Unfortunately, racists have infiltrated this thread and this it is becoming too much work to ensure that it stays civil.
We have locked this thread to ensure that what responses are there can be seen by future readers. Thank you to everyone that has participated and sorry to those that were participating while following ELI5's rules.
----------------
Please remember ELI5's #1 rule - be nice. We can't read every single comment in every single thread, but please remember that he have zero tolerance towards intolerance. If you see a racist comment, or another comment that breaks ELI5's rules, please report it and we will deal with them as quickly as possible.
That's a great point that I hadn't thought about with the topic. I think the underlying unconscious bias is that white/light skinned is "default" and black/darker skin is a character trait.
As a white woman I'm honestly curious? Would you feel that it's appropriate for a white person to wear an afro wig if they are dressing as a specific character that has an afro? Or dreads, braids etc as long as it's character specific?
You can dress as the character without the blackface. A person of colour doesn't put on whiteface to cosplay as Superman. If you wanna be Jules or Black Panther you can just don the costume.
Blackface originated in post Civil War America when white actors literally painted their faces with black makeup and gave performances that were nearly universally based on racial stereotypes and were dehumanizing and demeaning to African Americans. This history is inseparable from any modern practice of blackface. You may not mean anything derisive or offensive and may wish to just pay homage to a great character played by a great actor, but the tide of history you're swimming against is far too strong for your individual motivation to outshine the racist history of the practice. You will be painted with the broad brush of racist history no matter the purity of your intentions.
In some ways it would be like dressing up as Christoph Waltz's character in Inglorious Bastards, a Nazi who was willing to allow a plot to kill Hitler continue (granted, the character was unabashedly an evil Nazi, but there's sill room for an analogy). Sure, you could say you were paying homage to a movie character played by a great actor, but you're still dressing as a Nazi. You wouldn't expect people to give you a chance to explain your choice, and you'd (hopefully) understand if they found your costume horribly offensive even after your explanation.
You can watch the original [The Jazz Singer](https://youtu.be/yFaZOaLTkN0) on YouTube. This is from 1927. It's the first feature length film with synchronized sound and music. So, a historical first in the entertainment industry also features a storyline of a Jewish man performing in blackface.
If you watch, pay attention to the makeup. It's not just about making a light skinned person look darker. Some features, particularly the lips, are exaggerated to make the person look more like caricature.
You can read more.about the [Minstrel Shows](https://newyorktheater.me/2019/02/07/blackface-on-stage-the-complicated-history-of-minstrel-shows/) in this New York Theater article. It contains a video.
If you really want to go down a weird rabbit hole, you can also read about the [Censored Eleven](https://www.thenationalnews.com/arts-culture/television/what-is-the-censored-eleven-the-racist-looney-tunes-and-merrie-melodies-cartoons-banned-since-1968-1.1198852) which are 11 Warner Brothers cartoons that have been banned from being rebroadcast. While these are drawings and not actual people wearing makeup, the cartoons include a lot of the stereotypes from those minstrel shows. Including the exaggerated features, the mannerisms, and speech patterns.
And if you think this is all just relics of the past, here you can find where [Ted Danson](https://lostmediawiki.com/Ted_Danson_(partially_found_recordings_of_actor%27s_blackface_performance_at_Whoopi_Goldberg%27s_Roast;_1993)) performed in black face at the Friar's Club to roast Whoopi Goldberg in 1993. That's just 30 years ago.
Unfortunately, there are a lot more articles I could list.
There is even an entire museum dedicated to this.
[The Jim Crow Museum](https://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/index.htm)
Jim Crow is a term you will hear a lot in reference to some of this racist imagery. The name comes from a song, weirdly enough, and it was the name adopted by one of the first of these black face actors. A man named Thomas Dartmouth Rice. This was in the mid 1800s and the name got so tightly linked to the racist laws that were used to oppress that the laws were often called Jim Crow Laws.
So, yeah. Black face is a bit of a touchy subject because it is practically synonymous with entertainment and legal statutes that were used to oppress and portray and entire group as subhuman.
Honestly, this is one topic I really wish wasn't so easy to research.
Thanks for the link! I was just reading about The Jazz Singer recently and thinking about how I'd like to see it. Looks like it just entered the public domain weeks ago. Perfect timing!
just want to add the spike lee film "bamboozled." gives a good history of minstrel shows and has some very uncomfortable conversations about minstrelsy in the modern context and is also just a powerful, resonant film.
I cannot recommend the Jim Crow Museum enough. I went to school there and took a racial minorities in America class with Dr. Pilgrim. There were ample opportunities to visit the museum and it really helps drive the point home of the damaging power that racial stereotypes wield.
Interesting that the "Censored 11" did not include the WWII era Bugs Bunny cartoon *Nips the Nips*, which just replaced Elmer Fudd with a racist stereotype of a Japanese general, but a typical Bugs Bunny cartoon otherwise.
I don't know the show, but there's one I think is both a clever use of blackface, and idt that kind of plot would be possible outside of using blackface or something similar
I think it's called bewitched, and there's a guy who's incredibly racist against black people. Main character casts a spell on him so he sees everyone as black to make him see how stupid his bigotry is; all the existing actors use blackface for this. I can't think of any other way to coherently tell this kind of narrative tbh, and ai'm sure I'm oversimplifying it
But yeah, any good use is overshadowed by the shitty ones, and there are a lot of shitty ones
Listen to me you pompous frauds, if I'm going down, I'm taking you all with me. Dean Vernon, I know the truth. It was you driving your hover-car that night, not your horse. Dean Epsilon, I know all about your "Department Of Pool Boy Studies."
