User loginLive Discussions
Google search Most popular threads
Weekly Archives
Blog linksA Skeptical Blog |
We readMaye is innocent Tip jarFor entertainment onlyThe Public LibraryReality checksNews sourcesLink CollectionsDropping KnowledgeLibrary of Congress African American Odyssey Who's new
Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 5 guests online.
...Syndicate |
You think Rumsfeld is pissed at "Old Europe"?Submitted by Prometheus 6 on May 25, 2005 - 7:51am.
on Race and Identity UPDATE: I appreciate the traffic from Jesus' General, but the three comments I got so far today are making excuses for these assholes. If that's what you want to do, just move on.
There's something just fucking wrong with Germany. Something truly fucked up that I don't even want explained. Quote of note:
This via email. From: Norbert Finzsch [mailto:[email protected]] I am a German scholar of African American History and member of H-Net Afro-Am. Today I would like to direct your attention to something that is going on in Germany which, in my opinion, requires the consideration of the international scholarly community. It is with utmost indignation that the African German community has taken notice of the plans to open an "African Village" within the zoo of Augsburg, Germany. The opening of this exhibit is scheduled for July 9 - July 12. 2005. "Artisans, silversmiths, basket makers and traditional hairdressers are situated in an unique African steppe landscape" according to the leaflets handed out by the organizers of the show. The conveners obviously are oblivious of the fact that exhibits like the one planned in Augsburg are organized within the German tradition of racist "ethnographic shows" (Völkerschauen). A letter of reply by Ms. Barbara Jantschke, PhD, from the Augsburg Zoo, directed to an African Swiss citizen underlines the intention, to put Africans on display in the zoo within "an atmosphere of exotism". It is obvious that the conveners do not understand the historical implications of their project. Even in Germany the impact of colonialism and racism on African societies are nowadays debated in public. The way Africans and African Americans in Germany are perceived and discussed, the way they are present on billboards and in TV ads prove that the colonialist and |racist gaze is still very much alive in Germany. This is the direct result of forty years of German colonialism and twelve years of National Socialism. People of color are still seen as exotic objects (of desire), as basically dehumanized entities within the realm of animals. This also explains why a zoo has been selected as site for the exhibit. It is necessary to remind the organizers that in the history of "ethnographic shows" African and German African individuals were used as object for anthropometric tests and ethnological investigations of highly questionable scientific benefit. Many of the artists who performed in these shows in the 1920s and 1930s died from malnutrition and as a consequence of bad living conditions. The Nazis employed a policy of eugenic control, resulting in forced operations to limit the biological reproduction of African Germans or in downright incarceration in concentration camps. Survivors of this policy had to gain a living as performers in exotic shows. The Augsburg exhibit thus fails to acknowledge the political and social history of persecution in Nazi Germany. The African German community and concerned individuals like myself call to your attention the need to protest against the opening of the exhibit in the Augsburg Zoo. Please direct your personalized letters of protest to Frau Dr. Barbara Jantschke (Director Zoo Augsburg) at [email protected]. Thank you Norbert Finzsch Anglo-Amerikanische Abteilung Tel. ++49-221-470-2307 Am I the only one who smells a prank here? The description of the proposed "exhibit" sounds a lot like the Ota Benga exhibit from the 1904 St. Louis World's Fair. Not a prank, mayhaps, but perhaps a covert performance piece. There was something like this in this America about 10 years ago, where two actors pretending to be members of a tribe of a made-up island were toured around the country in a cage. The point is that the people coming to see it are not necessarily aware that it's a satire. The descriptions seem reminiscent of that. Your choice quote was doctored by Dr Finzsch (dr finch?) to incite anger. " to put Africans on display" ?? Note how the quotes indicating verbatim copying from the letter start after these words. More probably, the show is meant to put Africa on display. Literally putting Africans in zoo cages is utterly offensive, and mr snitch is all too happy to suggest that. Maybe, just maybe, this bears more resemblance to New York's Puerto Rican day than to what this finch suggests. Then again, maybe not. A zoo as the spot for this event seems at least less than fortunate. But I can think of at least one alternative explanation for this choice (apart from prof finch's dehumanization): only a zoo has the expertise to recreate that authentic landscape. why does this remind me of Epcot center? I mean, this is an exhibit to show how people in Africa live and they are trying to make it as real as possible. So, is this really any different than the 'disney' version of foreign countries seen in Epcot Center?
