The pretty much articulates why I'm so apprehensive about her curating the exhibit.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
A white woman was placed on a curation team at the AA Smithsonian museum
- Thread starter RastaMentality
- Start date
- Status
It's a problem with museums - if you just look at the postings, the assumption is that you have a graduate degree, if not a PhD in the subject you want to curate in. The ideal solution is to change the profession so that a graduate degree isn't required, but since that won't happen, the other solution is to basically offer scholarships to people of colour who want to be a part of preserving and presenting their history so that you can find people who have lived a culture to represent it.
There was a story that someone mentioned at the place I'm interning at about a museum somewhere in the States that had a headdress that they wanted to do some preservation maintenance on. The problem is that culturally a headdress can only be handled by men and all of the people on staff were women. After consulting with the Native community, they ultimately decided not to do anything with the headdress since they couldn't bring in someone to do the work for a single piece in the collection (I assume they couldn't afford to, but I don't know why actually).
The demographics and requirements of the profession will mean this stuff will inevitably happens, and probably happens a lot more often that we really see in the news (in fact, I hadn't thought about this problem until I saw this thread), but it's a really big problem and requires a big change in how we put people into positions to be able to present history.
You think she's going to put the exhibit through a white lens?
The very first tweet in the OP is a person shitting on a white woman for doing her job. Not asking whether she was qualified, not even putting up her name. Just that she's white and she's got that assignment. I think that's pretty fucking disappointing.
Edit: For the record, I'm not white. It would've been just as disappointing had the person in question been any other race.
Yeah? And what's that?
Last edited:
But there's also the duality of it all. Do we really want to ignore the good over the optics? or hold up the optics over the good.
If you're on page 14 and still think this is about Burnside's qualifications, you haven't been paying attention.
It's fine to disagree, just make sure that you aren't misrepresenting who you're disagreeing with for the sake of an easier argument.
FAKE EDIT: Since I discovered this thread I've been listening to some of Burnside's podcasts through her website. And she's incredibly smart and informed on Hip Hop and, more to the point, you can tell this is a subject that she's passionate about.
It's fine to disagree, just make sure that you aren't misrepresenting who you're disagreeing with for the sake of an easier argument.
FAKE EDIT: Since I discovered this thread I've been listening to some of Burnside's podcasts through her website. And she's incredibly smart and informed on Hip Hop and, more to the point, you can tell this is a subject that she's passionate about.
Now they giving out Pulitzers to rappers and we got white women curating african american hip hop exhibits at the Smithsonian and deciding who the hottest rappers are as the editor in chief at XXL
Yeah, because there's such a dearth of qualified black people in DC of all places...
Crazy (not surprising at all) how things get flipped uh...Now they giving out Pulitzers to rappers and we got white women curating african american hip hop exhibits at the Smithsonian and deciding who the hottest rappers are as the editor in chief at XXL
The more this sits in the back of my mind the more it infuriates me. To the point where I may not visit that portion of the museum.
Not even sure what the bad optics are. She's a person who knows how to set up an exhibition to the expectation that people want, that's basically it.
Lmao
Just because some Black people cosigned it doesn't mean they speak for all of us. Black people cosigned Donald Sterling and Rachel Dolezal having high NAACP positions too.
And you are conflating segregation and seperation. "Separate but equal" failed because those words were empty and Black people were actually segregated. Self-determination for Black people is best left to Black people. We don't need White people for anything, we just need resources.
To some or most (depending on where you go) black folks don't like the optics of a white person heading (despite her work) and running a section of a AA Historical museum dedicated to hip hip culture. A aspect of which was born out of a particular type of oppression and sabotage from the white majority in power and in popular media that keep it down for half of it existence. Though of course that's through no fault of her own. But from a pure optics standpoint, instead of a black face working the section, it's a white face running the show. Even despite the head of the museum being black.
I guess it's not going far enough. In terms of representation from a outward viewpoint. It similar to the scene in BP previous referenced, but less nefarious.
So you're going to consciously ignore what is by all accounts an incredibly thorough and well put together celebration of hip-hop culture because a white woman is involved?
Who does that hurt?
The truth is preservation is a tricky subject, when it comes to culture.
Though all of it's pointless, when we all gone so, meh.
The fear of having certain people curate things is that their lack of understanding or agenda could cause the result in being problematic. That's not what's happening here (at least what I think). The actual exhibition, for which is implied, is going to be well done. If say, Black Panther was directed by a white person but came out the exact same movie it would be same movie (though I doubt the likeliness of that being possible). I think that's a nuance that explains how I feel about this.
Of course I did, and it's alright. I agree with the last part, that they could obviously have found a skilled black person.