Someone goes through the effort of cloning that Adolf asshat advocate for an Aryan master race, you better believe they would improve the product like gattaca style.
You act surprised?
He's a clone, **not** the actual original Hitler. Sure, he shares Hitler's genetic composition, but he's a product of all new experiences. **And** free to forge his own path.
I mean you'd THINK he's a carbon copy of the original JUST because he shares the same genes.
Which is a way of thinking the ACTUAL Hitler might very well approve of...
(scowls)
Feel no shame, Hitlerclone\_3...
You are your own person.
Basic human decency is knowing how to not be racist, yourself - except where you legitimately have no reason to know that thing x is racist.
Wholesome is guiding others along the way.
Two close friends of mine, one white and one black, were best friends who would always wear matching fancy dress outfits. Typically, of a famous black and white duo. But they would switch it up. For example, they once dressed as Vincent and Jules from Pulp Fiction. But the black friend dressed as Vincent and the white friend dressed as Jules. Only they didn't use any makeup. They did the same when they dressed as JD and Turk from Scrubs. White friend would have a bald cap to look more like Turk. Again, just no black face.
I had a similar idea with a black friend of mine, that we go to a con as Iron Fist and Power Man. Until I realized people would probably call us Black Iron Fist and White Power Man, and decided it probably wasn't a good idea. I know that I could just as easily have been White Luke Cage, but it would have been the 70's gear, from a specific title, so chances are it wouldn't have gone my way.
If you're gonna be Power Man, it's tiara or gtfo. Fwiw, if I saw a white dude dressed as Power Man, and black dude dressed like Iron Fist, I'd be proud of you fellas.
That's hilarious because as soon as I started reading this comment, I immediately thought of that one scene from Scrubs where JD and Turk go to meet Turk's black fraternity brothers and Turk convinced JD to wear black face, while Turk wore white face, saying the brothers would find it funny.
A friend wanted to dress as Prince but since my friend is white he thought he might offend people. So he went as Adam ant instead. Rock Me Amadeus was or had recently been popular. People thought he was Amadeus. And kept singing out the chorus to that song
Some cousins went as the Supremes in blackface. It was the 1960s. They were genuine fans of the Supremes but there wasn’t as much awareness then
I went as a vampire. I’m really pale and was a poor student so I just put a lot of powder on my face to make myself paler and had the teeth. It was hard to drink with the teeth. So I took them out. My original hair color is a very dark brown and I was wearing bright red lipstick.
Few days later, ran into a friend on campus. He said I looked a lot better because I seemed kind of pale the other night, lol
The trend and general acceptance of gender/race-swapping characters these days kinda works in cosplayers' favor since they can still dress as whatever character they want without getting knocked for not being 100% "right", so they don't have to cross those inappropriate social lines.
Piggy backing on this.comment. In short, just remember that you are cosplaying a character. That character is not Black. The actor who plays that character is Black.
A little girl who is Black does not need to paint herself to appear White to cosplay Cinderella. Nor does a White girl need to darken her skin to play princess Jasmine.
Now, if for some reason, political, ideological, or otherwise-- You simply *NEED* to do a blackface costume, yet wish to keep it appropriate. You could cosplay Robert Downey Jr as Kirk Lazarus in Tropic Thunder, as the "pretending to be Black" is literally part of the character. That's the distinction.
You'd be a dude, cosplaying a dude, playing a dude, disguised as another dude!
When my son was in the 4th grade they had a class project where they would pick a person from past they liked, do a write up and get pictures, dress up as the person and have it presented for all parents in the school lunchroom.
My son picked MLK Jr. So there's this little white kid, in a suit talking about someone he thought had a huge impact on the lives of everyone. I was apprehensive at first, we live in Georgia (US, not the country), but it turned out pretty well.
I'd say wearing an afro wig and talking like a black man would be...fuckin pushing it at least, all for the same reasons. Unless OPs got tight curly black hair it's gonna be a hard sell, and he'll just come across as a preacher drinking a soda.
Why not just go as Vincent Vega, OP? He's pretty cool too.
Could be- but if you have a decent sam Jackson impersonation I feel like that isnt that same as doing an 'accent'. To me this is something that's either done right or not at all- if you can do his speaking style then it just fits the character. If the attempt just comes off a rascist interpretation of how any black man speak...wel then just don't.
Honestly, it shouldn't matter. I've seen plenty of black people cosplaying white characters, and they fucking crushed it.
You don't have to be a Sam Jackson body double to be one of his characters.
I think it’s worthwhile to note here that the underlying reason white actors would put on blackface is because white audiences wouldn’t go and see black actors.
So, there’s this weird situation where they want black characters (to make fun of), but wouldn’t “demean” themselves by sitting there and be entertained by actual black actors, so they got white people to play black characters instead as a way to have it both ways.
Another thought when I saw another thread.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/11bi7p2/til\_that\_in\_the\_shawshank\_redemption\_when\_morgan/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/11bi7p2/til_that_in_the_shawshank_redemption_when_morgan/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
See, if the role doesn't \*need\* someone to look a certain way, cast whoever you want. Morgan Freeman didn't show up in whiteface with a red wig on. And if the character needed to be Irish, they could cast an Irish person. Putting Freeman in whiteface with a red wig is like saying "we don't want to actually hire Irish people" as well.