When you get evidence it's a performance piece, let me know. Until then, fuck them.
It worked. Fuck them.
And I can think of 15 that are worse. And it's IS Dr. Finzsch. You CAN read, right?
Yes.
It's totally different than Epcot, "Colonial Williamsburg," or even a getup down at the Mall of America. It's a zoo, and there's, you know, something of a history of Europeans considering the people of Africa to be less than human. That's the problem. It's all about context, not content, that makes it disturbing, wrong and ugly. And it makes no difference if the intent wasn't there--any less than, say, Prince whatever-his-name wearing the Nazi uniform--the context still contains the underlying history. Change the locale, and the context changes. I would like to annouce that I actually deleted a comment in this thread. No cuss words or nuthin (that wouldn't bother me anyway). Just the sort of excuse my addendum at the top of the post suggests you not leave.
I hope nobody I sent to your site posted anything offensive. Sometimes, my readers get carried away. Satire's hard to do right. If you're not careful, it can have the opposite effect of what you intended. I write it every day, and still screw it up on occassion. It was very hard for me to figure out how to write something from the General's perspective. I wanted my readers to see your post, but I didn't want to write about it in a way that dismissed the enormity of the Zoo's offence. This is inexcusable. It can't be justified as an educationally-oriented portrayal of Africans. The man in Durban shares only his race with the Kahlahari Bushman. The traditional Masai man has little in common with the traditional Hutu. The mere fact that these people think that they can depict African life by showing a single African villiage is racist in itself. The fact that it's in a zoo is unconscienable and hardly needs further explanation. What in God's name are they thinking. Don't worry. You sent more traffic today than I see in a week nowadays and the worst I got was the three I actually published. I just ran out of patience and realized that none of them would have commented if they thought I'd delete their comments. So I nailed the next one, which was actually kind of tame next to "BA Baracus," who felt he could tell the good Doctor whose email I quoted directly, he had misspelled his own name. That's what ended my patience. That's why I mentioned the deletion...and I've gotten no one defending this crap since. Truth, though...these three guys could easily be regulars of yours that agree with you entirely. I will never forget being called a racist on a progressive site, though everyone (and I mean EVERYONE) else on the site jumped up and down on the boy's head. Then again, they could be regulars of mine, who have been waiting to see me gainsayed on racial issues...there are a few such. The race thing is difficult and always will be. I have to be ready if that's the issue I'm dealing with. And even if they did come from your site, I know who is to blame.
When you get evidence it's a performance piece, let me know. Until then, fuck them. Touche, Prometheus. It just strikes me as so ridiculous, even in the most provincial districts of Germany. But I guess one should never underestimate the utter depths of stupidity and lack of humanity people may sink to. I hope it's a performance piece. It would sure make me feel a lot better about humanity. You know what? You're right, and I was wrong. This story threw so many levels of disbelief at me, that it took me longer to process it than it took me to score a few cheap, technical points. My apologies. A race of people should never be the subject of a zoo exposition, and here they are. That's a very hard reality to accept. If you're versed in German, you can read Ms Jantschke's letter at http://www.lifeinfo.de/inh1./texte/aktuelle_news14.html#Atmosphäre : it's definitely not a performance piece, these people are serious. Apology accepted. I LIVE in those levels of disbelief, by the way. All Black people do, which is one reason I'm more tolerant of Black Conservatives than most Black progressives. I've seen this crap make people's heads explode. Hi, I am a german anthropology student and also complained about the idea from the zoo of Augsburg the Ethno::log, the worlds first weblog for cultural anthropology: http://sonner.antville.org/stories/1131075/ But there are some things to put right, the case is not that easy to judge. First of all, they don't show africans in cages. There are the so called "African Weeks" in this region of germany, and insitutions of the city take part in this, under others also the zoo. As Mike pointed out, the zoo is definitly not the place for this, but this is due to historical reasons. Its about context, not content, as Fred said. But from the view of a cultural scientist the most interesting thing is the fact, that the show is organised together with an african who organised similar events on other places and he was very fond of this place. And many africans living in germany, which sell craftwork from africa asked to have a booth at this event. So they are far less concerned with the location. So, first of all, we have to accept, that this is a discourse about a historical implication in a western society. It has only in a historical sense to do with africans. We should not think that in this case we have to protect africans against beeing displayed at the zoo, for that we are 100 years too late. People who do that are overcomen by rousseau'ish sensibilité, and thats not much better. The other problem I have with this is, is the stress on showing people in their natural surrounding, this adresses an old prejudice that those people are more bond to nature than we are. And the "exotism" the event serves.
