Blackface Jesus Gets Blogger Love

How do I criticize a media outlet or personality without falling into unintentional promotion? How can I chin-check without sparking up an "Apolegevent"? Don't know, but I'll try anyway.

Ok, let's talk about this guy-

He calls himself "Blackface Jesus".

Now, who cares what his motives are or how he justifies rocking blackface at hipster parties in New York. The problem I have is not with his existence, but the passive acceptance by the other party goers who are with him, and the recurring big-ups he's been getting from Gawker, a blog about NY media.

Nichelle had this to say:

When I first saw the "Blackface Jesus" on Gawker last week, it was just another "Blue States Lose" thing and I just rolled my eyes. Now in their third or fourth post of the guy, the weak joke is turning to be really offensive.  An image of a white guy in black face is what got frat boys and Ted Danson in trouble. Now, this kid gets glorified as a symbol of coolness. WTF?!

Jay Smooth, though he was addressing a different situation said something I think fits here:

I've been saying for years that irony is now the last refuge of a coward. A singularly dishonest and deluded sort of coward who imagines his behavior a mark of courage, as he fearlessly refuses to take anything seriously.

Cowardice is the root of all hipster irony.

And this is never more obvious, or more ugly, than when issues of race are involved.

Again, the issue I have is how others react to this guy. For me, this is an example of White male privilege being flaunted at it's worst. He rocks blackface because well, he can. And Gawker can highlight him as a funny ironic joke over and over because they can. Even in New York where Whites are the minority.

It's like saying, "F-- your sensitivity and the history behind this symbol. Even when outnumbered we can do what we want without taking seriously any critique". Well, this is my critique.

Comments

[Michael Miraflor (dj mirateck)]

This is exactly why I stay away from Williamsburg.

It reminds me of the 'Kill Whitey' fiasco from a few months back.

[WJC]

I don't find this offensive AT ALL. Jesus was black, folks! What is offensive is all of the iconic imagery that portrays him as white. I think it's brilliant.

[Michael Miraflor (dj mirateck)]

WJC i think what most people find offensive is the use of blackface.

who doesn't know that jesus was black?

[Eli Sweet]

Who said this is blackface? Painting your face black doesn't equate to blackface. If someone dressed up as darth vader and painted their face black, it wouldn't be "blackface darth vader," just darth vader. Although "blackface jesus" is a catchy tagline, I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that this man is just dressing up as Jesus and trying to be historically accurate. There isn't anything in his costume to suggest that he is referencing the blackface of the vaudeville era. After all, the blackface of that era was alway entirely black, shoe polish, burnt cork black. The color that this man has chosen to paint his face is clearly bronze.

[Hashim]

Eli, he calls himself "Blackface" Jesus. Peep his site

[i'm the skwidawd]

First of all, Jesus wasn't Black. "Black" is a modern term, and far from scientific. It's all about the context of the word. In America, Black means "of African descent." There are plenty of Indians with equally dark skin who are not considered Black. Jesus was not "Black", he simply had dark skin and curly hair. And we should leave it at that.

My only observation on the blackface is that it seems likeit would offend most Black people. Only a person who is not part of the black community would do something like that. I won't say it's wrong, but it suggests white insularity. And I'll leave it at that.

[WJC]

Hashim, you're being a hypocrite. Peep your own words.

"Now, who cares what his motives are or how he justifies rocking blackface at hipster parties in New York. The problem I have is not with his existence, but the passive acceptance by the other party goers who are with him..."

"Who cares what his motives are," you write. Well, if you don't care, why are these white partygoers forced to care. And I also agree that the simple act of painting your face black is not racist. That's like seeing a rainbow in a field and assuming the field is gay 'cause, well, we all know rainbows are gay. This man is not mocking black culture, in my opinion. I still think what he is doing is hilarious and acceptable. If he's guilty of mocking anything, he's guilty of mocking religion, not race.

And to answer DJ Mirateck's comment, most people don't know Jesus was black, dark-skinned, whatever. I guarantee you most of Middle America, and most Catholics or Christians for that matter, believe Jesus was white.

[i'm the skwidawd]

^^ Religious people aren't exactly known for their critical thinking.

[rafi]

^ Hey, generalization time!

The outrage over this is a little troubling. I don't know anything about this guy and this post is the first I've ever heard of him.

But isn't it a little bit of a politically correct knee-jerk to say a white guy can't make himself up like a black jesus in the name of whatever joke or statement he's going for.

In the Melvin Van Peebles flick Watermelon Man a black actor brilliantly plays a white guy who wakes up black one day. Eddie Murphy of course famously did a sketch around the benefits of being made up in "white face". The Wayans brothers got in on the white makeup fun themselves (though that movie looked terrible). Rappers have done it in videos.