My problem was with the first part, which I quoted. Adding "I am not taking away from this woman's achievements, but I find it hard to believe that her position has such a high barrier of entry that no black people were as qualified as her." doesn't change that you made a statement that is insulting to her profession and education, by hyperbolically implying that that was how you could find a replacement. Curators are more than just history buffs, as we both know.
Anyway, like the mod said, it's not about those qualifications, obviously, so let's drop this. I just really really didn't like the phrasing in that sentence.
Of course not, he got emotional and is taking out of his ass. I am sure mods will give him a warning any month now.
As someone else said "in a vacuum" it would be fine but we're not in a vacuum we're in a World were Black culture has been curated, controlled and appropriated by white people AND a World were this specific white woman who is knowledgeable, passionate and a scholastic champion of Black culture is an integral part of an important exhibition about Black culture.
That is tough to reconcile.
In a vacuum it is easy to say no because ideology exists in a vacuum, but Miss/Mrs Burnside lives in the real World and is heading up a real exhibit based on real work that she has done and she is taking real shit for it: I think a lot of people have sympathy for her in that regard.
The arguments against her aren't wrong because people sympathize for her.
Should she be removed because of her colour, right here, right now in the real World? Tough call.
I think the best course of action would be to find someone she could be a mentor to that could eventually replace her (if there isn't someone as qualified already). It's really hard to come to a conclusion about anything just because we don't know the exact circumstances on why she was chosen. Clearly she's qualified, and it seems like she is trying to get college age Black people interested in getting into the industry.
That would be impossible. Given who was behind the movie, unless the game plan was set from the start to finish.
Uh, youd probably want Questlove instead of Snoop as a consultant, and I'd take Nas over Jay. Nas def knows the history more in depth
Is she a passionate and knowledgeable expert in hip hop? (Answer is a very resounding YES, by the way.)
Then she's probably qualified for the job, and honestly, it's a single section in the exhibit.
I think (mostly) everyone understands what the issue is, it's just a difference in values. I can empathize wholly with the sentiment, but I don't believe any form of gatekeeping is the right answer to institutional racism. There is a clear racial divide that needs to be addressed, but widening the gap is not the solution. Particularly in history and education, race shouldn't matter (n the presence of genuine passion, knowledge, and long-honed skill). Are the guests going to this exhibit to see the curator? Would someone who is black (and probably not a hip hop artist themselves if we want to go down a slippery slope of who should be allowed to curate a Hip Hop exhibit) inherently collect better or more accurate pieces on the basis of their birth? If this woman personally represented the transgressions of all racist white Americans (i.e.: is herself racist or uninterested/unaware in the history of African Americans), I might be more on board with the uproar...but again, I don't think widening the divide is the answer to most of the problems we face within or outside of this.
EDIT: Honestly, it's all a bit insulting to the black directors who deemed her worthy of the position.
Then she's probably qualified for the job, and honestly, it's a single section in the exhibit.
CharlesAznable said:
I think (mostly) everyone understands what the issue is, it's just a difference in values. I can empathize wholly with the sentiment, but I don't believe any form of gatekeeping is the right answer to institutional racism. There is a clear racial divide that needs to be addressed, but widening the gap is not the solution. Particularly in history and education, race shouldn't matter (n the presence of genuine passion, knowledge, and long-honed skill). Are the guests going to this exhibit to see the curator? Would someone who is black (and probably not a hip hop artist themselves if we want to go down a slippery slope of who should be allowed to curate a Hip Hop exhibit) inherently collect better or more accurate pieces on the basis of their birth? If this woman personally represented the transgressions of all racist white Americans (i.e.: is herself racist or uninterested/unaware in the history of African Americans), I might be more on board with the uproar...but again, I don't think widening the divide is the answer to most of the problems we face within or outside of this.
EDIT: Honestly, it's all a bit insulting to the black directors who deemed her worthy of the position.
Last edited:
I understand that, I even mentioned to my girlfriend that this feels like a "2 steps forward,1 step back" situation. Meaning the exhibit and research itself is definitely a net positive but the optics are a step back in my opinion.
Imagine spending all of your academic and professional career being so passionate about a topic, collecting materials, building up your resumé to then be selected by directors to curate an exhibit and then being told by some rando on Twitter that you can't because of your skin color. So I'm assuming by this notion that all of the African American Studies professors should quit if they're not black? All the students should change major because they're white?
So her qualifiations don't matter, it doesn't matter that black directors hired her, and the black people who are completely fine with this (including myself) are "ignorant." I could understand if she was given the job over a black person who was equally or more qualified than her for the job. But we have NO idea about the hiring process whatsoever, or if there were even other applicants.
So her qualifiations don't matter, it doesn't matter that black directors hired her, and the black people who are completely fine with this (including myself) are "ignorant." I could understand if she was given the job over a black person who was equally or more qualified than her for the job. But we have NO idea about the hiring process whatsoever, or if there were even other applicants.
