i was once told “what the fuck is a community.”

can you answer that question?

i was once told “what the fuck is a community.”

can you answer that question?

As per Silliman, I read the quote in a larger context, and I don’t know… I don’t see what’s so dismissive about it. Seems to me he’s pointing out a difference in the audience perception of these writers vs. the SWMs. Besides, what’s different about him using the word APPEARS vs. you using the word TENDS in your claim?

I think what L. said is close to the truth:

“Sorry, it reads less like any kind of serious statement and more like a knee jerk attempt to show how down with the people you are or something.”

And that’s fine. I can be rah rah viva la raza myself, but if I start saying that white people shouldn’t be proud of their heritage, I am cheapening my own. And I guess that’s where I take issue. When you make such a claim, you bring down yourself and anyone like you.

Ethical imperatives, like political beliefs, are subjective. If I have the political belief that one is innocent until proven guilty, then it is an ethical imperative for me to extend that belief to everyone, regardless of socio-political standing. Regardless of history. My ethics would demand that I NEVER compromise that belief by making exceptions.

A belief in the “politicality” of everything and an ethical adherence to it makes no sense to me. Politicality is too broad for me to attach ethics to it. But I can attach ethics to certain issues that are informed by my personal politics. That makes sense to me.

In my mind, George S. Schuyler is no less significant than James Baldwin or Richard Wright or Ralph Ellison simply because his politics were on the opposite end of the spectrum. The same with a writer like Ayn Rand versus some of my favorite soviet writers like Kollontai or Akhmatova.

Regarding your disagreement with me on quality, you make a point. There are qualities, as in, the content in someone’s writing, that can inform the reader of the writer’s race, gender, class, sexual orientation, etc. This could also apply to the reader. I believe Amiri Baraka said something along those lines. There’s truth to that. But if your political/ethical imperative is to try to inform everyone of the political injustice around them, it’d be easier to do that without the artifice of making a claim with no substance simply to grab attention.

As per Silliman, I read the quote in a larger context, and I don’t know… I don’t see what’s so dismissive about it. Seems to me he’s pointing out a difference in the audience perception of these writers vs. the SWMs. Besides, what’s different about him using the word APPEARS vs. you using the word TENDS in your claim?

I think what L. said is close to the truth:

“Sorry, it reads less like any kind of serious statement and more like a knee jerk attempt to show how down with the people you are or something.”

And that’s fine. I can be rah rah viva la raza myself, but if I start saying that white people shouldn’t be proud of their heritage, I am cheapening my own. And I guess that’s where I take issue. When you make such a claim, you bring down yourself and anyone like you.

Ethical imperatives, like political beliefs, are subjective. If I have the political belief that one is innocent until proven guilty, then it is an ethical imperative for me to extend that belief to everyone, regardless of socio-political standing. Regardless of history. My ethics would demand that I NEVER compromise that belief by making exceptions.

A belief in the “politicality” of everything and an ethical adherence to it makes no sense to me. Politicality is too broad for me to attach ethics to it. But I can attach ethics to certain issues that are informed by my personal politics. That makes sense to me.

In my mind, George S. Schuyler is no less significant than James Baldwin or Richard Wright or Ralph Ellison simply because his politics were on the opposite end of the spectrum. The same with a writer like Ayn Rand versus some of my favorite soviet writers like Kollontai or Akhmatova.

Regarding your disagreement with me on quality, you make a point. There are qualities, as in, the content in someone’s writing, that can inform the reader of the writer’s race, gender, class, sexual orientation, etc. This could also apply to the reader. I believe Amiri Baraka said something along those lines. There’s truth to that. But if your political/ethical imperative is to try to inform everyone of the political injustice around them, it’d be easier to do that without the artifice of making a claim with no substance simply to grab attention.