easily find exceptions to this. More importantly, youthful tolerance doesn't necessarily predict future behavior as young people end up becoming involved in social institutions and situations where discriminatory behavior is not simply a reflection of personal attitudes towards race but long standing customs and incentives.
The problem with the series thus far is its total focus on prejudice within the context of informal social life. Besides squabbling with each other the adults also go to local bars and try to engage patrons on racial issues. They meet some who seem seem devoid of prejudice (e.g., feel comfortable with racial intermmariage), others who may harbor it or, at least, embrace stereotypes, even those that are of concern to blacks, which reinforce it (e.g., black kids are stigmatized as "acting white" for doing well in school) But everyone is polite and engaging at all times. Again, this provides only a glimpse of race relations because it exludes, for example, institutional norms in the critical housing and job markets. Given the right circumstances bigots will not discriminate and non-bigots will. Hopefully the series will move to that arena or it will simply be spinning its wheels.
Episode 3:
This episode was the most effective and interesting thus far. In the beginning it did get bogged down a bit with the continuing saga of Renee and Carmen, in which the former accuses the latter of using racist terms or terms that can be indicative of racism, while Carmen pleads that she is not at all racist and that Renee is misconstruing innocent word choices. My view is that Carmen is being misunderstood, but she does have an unfortunate tendency to provide ammunition for Renee because she shows no care in word selection (e.g., she tries to compliment a young woman by calling her "a beautiful black creature").
Though racial differences in ways of communicating no doubt can fan the fuels of discord, the point has already been made and it's time to move on. Fortunately that occurs, particularly when Carmen and Bruno in their black disguises go to a country western dance and Carmen senses that she isn't wanted by the all white patrons and staff. She is asked to give a credit card before getting served a drink and believes, possibly correctly (here's where the social audit approach is needed) that had she been white the drink would have been given first.
This experience shakes her and for the first time she seems to understand what it feels like to be discriminated against. Her husband Bruno does not notice any disparate treatment. Back home they get into an argument and Carmen accuses Bruno of being locked into his own view of the world without opening himself up to other possibilities.
Bruno notes that as a school basketball player he was once deliberately frozen out by black teammates who did not want to pass him the ball even though he was the best player. He said he was very frustrated but "moved on" and blacks who feel discriminated against should as well. Of course, Bruno could move on to a world where he was very unlikely to find himself in such a situation, whereas blacks necessarily move into worlds where whites have institutional control.
In another segment, Bruno in blackface and Carmen without her disguise go to an all black neighborhood and Carmen and Bruno have strong feelings they are being shown hostility for being an interracial couple. This might be the case, but apparently there has been some dispute about whether the editing of the scenes distorted the reality of the situation. In any case, even if editing was selective, few would doubt, though Carmen seems shocked, that anti-white sentiment exists within the black community. It probably would even have been stronger if black women were present as they resent black men being with white women and neglecting their own women.
Probably the most riveting part of the episode didn't involve black-white relations, but Brian and Renee's frustrations with their son Nick. Nick is a sweet-tempered seventeen year old, but has only an elementary school education, having dropped out before even embarking upon high school. His parents are very concerned about his future as he isn't doing much more than living in the moment and spends whatever money he has on extravagent items.
Brian is most frustrated that Nick seems not to notice the pervasive racism that he and Renee do. He wants Nick to observe white people watching him when he goes into a store in the mall so his son can understand how he is perceived. Nick has no interest. In some sense he is like Bruno, seeing a color-blind world where only personality matters, though Bruno does see black racism against whites.
What initially seemed odd to me is that Brian feels the persistance of racism, not the necessity of advancing his education, is the most important lesson Nick needs to learn. Racial discrimination clearly exists in employment, for example, but even if it was absent I felt the propsects for someone without even a high school education in today's economy are nil. White racists don't even have to look at Nick's skin to deny him opportunities. He's digging his own grave without their help. In fact, 72 percent of black males in their twenties who are school dropouts are jobless and 21 percent are incarcerated (Erik Eckholm, " Plight Deepens for Black Men, Studies Warn ", The New York Times , March 20, 2006).
Nevertheless, after examining the relevant data, I reconsidered my perspective and was somewhat less crirical of Brian's priorities. In fact, white dropouts don't fare nearly as poorly as their black counterparts. Only 34 percent of them are unemployed. If Nick gets his GED he will undoubtedly improve his job prospects significantly, but to equal whites' opportunities he would have to exceed their educational achievements.
If the series had simply had a graphic showing these data while Brian and Nick were conversing it would have provided a deeper understanding of Nick's situation and the role of race in America.
Episode 4:
This episode had a few notable features. Perhaps the most important one involved Rose and Carmen returning to their community in blackface noting how the people in what appears to be an all-white neighborhood respond to their presence. Because it was a residential area they were familiar with the process was quite similar to what could have been achieved in a social audit. They noticed a lack of eye contact and, more importantly, a reluctance to be helpful when Rose inquired about a possible job at a small store.
