Chris Matthews, Obama and fault lines

Send to friend
Dori J. Maynard
February 10, 2010
Why we need to learn to talk across diversity

Dear Chris,

Initially, so many people weighed in after your State of the Union remarks, the ones in which you said you actually forgot our first black president was black, that I thought there wasn't much for me to add to the conversation. But then I had an experience recently that made me realize that while a lot of people are talking about you, it doesn't sound like too many people are talking with you.
So, first let me tell you that I think one of the saddest things you said during your exuberantly rambling discourse was 'Maybe I shouldn't be talking about this, but I am.'

You took a risk. I'm not sure you would argue that it personally paid off, but it did get people talking.

So many people of good will are worried about making mistakes that often we just don't say anything in public, ceding the public discourse to those who sometimes have a less inclusive agenda, and preferring to let lose in private where we don't have the opportunity to get another point of view that could actually push our thinking forward.

The fact is, our increasingly complex diversity means we all will make mistakes.
But the answer shouldn't be to remain silent. Instead of being paralyzed by the specter of making a mistake, we need to get to the point where it's not the mistakes we make, but what we do with those mistakes that matters.
That brings me to my recent experience, where I made a mistake of my own.
It was at a diversity workshop where I was introducing our Fault Lines framework to a group of university professors. I thought it was going quite well, until someone pulled me aside to tell me our diversity framework didn't sit well with some of his gay and lesbian colleagues. Turns out that in their opinion I had conflated gender and sexual orientation. That certainly wasn't my intent. Our 'Fault Lines' framework is intended to give everyone the dignity of who they are as they are. Fault Lines also teaches that each of us also views the world from the prism of our experience, so it's entirely possible that this framework I have helped develop treats heterosexuality as the norm.

The person who pulled me aside was a straight white male, but he assured me the colleagues in question would bring it up. I waited, eagerly would be too strong a word, because who is ever eager to be publicly criticized. Anxious might be a better description, in both senses of the word. I was worried about being criticized and excited about learning something new that could help strengthen our program.

In the end, nobody brought it up, so I didn't get a chance to fully understand their point of view, but it's certainly something I've been thinking about since.
Chris, that's what I'm hoping you'll do, though I want to be clear that however misguided your thoughts were, you probably spoke for many other white people who were having similar thoughts.

Having said that, I have to admit, I was a bit taken aback by your remarks, though to say I was shocked would be a lie. I've heard that kind of thing my whole life, both about me or any other person of color the white speaker happened to find 'normal.'

Because that's really what you're saying, isn't it? That you don't think of the black person in question as black because far from fitting the stereotypes of a criminal, welfare recipient or some other pathological creature sitting at the margins of society, they could be just like you - except for their race. So, in an unconscious desire to avoid the cognitive dissonance of looking at a black person with whom you identify, you literally opt to white wash the experience.

There's a term for this, it's a form of white privilege, and you might want to think about the role it plays in your life and in your thinking as you talk about race on national television.

Again, I want to be clear that I'm not saying you shouldn't talk about race, or even that you shouldn't risk saying something else that will once again provoke conversation.

We have no chance of getting to that 'post-racial' place you talk about unless we are open and honest about how race shapes the way we think about each other. So, no, I'm not asking you not to talk about it, I'm asking you to think about why it is you forgot Obama was black and what that means about how you think about the majority of black people you walk past everyday.

Chris, I know we've only touched on the tip of the iceberg. Call me if you want to talk some more.


Best,


Dori J. Maynard

 

Comments

Maybe you are not being fair

Maybe you are not being fair to him about what he was trying to say. Maybe you are understanding what he was trying to say through a prism that suspects that anyone who is white and commenting on race in America is commenting from a distorted perspective of "white privilege." In order to really get a good conversation about race going, you have to let all races discuss the issue of race in America without shutting down people who have a different perspective by diminishing the value of their viewpoint by dismissing it as distorted by "white privilege." While I am not a fan of Matthews, perhaps what Matthews meant to say, albeit inarticulately, is that when an African American politician talks about solving American problems neutrally, without importing the issue of race either implicitly (through race-guilt) or explicitly into the conversation and the problem-solving effort is completely race-neutral in content and tone, then it is easy to forget about race and just focus on the words and the content and to forget any color divide and simply solve problems as Americans, not black Americans or white Americans, but just Americans. Here's an analogy: if a beautiful woman were speaking about these topics, and everyone knows she is a woman and is beautiful and can certainly see it when she is talking, but her arguments are so cogent and so well delivered and she is addressing topics of general concern, at some point what she looks like is something that is forgotten because one is absorbed by the content of the conversation, not the appearances of the person delivering the message. This phenomenon can occur no matter who the speaker is and what that person's color is. Some things are far harder to get passed than the color of one's skin, or eyes or hair color. For instance, I was never able to get passed George Bush' Jr.'s fake twang-y accent or the goofy Simian aspect to his face when he spoke, and it always was something that was present to me while he spoke. I think what Matthews was saying is that skin color is not one of those things that is ever-present when one is listening to a speaker who is addressing issues of general concern without reminding one of the issue of race during the discourse.

Hi Dori, Good column. Like

Hi Dori, Good column. Like your dad, you always see the best side of an issue. And you try to extend the dialogue whenever possible. All good. The thing that was revealed about Chris Mathews' comment is that he mostly sees Obama as black; seeing him without the racial overlay was a surprise to him. Is that good? I'm not so sure.

Chris Matthews

Thanks for this piece. I was live blogging on Twitter, and when Matthews made his comment, there was a massive negative reaction. Sometimes he's right on the money, and other times...he is so far off base that you wonder what planet he is from.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.