At the races
Friday, 1. September 2006, 12:45:24
There has, here in the United Kingdom - a challenging term at these times - been much fuss and furore over race and culture. It has been simmering for many years - decades - Brixton riots of the eighties and the Bradford/Oldham infractions come to mind. In the immediate past, there has been the airing of a BBC film "Shoot The Messenger", all the scaremongering toward Asian/Middle eastern looking Muslims and an unseemly row between Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London and Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality over the multi-cultural merits of the Notting Hill carnival.
Living in the city, London, as I do, it is hard to not to notice the sheer volume of people and cultures that inhabit this little city. I went to a school, back in the eighties, that was over eighty percent black and British born. The rest of the school was comprised of white British and other British born but with family of different origin. The dominant religion was Christianity and all the role models for the black youths were American. As a black person, with predominantly black friends whilst growing up, there were beliefs, passed down and around from relatives and peers, of what we were, as black people, and how we were viewed. The "second class citizen" tag is one which is only now lifting after two, in some cases, three generations. There was always the belief that we would have to work twice as hard as our white counter parts to achieve the same position in society. When I was growing up only the best went to university, these days, black, white and other, all go to "Uni".
With the eighties and the advent of Windows, mobile phones and media age, the world suddenly got
smaller. As computer prices fell and the internet became more widespread, more and more people could
afford them and the world got even smaller. Air travel has become cheaper and more frequent; and the
world is even smaller.
Due to the British economy and a somewhat open door policy across Europe, Britain, and its cities are awash with different cultures. There is not a region of the world that is not represented in London, in fact, you can, in some parts, find it hard to meet a native. London is indeed a multi-cultural melting pot. Or should I say pot. The races do not melt together as much as one might believe living in London. In urban areas, where people are forced to live together, the races tend to mix. This is very much the case with black and white, the sight of a black and white couple barely turning a head nowadays. Black and other races is, besides white, a rarer sight, though that is a totally different blog, so I will not go in to the whys
here.
It was touched upon, if not mentioned in the brilliant BBC film "Shoot The Messenger" which told the fictional story of a middle class black man, Joe, who is becomes a teacher so as to help black students but is accused of assault by one of the pupils and his life spirals out of control, finding himself ostracised by black society and reduced to madness and eventual homelessness. He is rescued by a god fearing black woman and gets his life back on track. The way the story is told allows Joe to address the camera and through these asides we learn that he sees all his problems as steming from his blackness.
In the press, from some quarters, there was a feeling that the film was overwhelmingly negative in it's portrayal of black people - this is not true - and that it was racist, once again a different blog, but suffice to say, it was one of the few programmes I have seen in years where I saw recognisibly black characters.
Trevor Phillips said that he believed the Notting Hill carnival was no more multicultural than "a day's Morris dancing or caber-tossing" Ken Livingstone took exception to these comments and proclaimed, live on radio, that Mr Phillips was "pandering to the right" and that "he'll soon be joining the BNP" - British National Party - extreme right wing "political" party, promoting white rights. I believe that Trevor Phillips was just pointing out that the carnival, though attended by every race and creed, was still an event dominated by black music - r&b, reggae and calypso - and the floats and costumes are West Indian in origin. So in that respect he is right; it is not a multicultral event. It is a party and everyone can attend, but so is Chinese New year, but one would not call that a multicultural event.
I don't know much about being a Muslim. I am not one. I do know that they do not all hold with or support the views of those who have unwittingly pushed their faith to the forefront of national conscienceness. The fact is most human beings has some belief system, religious or otherwise, that guides them and governs their lives and decisions. Most of us want to be happy and safe and want the same for our families and friends. Muslims are no different. Hammasa Kohistani is a Muslim, she has caused some controversy and some celebration. Who is she? She is a beautiful girl who entered a beauty contest and ended up as the current Miss England.
So to the question of multicultural U.K.? No, not really. I have black friends, white friends and Asian friends, but I live in a city where people from every corner of the planet come to visit and if they ask me, I could tell them what part of the city they are most likely to find most of their compatriots, because most people want to be with their "own". Having said that, every change begins with oneself, so ask yourself; how much do you want to mix?
Living in the city, London, as I do, it is hard to not to notice the sheer volume of people and cultures that inhabit this little city. I went to a school, back in the eighties, that was over eighty percent black and British born. The rest of the school was comprised of white British and other British born but with family of different origin. The dominant religion was Christianity and all the role models for the black youths were American. As a black person, with predominantly black friends whilst growing up, there were beliefs, passed down and around from relatives and peers, of what we were, as black people, and how we were viewed. The "second class citizen" tag is one which is only now lifting after two, in some cases, three generations. There was always the belief that we would have to work twice as hard as our white counter parts to achieve the same position in society. When I was growing up only the best went to university, these days, black, white and other, all go to "Uni".
With the eighties and the advent of Windows, mobile phones and media age, the world suddenly got
smaller. As computer prices fell and the internet became more widespread, more and more people could
afford them and the world got even smaller. Air travel has become cheaper and more frequent; and the
world is even smaller.