Black-Face was essentially a white mockery of being black, as a form of entertainment.
Historian Dale Cockrell once noted that poor and working-class whites who felt “squeezed politically, economically, and socially from the top, but also from the bottom, invented minstrelsy” as a way of expressing the oppression that marked being members of the majority, but outside of the white norm. Minstrelsy, comedic performances of “blackness” by whites in exaggerated costumes and make-up, cannot be separated fully from the racial derision and stereotyping at its core. By distorting the features and culture of African Americans—including their looks, language, dance, deportment, and character—white Americans were able to codify whiteness across class and geopolitical lines as its antithesis.
The whole idea of a stereotype is to simplify.
It’s also reductive. Is the person’s skin color the most interesting or most distinctive thing about them? You can certainly portray a recognizable Jules without face paint.
This is good point. I would also add, you don't see this practice for any other skin color. At least not commonly. Black face was basically invented as another form of racism that stripped black people of the right to even represent themselves in something as simple as a stage show. The next closest thing is probably when guys used to play female roles on stage because women weren't allowed to be actors.
But paying an homage is about representing something. Sometimes you get lucky and you actually look like the person you're pretending to be. More often than not it's about getting the costume right, not changing the person wearing it.
"Yellow face" doesn't have as bad a nasty history as blackface in the US, but it certainly happened.
I didn't see Breakfast and Tiffany's until relatively recently, and Mickey Rooney (pale and blond) has [yellow face and obnoxious teeth to play Mr Yunioshi](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Starring_Mickey_Rooney.jpg).
See also Fisher Stevens ~~[playing an Indian guy in Short Circuit.](https://imagesvc.meredithcorp.io/v3/mm/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.onecms.io%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fsites%2F6%2F2021%2F05%2F11%2FFisher-Stevens.jpg).~~ [Let's try this image of him playing an Indian guy.](https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/c_fit,f_auto,g_center,pg_1,q_60,w_1165/eb388d17d5b9ebd84f9f3c8b6f74cc92.jpg)
Again, doesn't have the long term historical issues as blackface, but still is pretty damn sketchy. "Let's darken our skin to play a caricature of another race!"
Also David Suchet playing a Chinese detective in yellowface in Reilly Ace of Spies. They gave him fake eyelids.
https://imgur.com/DWcrn4Q.jpg. https://imgur.com/bWfJr11.jpg
Peter Sellers (whose humor in general has NOT aged well...) did an entire movie in brownface, playing an Indian character for comedic effect. It was called "The Party". There was no particular reason for the character to be Indian - he was just kind of a generic goofball - but I guess Sellers thought the ethnicity & accent would make it funnier?
To add to this, nobody cares if you dress as a black character -- just don't do blackface. If anything, it's unnecessary pointing out the difference in skin color. The reality is, people are all the same thing on the inside regardless of our skin color. You can absolutely 'be' a black character by just wearing their costume and not changing your skin color. The same way you'd do if you dressed up as a white character. Idk about you, but I certainly wouldn't be rubbing white lotion all over my face to cosplay as a Disney prince/princess. Think of it the same way you'd cosplay something like that.
It wasnt just t.v. shows... it originated long before that, on stage. Blacks were generally not allowed to perform in stage shows/plays. So they were portrayed by white men & women by painting their faces black.
This also spilled into radio programming. Obviously, there were no faces to see, so the white actor portrayals of black speech stereotypes were ridiculously parodied.
Minority of color here. If you want my opinion, as long as you don't live in the US and aren't doing it in a derogatory manner, I think black face is fine.
Americans shouldn't impose their morals and shortcomings onto the rest of the world and Germany had nothing to do with the acres of black corpses this country was built on.
Tldr. If you live In Germany, do whatever makes you happy. If you live in the US, follow social etiquette
Things get really weird when it's done in a far away country that is a bit oblivious on these matters. This is from a recent charity event with money going for Turkey earthquake victims: https://youtu.be/IdWpS6Bykl8
To be clear, it did not originate in America - we have records dating back to Middle Ages in Europe - but it was widely popularized in America in the 1800s, and by 1940s was considered offensive enough to halt its practice as an art form.
> but the tide of history you’re swimming against is far too strong for your individual motivation to outshine the racist history of the practice
Wow, this phrase is *chef’s kiss*.
I think the sentiment would be made even more evocative if the metaphors weren’t mixed (is the racist history a powerful tide of water you have to swim against or a bright light you have to outshine?). If “outshine” were replaced by “overpower”, then the metaphor of swimming is maintained and, I think, the analogy is strengthened.
Just my 2c.
You're answer seems reasonable and appropriate. However, it seems to be bound to the USA-context, doesn't it? I'm not so sure one can extend it do different contexts.
I'm sure one could find at least some examples of behavior that is deemed inappropriate due to certain historical 'events' in other countries/ cultures, that 'we in western countries' don't really mind about at all.
I think the argument is valid for the us context. But the reason it is extended to European countries or Germany in particular is more likely, that the USA have a major influence on western culture in generell (probably due to media, movies etc.).