Clearly, Rose and Carmen are being affected the most by the race reversal. Brian and Renee don't seem to be interfacting with whites very often when they are in whiteface and when they do nothing dramatic seems to occur. But Bruno is a stand-in for what they imagine the white community has to offer. There is a chasm between him and all the other participants, except perhaps with Nick, who also seems unable to fathom the existence of white racism.
Much of the episode seems to revolve around the desire on the part of the whites to have "authentic" black experiences while the black participants typically suggest there is a distinct black culture that is impenetrable to whites. But sometimes the whites are accused of stereotyping and making assumptions about blacks that deny their individuality. Much of the problem arises because class and age divisions within the black community are observed but not analyzed. Bruno meets middle class black adults, but his image of blacks in general is largely drawn from the baggy pants, do-rag fashion of black male youth culture. Brian and Renee are aware of the existence of the latter if only because of Nick, but they want Carmen and Bruno not to notice it at all. Each side of the racial divide wants the other to have blinders on.
Episode 5
This installment was significant in two respects. First, Renee finally had a connection with a white person that she could value. Initially, this seemed unlikely, because for unexplained reasons she tried to interface with whites involved in Bible studies and knitting and ended up meeting women who were considerable older than herself with whom she had little rapport. But, on the third try she had an experience comparable to one Carmen had with a black radio personality earlier in the series. She was astounded when she discovered the woman's daughter had a black playmate and this undoubtedly set the tone for what became a promising friendship.
Renee has always felt, with some accuracy, that Carmen acts inappropriately around blacks and is terribly naive about black life. Neverthless, Renee herself appears to have lived a very insulated social existence. The idea that there are whites who are untainted by prejudice comes as a shock to her. It would have helped if there had been some material on Renee's normal world back in Atlanta. Does she work only with blacks, have no white neighbors etc.? Are all her encounters with whites without informality?
Whether Renee's world is unusually restricted in terms of interracial contacts or whether this is typical of informal social relations in contemporary America might have been clarified with polling data. Polls, cited earlier, have shown, in fact, that most whites and blacks believe that a majority of of each race is not prejudiced against members of the other race.
If Renee has now developed a more nuanced view of whites Bruno has not altered his perspective on race relations. In one scene he and Brian go to Simi Valley, a white suburb, (in)famous for being the scene of the trial and acquittal of the policemen who beat Rodney King in 1992. Much to Brian's amazement and consternation when both men (Bruno in blackface) ask shoppers in a mall parking lot if they have jumper cables for their stalled car white passersby are uniformly helpful. Bruno sees this as confirmation that white racism is negligable or withers in the face of black politeness; Brian is simply dumbfounded at what he believes is an atypical experience. He could have been and perhaps should have been pleasantly surprised that overt displays of prejudice did not materialize, but he seemed unwilling to concede that informal social interactions between blacks and whites in public places might be more benign now than in the past.
Obviously, one scene proves nothing, but polls suggest that overt expressions of prejudice have lessened over the decades. On the other hand, Simi Valley's almost total whiteness suggests prejudice and discrimination might occur in other arenas. It's one thing to provide jumper cables when asked; quite another to welcome blacks as neighbors or sell your home to them. (In the Diane Sawyer-hosted program from the early 1990s discussed earlier, black and white social auditors pretended their respective cars broke down and waited to see if anyone spontaneously offered assistance. Only the white motorist received help).
Bruno and Brian also walked the streets of Venice, California and once again encountered personal friendliness. But, Venice is an extremely liberal community and this should have been commented upon. Instead someone who knew nothing would assume that Bruno had scored another unambiguous triumph.
Finally, Brian took Bruno to a dominoes game in a private home. The men seemed to be more working class than upper middle class and either because of that and/or Bruno's lack of interest in dominoes and drinking Bruno felt uncomfortable in the setting. Why Brian thought this was a good location for fieldwork was not made clear, but Brian, perhaps despairing at having Bruno "see" white racism, wished Bruno to get in touch with his own discomfort with blacks. Bruno's excuses for feeling ill-at-ease, however, were plausible in the absence of any scene in which we can observe him happily engaged with a group of working class whites drinking, laughing and deeply involved in some other board game he has no previous interest or exposure to. Once again, the lack of a side-by-side comparisons characteristic of the social audit method weakens what could have been a powerful moment.
Final episode:
The final episode was undoubtedly moving, with Renee and Carmen reconciling and even Brian and Bruno bonding to some extent while playing basketball. Even Nick seems to have matured slightly.
Rose, who was the person most open to the project all along, seemed most affected by her experience.
These developments made the project worthwhile for the individuals in the two families and one can hope that white and black viewers of the series will be influenced by it to be more open to interracial socializing.
Despite this, however, the series, precisely because it stayed at the level of interpersonal as opposed to impersonal relations between the races. Without examining decisionmaking involving housing, employment and education, in which parties typically do not become acquainted in more than a superficial way, one cannot really explore the reality of race relations in the United States today.
The era of white supremacy and overt prejudice and discrimination is largely gone. Undoubtedly, especially among the younger generation, even covert racist sentiments have dramatically diminished. But institutional forms of discrimination still exist. A new series by the architects of this one which focuses on that aspect of race relations woulod be weclome indeed.
Recent Comments