The problem is, White people get access to EVERYTHING and there are barely hurdles. You can lead a hiphop exhibition, can lead an NAACP chapter, can direct and helm Slave movies, you can be the last samurai lol etc.... You have all the access in the world of gatekeeping the experiences of people who look nothing like you. A Black person can lead a Mozart Museum but will have to endure a million times more hurdles in order to do so. A Black director approaching a studio about his "Irish Potato Famine" project will be looked at strangely or laughed out the room by execs. We are understandably protective of our cultures and subcultures, since our entire four centuries old existence on this continent has been one of plunder.
The only reason I'm arguably giving this a pass is because she's been working on this from the ground up. If for some reason "there were no Black applicants", that is just an indictment of systemic racism in America, which White lady curator gets to benefit from.
I'm listening to the podcast of how she became a hip hop head and they are spending a lot of time talking about race and how white people get opportunities and privileges that black people don't. They just got done talking about how rock was created by black people and stolen. She seems very aware of the complications surrounding her work, the music she is super into, and race. I doubt she's unprepared or blindsided by the conversation. She couldn't actually be a fan of hip hop at its roots and not expect this conversation.
Have you listened to any interviews with her at all? She's wholly aware of the privileges she has and the reasons she is able to do what she is. If, by (completely true!) means of systemic racism in America, there were no black applicants, does that mean they should not bother to have this section of the exhibit? Is the representation of a white curator a worse alternative than not having an educational exhibit on American hip hop that would bring SOME awareness to people who may not have otherwise looked for that information or seen historical pieces?
(Perfectly valid) hypotheticals aside, she had to interact with any number of black individuals to collect what she has and they are all a piece of the final product, from the creators to many of those who were in possession of them. She has chosen to put time and energy into researching and discussing African American history, she was hired by black directors, she is endorsed by black hip hop artists, and she is not the "star" of the exhibit, the pieces on display are.
Last edited:
When there are black voices being critical of a white person (and not even that really, it's more just the position she's in), unfortunately that's always going to bring people out.
It's a discussion worth having I think, it's interesting circumstances and there (to me) is merit to both sides that are arguing. It's too bad we don't know the extent of their search to fill the position and stuff.
Yeah tbh I don't think it's possible in any stretch of reality.
This in a nutshell. I'm disappointed in this hiring, not angered. I get that the woman is qualified for this position, but it's just a shame that something that is 100% tied to our cultural DNA isn't being represented by one of us. In all likelihood, she'll do a fine job...but the optics on this sucks...a lot.
I mean, could you imagine if my black ass was chosen to curate something like Nordic history? Or if I, as a male, would curate a women's history section? Sure, I can be qualified, but something about it would just seem...off.
Last edited:
It's a discussion worth having, but you criticize people for trying to have the discussion if they disagree with SOME black people (even if other black people think she deserves the job)?
It's not so easy to turn down a job for moral reasons. Sometimes, you've got bills to pay.
This is basically my stance.
Ordinarily, this would be a problem. But knowing everything, I can live with it. The "optics" aren't great. Like, fucking imagine a nigga being the curator of a Museum of Ancient Celtic/Irish History IN Ireland. You think they'd just let that happen? But, like I said, it's whatever.
I'm not too worried about white nonsense drowning out black concerns in DC.
I thought their post was curious, too so I did a google search and this is what I found.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redneck#Political_term_for_poor_farmers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain
Your other example about a man running something about women is better, but if this one were the case, the only people who would be mad would be racist whites and the rest of us would all be saying "It doesn't matter that he's black, what matters is that he's the best person for the job".
This is naturally because white culture, of which Nordic stuff forms a notable part, is already societally dominant, so the liberal argument would be that there's no problem with allowing a qualified minority to curate it.
For my part, as someone of (partial) Norwegian descent, I could not care less who puts together a museum exhibition about my ancestral culture.
No, that's why I said it's worth having the discussion, I'm not criticizing anyone who wants to have a discussion in good faith about it at all. I have an opinion on it as does everyone else but like I also recognize as a white dude this particular scenario def isn't my place to be telling people what is or isn't right, especially if my contribution is arguing for a white person to have a position that it would be great to have a black person in, I don't need to be arguing for that.
They will if they go to her website and listen to any of her 350+ podcast episodes, or the many NMAAHC videos she appears in, or on one of her guided tours that you can watch via the periscope link above. She is by all means a leading expert in hip hop in the museum field. People already take her seriously, it's why she was promoted to this position, there is no debate about her knowledge of the subject, just about the moral implications of choosing her over a similarly qualified black candidate
Yes, that's exactly what they should have done. Thanks for understanding.
Are you a qualified museum curator who has spent the last decade being the driving force creating the Nordic history exhibit you are chosen to curate?
- Status