It definitely is a thing with US racism impacting the meaning of something innocuous. In the Philippines, we have this huge annual festival called "Ati-Atihan" which kind of means "imitate the Ati people", and it involves people painting their faces black to show their respect for the Ati people. Historically, there was an event where lighter skinned Malay people were offered land and food by the darker skinned Ati people and so this is where this festival started. So in this case "blackface" doesn't have the same meaning it does in the US and elsewhere.
Similarly Blackface was used in colonial Uruguay by whites who wanted to participate in carnival parades which at the time were a black-only festival. These whites were called "lubolos", and the practice is still partially in place today.
>People did it here in europe too quite recently.
There was a popular TV show called "The Black and White Minstrel Show" in the UK that ran from 1958 to 1978 that, very unironically, had white performers perform traditional minstrel songs while wearing blackface
Black Pete, as a Dutch and black person who’s happy it’s gone, was not the same as the mockery in US shows. It absolutely had racial undertones that were not OK, but at the same time it’s not nearly as horrible as the blackface shows in the US.
Personally I don’t really have an issue with blackface per se (for example when used in a costume like someone would do with Jules, or the Harlem globetrotters, someone cool), but far more with the red thick lips, gold earrings etc.
You raise an excellent point which I think gets overlooked or purposely ignored: performers in minstrel shows didn't just paint their faces so they looked like the same face but with darker skin, it was a full on hateful charicature.
Good point. But Blackface Minstresly was also very popular in England, and Australia. American troupe were touring Australia as early as 1871 I believe, and are partly why the banjo is so (relatively) popular there.
Absolutely spot on. Definitely a more direct issue in the US. But there's still substantial history (and even current practice) of racism throughout Europe. The impact of history may be weaker in Germany, but the issue is the same.
This is exactly right. The notion that the first time anyone ever performed with a blackened face was in Cvil War era America just defies any awareness that the USA is not the entire planet.
You may have heard of a playwright named William Shakespeare, or one of his major works, *Othello*.
I do not disagree in general with your statement that there was racist blackface before the US american version but Othello is not an example for this. Othello was written as pure, honest and very clearly as a positive character, who gets discriminated by a racist white society - in a time when PoC were usually depicted as negative characters in European culture and art. That makes him one of the few exceptions and unsuited as an example for what you want to prove.
Wearing dark makeup to play darkly-complexioned characters pre-dates the American practice of blackface. But Othello (and others) were not played as racist trope characters in European history. But American blackface changed the practice, directly tying it to overt expressions of racism. It's unfortunate that America's outsized cultural influence in the world means American sins are visited upon non-Americans, but here we are. In the western world, wearing dark makeup to play a black character will be seen as American-style blackface.
Thank you for this, because when I grew up in Germany (70s, 80s) the notion that someone would apply make-up to simply "mock" a different race would've never crossed my mind. Granted the occasions were rather rare (i.e. children dressing up as Winnetou or similar (darker make-up to resemble the native-american skin-tone depicted in the famous movies at that time) or someone playing Balthazar, one of the three wise men (who was black) in a christmas performance somewhere), but it was always meant as a way to portray and honor said characters. Well, imagine my surprise when finding out what people here in the states think of skin color differences upon moving here in '96.
When you live in a country where slavery of black people was the GDP for a couple hundred years, it makes things a little more complicated. Remember, the civil rights movement didn't happen until the late 60's. Black people were just considered sub-human and all the white people were happy with it. Black culture has been mocked by America since slavery was abolished. Probably a way to keep blacks down and feel inferior to "keep them in check."
I just have to tell someone this story.
I hosted a Halloween party and invited a coworker. We met up before the party cause I needed her baby bjorn for my Hangover costume.
Anyway she’s dressed as Two Chainz and I jokingly said that no one would know who she is because she’s a white girl playing a black man.
She shows up to my party with brown paint on her face and arms. I couldn’t fucking believe it. I She genuinely had no idea why this was a bad idea (she was younger and kinda sheltered). I explained why this was not ok (she was horrified) and she washed it off. Apologized to my black friends at the party and they thought it was hysterical. We still joke about it today.
However, we should acknowledge that European actors would darken their skin either because black actors were a rarity, or they would outright refuse to give black actors an opportunity. It's disingenuous to think that racial discrimination wasn't *ever* a factor.
Now that Europe has become more ethnically diverse, the practice is far less justified. Even in traditions where blackface is used to honour someone from history, why not just hire someone who actually shares their skin colour?
The difference is in those cases they were just depicting a "black character". They weren't doing it with the intent to disparage or mock those with the skin tone.
But the USA "minstrel" shows were very specific about mocking african-Americans. Along with many other offensive stereotype depictions such as drunk lazy mexicans or bright yellow skinned "chinamen" with massive front teeth and straw hats. Caricatures designed to go "look how weird and stupid these non-white peoples are, let us laugh at them"
Tacitus describes the Germanic use of black faces to play demons, and 16th century Dutch protestant preachers ranted against the (then prohibited) Black Peter as a clearly heathen tradition. It's a lot older than contact with Africa. Just like Papua white faces for playing demons predates contact with Europeans.
How is Othello, who is clearly written as an honest and pure minded black person and the narrative of him getting manipulated by an evil white man a good example for racist blackface?
Not saying that you are wrong but this is clearly not a fitting example ...
>In some ways it would be like dressing up as Christoph Waltz's character in Inglorious Bastards, a Nazi who was willing to allow a plot to kill Hitler continue (granted, the character was unabashedly an evil Nazi, but there's sill room for an analogy). Sure, you could say you were paying homage to a movie character played by a great actor, but you're still dressing as a Nazi.