Is commenting or satirizing racial attitudes in this fashion only allowed if you're putting on a white-face?

Now it could very well be that this guy's shtick is totally useless. But in what context would it be permissible for a white guy to put on black face makeup in the name of a joke or skewering? I don't accept that it should be automatically off limits. I think the fact that this country does have a double standard about who can say what about race is part of the problem. It encourages people not to talk openly about it.

In the grand scheme of things what some guy is wearing to impress or shock people at a party or on the internet is rather trivial. If "Blackface Jesus" was the punchline of a gag on Family Guy you might be laughing and the irony wouldn't seem so cowardly because we tend to put much more faith in what the "pros" do than in the intelligence of the people around us.

[i'm the skwidawd]

No one is going to stop this guy from getting his Blackface on. It just appears culturally insensitive because when you parody a parody of an entire people... it ceases to be parody.

And if you care to challenge me on my "religious people are generally not critical thinkers"... bring it on.

[ladybug]

this does not upset me a fraction as much as much as people using the word "nigga" (old argument... I know)

when I first saw him I did not put together the idea of Al Jolson with what he is doing and I am probably one of the most PC people you will ever come across, always ready to speak up for ANY race that I think is being stepped on

trust me... he is not clowning a race, he is clowning himslef and an all american idea(s?)... take no offense

[Clyde Smith]

I don't know what's up with this Blackface Jesus guy or NY hipsters but I do know that if he was a hip hop blogger, a lot of folks would be saying that you should be worried about the "real enemies".

Not me, of course.

PS-If you don't catch my historical reference, just ignore me. Everyone else does.

[Bol]

You should be worried about the "real enemies."

Also, Jesus is a fairy tale.

[Carmen]

I think it's worth noting that this Blackface Jesus thing is not happening in a vacuum. There's been a rash of figurative or literal blackface incidents recently, and it's indicative of the larger move in the direction of so-called "political incorrectness." In reality, this is the same racist tripe that was promoted by minstrel shows back in the day. If you're interested, here's my take on it:
http://www.mixedmediawatch.com/index.php/archives/2005/12/blackface-jesus/

[Jim]

I'm fairly certain that Gawker was the one who named Blackface Jesus in the first place. Then BFJ saw his opportunity and took it. Tens of thousands of people read Gawker every day, so now that's what people recognize him as. And yes, his own MySpace profile says Blackface Jesus, because that was the name given to him.

I don't think he was ever trying to dress in blackface. Didn't blackface actors usually have the huge white or red lips painted on? I think BFJ was going for a middle-eastern look, but the whole Blackface thing took off due to Gawker.

[Model Minority]

Honestly....I am glad that he is doing what he is doing... Its quite AMERICAN....
a. in that reminds me to keep my friends close and enemies even closer....

b. It also reminds me that the problem w/ the NAWTH is that Negros and Crackas be actin' like its all good in the hood...see I like it in Jawja/Virgina/South Carolina where they will let me know:
i. Where I can eat and sleep and work.
ii. And which tree I will be hung from if I act up.

[rafi]

Since no one who is outraged by this answered my question I'll try again. Is it ok for black comedians (Eddie Murphy in Coming To America and that classic SNL short film, Godfrey Cambridge in Melvin Van Peebles' Watermelon Man) to put on white face makeup and act as white people in a comedy?

If so (and I assume we all agree that it's ok) then are you saying it's only black people who are allowed to go there?

The whole idea of Jesus being a non-caucasian freaks out certain ignorant segments of the population. If this guy's shtick is dumb-funny (or smart-funny or both or neither) it looks likely that he's trying to make a statement against that kind of thinking. He's preaching to the choir naturally since he's amongst a like-minded urban crowd and not walking down a street in say Iowa dressed like this. So the only people left to get outraged are those who yes have been taught to knee-jerk at certain things like the idea of blackface.

Or maybe he's mocking the absurd afrocentric contortions of certain pseudo-scholars, namely some of the narrow-minded "intelligentsia" who actually will see his message in nyc or on the internet. Dare we give him that much credit? Well why assume it's impossible. Jokes that fuck up people's assumptions and where it's not easy to dissect the target are in fact a great thing.

Who said someone cant parody a parody? I think you may mean how hard it is to effectively satirize a satire (i.e. Scary Movie satirizing Scream). Blackface or other racist mechanisms werent exactly sophisticated satire. Is Mel Brooks out of line when he makes comedy out of Nazis? How about when he mocks good ol white racism in Blazing Saddles... "Where the white women at?" Could that movie be made today in this environment? How about Network where a white director makes fun of black militants and makes fun of the white system's response to black militancy? How about Network's clear descendant Bamboozled? I just read a Spike Lee interview where he said that movie probably couldn't get made today and nearly wasn't when he made it. What kind of society do we want where certain terrible issues are taboo even to those pointing out their terribleness? Are we only allowed to speak about racism in a non-comedic and narrow way? Oh, you mean in the way that makes no one want to listen and makes no one want to discuss?