Due to the British economy and a somewhat open door policy across Europe, Britain, and its cities are awash with different cultures. There is not a region of the world that is not represented in London, in fact, you can, in some parts, find it hard to meet a native. London is indeed a multi-cultural melting pot. Or should I say pot. The races do not melt together as much as one might believe living in London. In urban areas, where people are forced to live together, the races tend to mix. This is very much the case with black and white, the sight of a black and white couple barely turning a head nowadays. Black and other races is, besides white, a rarer sight, though that is a totally different blog, so I will not go in to the whys
here.
It was touched upon, if not mentioned in the brilliant BBC film "Shoot The Messenger" which told the fictional story of a middle class black man, Joe, who is becomes a teacher so as to help black students but is accused of assault by one of the pupils and his life spirals out of control, finding himself ostracised by black society and reduced to madness and eventual homelessness. He is rescued by a god fearing black woman and gets his life back on track. The way the story is told allows Joe to address the camera and through these asides we learn that he sees all his problems as steming from his blackness.
In the press, from some quarters, there was a feeling that the film was overwhelmingly negative in it's portrayal of black people - this is not true - and that it was racist, once again a different blog, but suffice to say, it was one of the few programmes I have seen in years where I saw recognisibly black characters.
Trevor Phillips said that he believed the Notting Hill carnival was no more multicultural than "a day's Morris dancing or caber-tossing" Ken Livingstone took exception to these comments and proclaimed, live on radio, that Mr Phillips was "pandering to the right" and that "he'll soon be joining the BNP" - British National Party - extreme right wing "political" party, promoting white rights. I believe that Trevor Phillips was just pointing out that the carnival, though attended by every race and creed, was still an event dominated by black music - r&b, reggae and calypso - and the floats and costumes are West Indian in origin. So in that respect he is right; it is not a multicultral event. It is a party and everyone can attend, but so is Chinese New year, but one would not call that a multicultural event.
I don't know much about being a Muslim. I am not one. I do know that they do not all hold with or support the views of those who have unwittingly pushed their faith to the forefront of national conscienceness. The fact is most human beings has some belief system, religious or otherwise, that guides them and governs their lives and decisions. Most of us want to be happy and safe and want the same for our families and friends. Muslims are no different. Hammasa Kohistani is a Muslim, she has caused some controversy and some celebration. Who is she? She is a beautiful girl who entered a beauty contest and ended up as the current Miss England.
So to the question of multicultural U.K.? No, not really. I have black friends, white friends and Asian friends, but I live in a city where people from every corner of the planet come to visit and if they ask me, I could tell them what part of the city they are most likely to find most of their compatriots, because most people want to be with their "own". Having said that, every change begins with oneself, so ask yourself; how much do you want to mix?
WIDGETIZE
Wakajawaka # 1. September 2006, 13:10
Have a great weekend!
devans186 # 1. September 2006, 15:55
chentianyu # 4. September 2006, 09:00
i like your essays very much ~
i am from china, you know, in china , there is not inhabite so much foreigners, therefore, i can not totally understand your feeling ,but, most of the poor of chinese would not treated equally as the rich, especially the goverment officials and their family.
it is very sad~
lokutus_prime # 10. September 2006, 23:17
It's a strange and often worrying thing this 'identity' that most of us either unconsciously cling to or consciously try to build up. On the obvious surface it seems pretty simple. We all have a 'look' about us. It is primarily noticeable on our skin 'surface' features, our physiognomy (a person’s facial features or expression) and through our physical attributes the pigmentation of our skin and so on. It's also, perhaps, reflected in the way we behave, the way we speak, the language we use - it suggests what our 'culture' (I use this term cautiously) is, for instance. But these things always obscure the real and logically unassailable fact that we are all related to each other, all our ancestors and their ancestors and so on, back to the original single cell that in a branching of evolution gave us our human ancestors. But my explanation is far too simplistic, some would say, to answer the fundamental question of 'differences' between us human tribes and the reasons why we tend to seek out 'our own' and stay within a 'clan' or a 'grouping' with which we feel 'secure, safe' and culturally 'familiar'. In your own analysis you have brought out the salient facts, but as to 'why' we humans should act in the way that we do toward each other is based more on 'fear' than almost any other reason. The 'fear' is probably irrational in the main - allowing for specific instances where 'fear' may be well founded because of a real, or apparently real, threat - because its premise is based on history, on the past, on what went on before we were born and it brings to mind the old saw of "the sins of the fathers will be visited on the sons".
What conclusions might we draw from all that you have said and from the things I have mentioned? Perhaps we will always be revising any conlusions that we might make but it seems to me that the main thing is to recognise that we humans are diverse in our language, culture and social practices and, even among our own 'tribal grouping', our physiognomy.
To 'live together' is, I suggest, subtly different to 'living among one another '
Yours truly,
lokutus_prime