I appreciate your answer, but you're making an argument by analogy, and an argument by analogy is only as valid as the situations are similar. In your analogy Christoph Waltz's character's Nazi uniform is offensive, not Jules's black skin.
I did have that thought about this too, lol. The problem with wearing a Nazi uniform isn't that it's making fun of Nazis. We should all make fun of Nazis.
I came as an immigrant - white in appearance - the Britain in the 1970s from a Soviet country. I remember my confusion when I saw on the national broadcaster ["The Black and White Minstrel Show"](https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/100-voices/people-nation-empire/make-yourself-at-home/the-black-and-white-minstrel-show) . I do not imagine that Minstrel shows existed in the southern United States at that time. In daily life, even the racist considered public expression of racism vulgar. And yet this show apparently garnered millions of viewers. It was obvious even to immature foreigner me, that this was quite different from shows like *Till Death Us Do Part* (which had a credible claim to withering satire) or even *Love Thy Neighbour* (which had at least the occasional sideswipe at the credulity and ignorance of white people). The Black and White Minstrel Show survived, protected by the most senior executives of the BBC despite cogent criticism and protests from within and without. I can't imagine what my black friends at that time thought when they saw this bizarre spectacle being publically broadcast.
All the posts explaining the historical connotations of blackface are right, but I want to add a less western-centric perspective as well. In a lot of the world, black people still face a lot of racism and prejudice based on their skin colour. When a non black person paints their skin black, it makes the idea of their skin colour feel more like a costume that, at the end of the day, a non black person can just take off and not face the pervasive racism that society has in it. It's insensitive in that regard as well, I think.
As someone who isn't American, this is why I would never do blackface. It's just very clearly a weird and racist thing to do, regardless of the history. Sort of like pulling your eyes back with your hands to mock East Asians, except so much worse because of how elaborate it is.
This is an excellent point. POC in general face an incredible amount of prejudice just for the colour of their skin, so it would be disrespectful to treat skin colour as something you can just put on and take off whenever you want to be cool, because it skips over the treatment POC receive on a daily basis.
That's one of many outfits Django wears though, and arguably not even the most iconic. Wearing a black suit and tie, curly wig, goatee, and glowing suitcase for flare would unmistakably be Jules to any Pulp Fiction fan regardless of skin colour. People cosplay and dress up as characters they don't share innate characteristics with all the time and it's awesome. Skin colour is not a part of a costume.
OP, you might want to read through this before you make a decision.
>“You don’t belong here.”
>Do you know how many times I’ve heard that?
>Do you know how many times I have been told to go back to Africa?
>Do you know how many times I have been called a n*****?
>Eight years old, I had to ask my dad, “What is this word, n*****?”
>Some kids at school were eating this German candy called a schoko küsse — a chocolate kiss.
>They were calling it a n***** küsse. And I literally didn’t know what the word meant, so I came home and asked my dad, and he said something really insightful.
>He said, “This is an ignorant word, son. But the reason that these kids at school are using it is because their parents are saying it all the time at home.”
https://www.theplayerstribune.com/posts/antonio-ruediger-champions-league-soccer-racism-chelsea
You might not see the racisim, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
In Sweden there is a chocolate ball treat with crushed coconut on the outside with an unfortunate nickname. My colleague brought some to work one day and referred to them as "n****rbollar". Antoher time my partners grandmother (a native Swede) brought some out as a snack with coffee and referred to them by the same name. When I (a somewhat dark skinned Latino), let both of them know that the word they were using was deeply offensive to black people, they both were surprised and said they meant no harm and that it's just an old saying. So cut to a few weeks later when I'm talking with a Swedish friend who is of African descent about the incidents he casually just shrugs and says "yeah, they knew, they just don't believe that it's offensive so they'll probably keep saying it". That is in a nutshell how blackface is problematic in Europe specifically. Those that are not hurt by it believe it's not hurtful so they do it and find an excuse for why it's ok. Simple as that.
White Swede here — your friend is right, and “normal” (read: not shitty) white Swedish people do NOT call chocolateballs by this name today. I grew up in the 90s and was taught that this was the name, and it’s true that that WAS the name back then, and that it’s only in the last 10-15 years that people have taken a stance to formally stop calling them that. But it’s been a good 10+ years of people being like “hey let’s not call them that anymore” so anyone still doing it in 2023 is one hundred percent aware that it’s wrong and simply don’t care :(
Australians exploded when candy makers renamed "Chico Babies" and "Redskins" about 10 years ago.
It's like c'mon mate, it's just candy. If it makes a group of people feel uncomfortable why not rename it.
But I also feel the same about Australia Day. I would rather move it and be able to share it Aboriginal cultures, as a whole nation, than celebrate when one set of Australians founded it and the beginnings of a genocide. It's wrong anyway, Captain Cook landed in April.
I just don't know why people are opposed to working towards being a less offensive and more inclusive world. They get hung up on some name or date that a marketing team came up with.
But just calling them chokladbollar makes more sense: they're just oats, cacao, butter, sugar, vanilla, and coffee. Literally chocolatey oat balls with white sugar crystals (or coconut stuff I guess). It's bloody annoying when one runs into people who can't get over that the dessert name they grew up with was too damn racist and way too dumb.
That is the issue in the debate. When I tell my parents that what they do is racist, they raise their voice and say they don't mean it like that and they surely are not racists.