We agree the zoo is not the place for this. So why is it in the zoo? Do you realize this single question makes everything that follows either irrelevant or a matter of details?
Now this African, having built a display that shows Africa in a positive light...we agree there's no problem with the content...consider it from his position. Do you think a person who sees Africa in a positive light would approve of the context if he were aware of it? I'm sure no one told him, "Oh yes, we used to put Africans on display in the zoo all the time. No, it wasn't a special thing like this, it's just where we thought Africans were best displayed. You have to admit, we're displaying them pretty well this time, right?" Is there any reason this particular aspect of the festival had to be in a zoo? I don't think so.
I don't blame them. They came to Germany pretty much knowing the deal, for economic benefit. They probably figured they might as well make some money since you're doing it anyway. Plus, they're actually part of the show, aren't they?
Based on the information we have here, we're only a couple of weeks too late.
Okay, well, there's not much that leaves me gaping, but this is one. I mean, just the sheer... the sheer... uh... Well, I don't know. Is this person actually clueless about the amount of insensitivity he's displaying here? Distinctly possible. I've met people like that. But not likely. And if not, the sheer BALLS on this fellow would leave me quite breathless, if I were inclined in that direction. 'Oh and by the way as part of the zoo we'll be displaying Africans. I'm sure this will generate plenty of publicity.' Now, actually, if he were to come out and say, 'oh, and we'll also be showing examples of indiginous villiages from all the other continents, including a couple places in Europe' then it probably wouldn't bother me. Okay, a zoo is probably not the best place, but I can think of worse, and if a zoo has the space and the money, then it'd be neat. But the way it is, it's hard to read this as anything other than racism of the ugliest variety. (Well, maybe the second-ugliest, since no one is actually being murdered and/or enslaved.)
Incidentally, when I saw this,
Dr Finzsch (dr finch?)
I instantly assumed that he was asking if 'Finch' was a correct translation of 'Finzsch'. Is that not what was meant?
-fred (no, not the same fred)
If it were, he would have referred to the good Doctor by his actual name for the rest of his comment.
Whoever thinks that I "doctored" anything or whoever questions the authenticity of my quotes, please visit my website under http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/histsem/anglo/ Best Norbert Finzsch AND: Finzsch does not mean "finch" Well, you see you got top billing here, Dr. Finzsch. Unfortunately, my typically American provinciality means I can't read German... Interestingly, the Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle opened the first part of its “African Village” to coincide with Black History Month in 2001. “The village celebrates African culture and the country’s wildlife…the exhibit will immerse visitors in a representation of a rural village in East Africa...” reads the press release, which lists appearances by various African-American and African artists as well as crafts, dancing, music, storytelling and puppet performances. You have a point? Sure. You wrote at the beginning of this thread "..there's something just fucking wrong with Germany. Something truly fucked up that I don't even want explained" I pointed out that an "African village" (costing 2 million dollars from public funds & Bill Gates) was created in a US zoo, not in 1900 but barely four years ago, at the beginning of *this* century. Not worthy of any comment or reflection? Really? There may also be another meta-narrative at work in the Augsburg case. The original call receives worldwide press attention. The "concerned individual" - Norbert the "Good German" - rescues the African German community from evil racists; a Schindler for the 21st century. Too far-fetched? Perhaps. What do you think? My point - in case it's misunderstood - is not that the criticism of the zoo is unjustified. The zoo director had not thought about the contradictions of the location, and was clearly unaware of the issues around exotism. This needed to be challenged and debated. OTOH Professor Finzsch, who is clearly well-versed in the issues, knows very well not only *what* he is saying, but *how* he is saying it. His rhetoric, originally addressed to "the international scholarly community", ends up as an urban legend on the internet where Africans are put on display in a German zoo in 2005. Look at all the blogs and websites which present this condensed version, complete with swastika. And that's not just the blogs - check out the English version of Spiegel online for a simplistic, crude summary of the issue. The opportunity of using this incident to raise awareness of racism and colonialism appears to have been buried, in Germany at least. Time to reflect, Professor?