[rafi]

One more thing... Remind yourself that people (including myself) have complained about some of the lame ass safe attempts by white Hollywood to preach a hollow, self-righteous message or go through the motions on "race pictures" like Ali, Crash, Grand Canyon, etc.

Those people reach millions, make millions and are rewarded handsomely for saying nothing. I'm just suggesting an alternate target. I'll always take a shocking controversial act by an individual over a well-funded bland movie focussed on looking smart and well-intentioned.

[Jay Smooth]

Hmmm..

When I looked at this guy's myspace page yesterday, one of the pictures had a caption with the word "nigga" in it, something to the effect of "Damn right I drink PBR, nigga!" ..but today I see he removed it:

http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=41069848&imageID=342370009&Mytoken=6ABCAF8A-1044-7DA0-99B7151F05A2DB7432646734

[i'm the skwidawd]

1. Blacks as whites. No one cares if you imitate or pretend to be a white person because white people represent the elite of this country. Note, it is always OK to parody presidents and kings and such. Even when white people do it, it's OK because everyone is basically under the king or president. But if the King gets up and is like, "Yeah, I executed a commoner for stealing an apple... he deserved it! Aha ha ha!" ...would you be laughing?

2. Jesus as Black. I am going to suggest that convincing those non-critical religious people that Jesus was not from Europe seems like a low priority.

3. Mel Brooks and Bamboozled. These are two of my favorites. But they also walk that fine line (even if it appears effortless). Spike took a lot of heat, but I back him up. But also, I think you are forgetting one thing... Mel Brooks is a Jew, and Spike Lee is Black. You're gonna have to get used to the unwritten rules on these sorts of things. It's OK for the oppressed to make light of their oppression.

It is understandable that oppressed people get a little weirded-out when their oppressor starts making light of their own oppression. As a white person, if you are truly sincere about changing the situation, then you will act in a way that is sensitive to the situation, not cavalier and self-justifying.

4. An analogy. Let's look at our racial history as an injury. Black people are the hospital patient and white people are the doctor. Do you think it is appropriate for the doctor to crack jokes about the patient's injury?

[Jay Smooth]

Also, a warning: The latest blackface jesus photo on Gawker has a little full-frontal nudity going on.

(and when i say little, i mean very little.. ba-dum-bum.)

[jack booty]

i think it's great that some party guy can dress up like this and get a rise out of you. he's doing exactly what he should do...bothering, irritating, questioning, praising and getting you to think.

[i'm the skwidawd]

The war in Iraq sparks debate and causes me to think, but that doesn't mean I support it or am glad it happened.

It's good to talk about these things. But if the target of the discussion (BFJ) and his cohorts don't do some of their own thinking and learning... then all that discussion and "thinking" is a waste of time.

That said, I agree with the people who say that BFJ is a pretty minor offense. He's just another FOB NYC hipster SOB who testing the waters in a big city.

Imagine BFJ goes up to a Black person and says, "How can I help improve race relations in this country?" I doubt the person will say, "Paint your face black, wrap your body in the American flag, and go to lots of hipster parties."

[Jay Smooth]

Skiwdawd is 100% on point.

I had a chat with Blackface Jesus on myspace thisd afternoon, which I will post in a minute.

[rafi]

Oh Mel Brooks being Jewish changes things? I'm a Jew too. So was Jesus, he said some crazy shit. Maybe BFJ is Jewish... then it's ok?

You clearly missed my point on the blacks in white makeup that I cited. It was not as simple as lets mock whites on some Def Comedy Jam shit. It was to mock or make a point about racism. I don't think mocking or even just raising the issue of racism in a way that it can't be ignored is the domain of a particular race and can never be done by a white person. That's a dangerous way to think and to me it's counterproductive to the progress that needs to happen in this society in order to confront and curtail racism.

Point #1 and #4 are especially misguided in my opinion. If the racial history is the injury you suggest that Black people are the injured and whites are the doctors? First of all Malcolm X would slap you silly for such an ignorant metaphor. Are you honestly telling me that you expect white people to a) have the ability and understanding then b) the inclination to patch up the wounds of racial history for black people?

And then J-Smooth says you're 100% on point. It's interesting because my favorite post of all time from J-Smooth's site was the one where he linked to this post from Prometheus 6. The situation we're in is that both whites and blacks have been extremely fucked up in very different ways and to different degrees from our collective racial history. Until we are actually willing to openly work towards understanding that, how far can we get as a people?