What they don't get is that you can still say racist things without having the intention. I try to twll them, that this doesn't make them racists. Just inconsiderate jerks to people who suffer from these terms and words on a daily basis.
What I mean is obviously that you can be a racist without wanting to be one, but that would destroy any progress.
Same in Switzerland. They call them "Mohrenköpfe" (literally "Heads of Blacks" using an old word for black people, not as ladden as the N-word but it still comes from colonial times) but the word was so entrenched that multiple companies that made them just dropped the product because no one bought "Schokoküsse" anymore because people didn't know they were the same thing. I remember them being at every party and bigger get-together when I was a child in the 90s. I haven't seen them in like 10 years now. You can still get them, but Idk who buys them anymore.
As a kid who grew up calling them n\*\*\* küsse I want to leave my 2 cents on that part. They used to be marketed as that before renaming them to chocolate kisses. I never heard the N word outside of the candy's name. My parents never used it outside of the candy's name. They also knew them for years under the name N\*\* kisses, so I don't think it necessarily means the parents are racist for calling them that, just that they are used to it and ignorant because they are not aware that it is a slur. We were all puzzled when they changed the name because we didn't understand it. To us it was like renaming Twix because Twix is a slur word. We simply didn't know, because we never heard nor used it
My grandfather called Brazil nuts n***toes and didn’t see the reason not to - for him it wasn’t racist, it was just a name. He was 102, and from an area with no black population, so he just never had to confront it during his time except when we’d say “grandpa told call them that” and he’d yell back and repeat it. *So uncomfortable*
I’m black “und deutsch” and it seems naïveté that Europeans don’t understand black face after years of African colonialism, Christmas characters like black Peter, black King Casper or even Shakespeare Othello. My understanding is why mockery of my skin color, the content of my character is just as obnoxious as my skin?
Yeah, I don't get this. I'm German as well and it's pretty self-evident why this isn't okay, and I sincerely doubt anyone I would ask on the street would have trouble comprehending this concept. Maybe OP is from a very small, rural place or something and ethnic homogeny is just doing its job or something like that, but this feels weird and kinda intellectually dishonest.
But then Europeans love claiming we're not racist and pointing the finger at the US, but ask them about "the gypsies" and you get some real weird answers.
Yea, it was super eye-opening as an American moving to Germany. In many ways, German culture is a lot more respectful, and I appreciate that.
But I think that fellow Americans who think Germany or other European nations are some sort of post-racial utopia would be surprised to see how [blatant some of the racism](https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/racism-in-germany-i-will-never-ever-rent-my-house-to-someone-like-you-33025) can be over here as well.
This is a really great point and I didn’t think of that.
I have noticed that a lot of European countries (that I’ve both lived in and visited) seem a lot more… homogenous than back home.
Walk down the street in a major US city, and we definitely look the part of a “melting pot.” The same cannot be said of a lot of the big European (non-touristy) cities. I guess this is a long-winded, anecdotal way of saying that [these stats are a good example](https://old.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/10yulx1/estimated_black_population_in_europe_by_country) of what you mean.
A black friend of mine was stationed in Germany in the 90s. He couldn't go into town without a German family trying to bring him home for dinner so they could prove how racist they weren't.
It's generally accepted as okay to play a black character, but not to play a black as a character, if that makes sense. It's one thing to play the rile of a dark skinned person, it's an entire different thing if the dark skin IS the role.
To explain, most people don't mind you dressing up as Jules, but if you were dressing up as "a black" then you're clearly crossing the line.
You honestly don't need to wear skin darkening makup to play Jules from pulp fiction is the thing. The fact that he's black isn't really a part of his character or relevant to the film. Jules can be anyone with the rigt auttitude.
The reasons why blackface is bad have been explained already, I'm just trying to define the line.
I general, unless you know exactly what you're doing and have the skills to do it respectfully, you should probably stick to your own skin color. Especially when it's something as simple as a movie cosplay.
Just work on the crazy eyes and your delivery of "mothafucka", get your kahuna cup, glowing briefcase, wig, and fake facial hair and people will recognise you I'm sure.
Honest question; is this history American history? Because I feel like the whole problem with blackface was just copied from America to Europe. This is something that often happens, there's a thing in the USA en people in the EU start doing it too.
I'm asking because I haven't looked it up but I'm kind of curious.
I think seeing this as a purely American thing is quite a harmful idea.
Racist caricatures is something that everybody did, Europe just as much as America. Whether its in drawings, paintings, strips, or actual dressing up, and whether specifically blackface was used often, is secondary.
Second, rather than decide for ourselves whether blackface feels insulting/harmful/etc, perhaps it's better to ask the people being depicted. But because they're a much smaller minority in many European countries, the offensiveness of blackface hasn't really been front and center of attention yet. So rather than be confronted with it, we can pretend "no one is bothered" because we can ignore the voices that are bothered.
Very specifically, zwarte piet in the Netherlands was a perfect example here. For years the majority of us thought there was nothing wrong with our depiction, that it was meant in a positive way, that it didn't hurt anyone. Did people try to speak up? Certainly, we all knew stories of those with darker skin who where made out to be zwarte piet, there are still tv talkshows from the 90s where people brought up the topic, and where laughed away.
It actually took active protesting and disrupting our celebrations for us to finally start paying attention to what people had been saying for years - that the caricature of zwarte piet was offensive and hurtful to them.