No, it's not worthy of comment, other than stating it's an attempt at deflecting the discussion. I have several hundred posts, at least, pointing out there's something fucked up abot the USofA...I just live here and so don't need it explained.
Then don't lead with anything that even needs explanation. You'll notice my point is obvious from the first sentence.
I noticed that. It was very well done...correct information that invoked the correct moral abhorance of the display. Or, to quote my first response to thie suggestion you repeat: Your choice quote was doctored by Dr Finzsch (dr finch?) to incite anger. It worked.
It is telling that pointing out the racism and colonialist, in Germany, is cause to reject discussion of the racism and colonialism. How very...American. And you think Dr Finzsch is responsible for that. You know, there's something fucked up about Germany. Something I don't even want explained.
"...an attempt at deflecting the discussion"? Aha. So you *really* can't see a connection? Sure, then best to ignore it. You do say you don't want it explained. It's your blog, after all. Professor Dr Finzsch may not be responsible for the whole debate, but he has played a not insignificant role in the way it has polarized. In the meantime there are legal moves to censure, possibly remove the zoo director from her job. Remember that the Prof. is not simply a "concerned individual" but a tenured academic who sets off a chain explosion in the English-speaking world, knowing very well that the majority who read it do not have enough command of German to access the original sources. "How very ...American?" Well, you're certainly the best judge of that as I'm neither American, nor German. Still pissed at Old Europe? :-)
I haven't seen you make a connection, no. And since my only responsibility is to make sure my own points are sound, making other connections is the responsibility of the person who wants that connection made.
One can be a concerned individual and an academic at the same time. One would hope people are concerned irrespective of their job description. Send me a translation of the original sources, and I'll post it.
Consider yourself judged. Perhaps you'll pass these translations from the paper in Augsburg. If so, please leave the paragraphs intact. [The Great and Powerful Oz: Perhaps.] [The Great and Powerful Oz: My, my, my. Two sentences. I AM impressed.] Here's a post that spells out the connection you were missing between the current debate and "African villages" in zoos in the US (please format link as appropriate) So your problem is you think we're being unfair to Germany? Heh. In here, the United States of America gets cut less slack on its racial issues than Germany. I don't try to make each post a treatise on every extant issue, is all. Here, in this thread, the issue is the Augsberg Zoo.
I have too much experience with the Southern Strategy to assume ignorance on the part of highly educated people like the director of the zoo. Especially in the person's field of expertise.
That's what we're doing. At best you want it handled in genteel fashion. Sorry. By the way, that's the mailing list through which I got the email I posted, so I've seen that post. Matt: Obviously I don't feel the need to accept personal insults, however subtle. |
|
|
||
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Germany as a whole. I had the same views about Krautheads at one time, but realized I couldn't really stereotype an entire country, including Germany, without being guilty of the same type of prejudiced thinking that I was trying to call out. This does seem very fucked up, though. Even if they intended it as some sort of cross cultural exchange, a ZOO is obviously not the place, and "African Village" sure sounds like an "ethnographic show" as described.
http://www.zoo-augsburg.de/htm/content9.htm
http://babelfish.altavista.com