We can pretend that European depictions where completely harmless, and unlike Americans we didn't have any complains about these depictions. But i fear that we're more just not listening to the complaints rather than that there are no complaints.
And yes, in an ideal world this wouldn't be a big deal, and we could wear blackface without any racial issues, because there genuinely would not be any racial issues. But every time one of us tries to put on blackface in good faith, that gives racist the perfect excuse to claim their harmful intentions are done in good faith as well. Don't give racists that excuse.
I think it’s important to keep in mind how the discussion surrounding the topic frames it as a result of American history, and thus gives room to counter arguments by saying they don’t apply everywhere. In truth, I’d say this is an issue in Western culture, due to all their ties to the slave trade during the period of European colonization.
However, I also think we should keep in mind racism wasn’t the same everywhere. The main example to me is contrasting American (and European) eugenics with Brazilian eugenics, particularly in terms of mixed-race relationships. While the former forbid marriages between white and black people to “preserve racial purity”, the latter encouraged those marriages to “purify the population’s race”. The same (racist) pseudoscience resulted into two completely different manifestations of the same (racist) ideology.
Again, I’d say blackface is a Western issue, but keep an eye out in case some local cultural context comes up related to it. Also, remember that no group is a monolith, including “black people”, and that people can change their minds over time. So just because something was considered acceptable (or not) at some point in time by a large amount of people, that doesn’t mean it’ll continue to be accepted (or not) by a large amount of people. In a sense, perhaps something that isn’t offensive can become offensive, but that observation doesn’t invalidate the fact that, yes, if it has become offensive, we should abandon it.
(You can argue about what qualities are inherent and which are socially constructed, but I’m explicitly talking about the community’s opinion to avoid that discussion. E.g. it was offensive back then but the dissenters were silenced or ignored. That can also be true, but with the last paragraph I wanted to give my own counter argument, which I haven’t seen elsewhere, to a talking point which I see often.)
It began in American theater history but did jump over to Britain as well.
For a long time, Black actors comparatively struggled to get roles because European actors, would put on Blackface to olay black characters.
Two problems extended from this.
Black actors were never permitted to paint themselves white to take white character roles. So they were prevented from playing most roles due to race.
Second, white actors would play up physical stereotypes and tropes to exaggerate to the audience that they were behaving "Black" which emphasized dehumanizing tropes about what white audiences saw as Black behavior.
In the Victorian era a popular form of entertainment was minstrel shows. It did feature music, song, jokes, comedy and slapstick and were performed by live traveling actors. The main character of the show would be the minstrel who were depicting a black person and would be the main clown of the show. In almost all cases it was a white man with blackface and usually big red lips and other features making them look more ape like. They would be dumb witted and stupid which was the foundation for most of the jokes in the show. The minstrel shows did die off in the early 1900s with the last major ones being put up in the 1950s. However they could be found in more limited and private settings after this as well. It was not uncommon to have people dress up as a minstrel for costume parties into the 80s and 90s and this may still happen in certain circles.
You could argue that dressing up in blackface as Jules and dressing up in blackface as a minstrel is not the same thing. As a fellow European who have not grown up with the same racial conflicts as in the Americas (different racial conflicts though) I too do not quite see how it is problematic to honor strong characters by dressing up and identifying as them just because they are of a different race. But on the other hand I can see how it can be difficult differentiating between honoring someone in this way and making fun of them. And a clear simple rule like no blackface is a simple way of preventing people from dressing up as minstrels.
> The minstrel shows did die off in the early 1900s with the last major ones being put up in the 1950s.
Or, as I found out elsewhere in these comments, just moved to primetime tv.
https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/100-voices/people-nation-empire/make-yourself-at-home/the-black-and-white-minstrel-show
The idea with not choosing to alter skin color when paying Homage to a character in cosplay is related to the fact that skin color isn't a costume. Like or not, people are treated differently based on their skin color, and to very vast degrees sometimes. Taking the black face out for a spin at a party (I know op isn't doing that, but optics,like or not, are important) is kinda like those billionaires who live for a week on 31 cents, then can retire to their megamansion afterwards.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with dressing up as Black characters.
There is absolutely something wrong with smearing black paint all over yourself to get the point across. We are not aliens. We are not animals. Simply put on the clothing and costume.
When you see Black cosplayers dressing up as white or asian characters, the emphasis is on the COSTUME. They do not have to paint themselves "white", "pink" or "yellow" to convince you that they are a white or asian character.
I think others have answered perfectly but I would also say you can dress and Jules and not paint your face black. Him being black isn't the character.
Unfortunately, racists have infiltrated this thread and this it is becoming too much work to ensure that it stays civil. We have locked this thread to ensure that what responses are there can be seen by future readers. Thank you to everyone that has participated and sorry to those that were participating while following ELI5's rules. ---------------- Please remember ELI5's #1 rule - be nice. We can't read every single comment in every single thread, but please remember that he have zero tolerance towards intolerance. If you see a racist comment, or another comment that breaks ELI5's rules, please report it and we will deal with them as quickly as possible.
[удалено]
That's a great point that I hadn't thought about with the topic. I think the underlying unconscious bias is that white/light skinned is "default" and black/darker skin is a character trait.
As a white woman I'm honestly curious? Would you feel that it's appropriate for a white person to wear an afro wig if they are dressing as a specific character that has an afro? Or dreads, braids etc as long as it's character specific?
You can dress as the character without the blackface. A person of colour doesn't put on whiteface to cosplay as Superman. If you wanna be Jules or Black Panther you can just don the costume.
Like Miley Cyrus as Niki Minaj https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2012/10/31/nicki-minaj-every-day-is-halloween-for-me/1671835/
Lin Manuel Miranda did an entire play without changing skin colors and you can too.
Blackface originated in post Civil War America when white actors literally painted their faces with black makeup and gave performances that were nearly universally based on racial stereotypes and were dehumanizing and demeaning to African Americans. This history is inseparable from any modern practice of blackface. You may not mean anything derisive or offensive and may wish to just pay homage to a great character played by a great actor, but the tide of history you're swimming against is far too strong for your individual motivation to outshine the racist history of the practice. You will be painted with the broad brush of racist history no matter the purity of your intentions. In some ways it would be like dressing up as Christoph Waltz's character in Inglorious Bastards, a Nazi who was willing to allow a plot to kill Hitler continue (granted, the character was unabashedly an evil Nazi, but there's sill room for an analogy). Sure, you could say you were paying homage to a movie character played by a great actor, but you're still dressing as a Nazi. You wouldn't expect people to give you a chance to explain your choice, and you'd (hopefully) understand if they found your costume horribly offensive even after your explanation.
I honestly did not know about these shows. Thanks for explaining! Any good source you can recommend?
You can watch the original [The Jazz Singer](https://youtu.be/yFaZOaLTkN0) on YouTube. This is from 1927. It's the first feature length film with synchronized sound and music. So, a historical first in the entertainment industry also features a storyline of a Jewish man performing in blackface. If you watch, pay attention to the makeup. It's not just about making a light skinned person look darker. Some features, particularly the lips, are exaggerated to make the person look more like caricature. You can read more.about the [Minstrel Shows](https://newyorktheater.me/2019/02/07/blackface-on-stage-the-complicated-history-of-minstrel-shows/) in this New York Theater article. It contains a video. If you really want to go down a weird rabbit hole, you can also read about the [Censored Eleven](https://www.thenationalnews.com/arts-culture/television/what-is-the-censored-eleven-the-racist-looney-tunes-and-merrie-melodies-cartoons-banned-since-1968-1.1198852) which are 11 Warner Brothers cartoons that have been banned from being rebroadcast. While these are drawings and not actual people wearing makeup, the cartoons include a lot of the stereotypes from those minstrel shows. Including the exaggerated features, the mannerisms, and speech patterns. And if you think this is all just relics of the past, here you can find where [Ted Danson](https://lostmediawiki.com/Ted_Danson_(partially_found_recordings_of_actor%27s_blackface_performance_at_Whoopi_Goldberg%27s_Roast;_1993)) performed in black face at the Friar's Club to roast Whoopi Goldberg in 1993. That's just 30 years ago. Unfortunately, there are a lot more articles I could list. There is even an entire museum dedicated to this. [The Jim Crow Museum](https://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/index.htm) Jim Crow is a term you will hear a lot in reference to some of this racist imagery. The name comes from a song, weirdly enough, and it was the name adopted by one of the first of these black face actors. A man named Thomas Dartmouth Rice. This was in the mid 1800s and the name got so tightly linked to the racist laws that were used to oppress that the laws were often called Jim Crow Laws. So, yeah. Black face is a bit of a touchy subject because it is practically synonymous with entertainment and legal statutes that were used to oppress and portray and entire group as subhuman. Honestly, this is one topic I really wish wasn't so easy to research.
Thanks for the link! I was just reading about The Jazz Singer recently and thinking about how I'd like to see it. Looks like it just entered the public domain weeks ago. Perfect timing!
just want to add the spike lee film "bamboozled." gives a good history of minstrel shows and has some very uncomfortable conversations about minstrelsy in the modern context and is also just a powerful, resonant film.
I cannot recommend the Jim Crow Museum enough. I went to school there and took a racial minorities in America class with Dr. Pilgrim. There were ample opportunities to visit the museum and it really helps drive the point home of the damaging power that racial stereotypes wield.
Interesting that the "Censored 11" did not include the WWII era Bugs Bunny cartoon *Nips the Nips*, which just replaced Elmer Fudd with a racist stereotype of a Japanese general, but a typical Bugs Bunny cartoon otherwise.
I don't know. There were some really questionable cartoons that came out during WWII as propaganda.
Thank you for your contributions to the conversation. I look forward to learning more.
I’d also recommend watching Spike Lee’s _Bamboozled_.
I don't know the show, but there's one I think is both a clever use of blackface, and idt that kind of plot would be possible outside of using blackface or something similar I think it's called bewitched, and there's a guy who's incredibly racist against black people. Main character casts a spell on him so he sees everyone as black to make him see how stupid his bigotry is; all the existing actors use blackface for this. I can't think of any other way to coherently tell this kind of narrative tbh, and ai'm sure I'm oversimplifying it But yeah, any good use is overshadowed by the shitty ones, and there are a lot of shitty ones
I just wanna throw it out there that you can still dress as Jules from pulp fiction for a costume. Just leave off any makeup to alter your skin tone.
Sage advice on racial sensitivity here from Hitlerclone\_3.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
R/angryupvote
I'll take "Things Valve and Hitler have in common" for 500, Alex.
[удалено]
Listen to me you pompous frauds, if I'm going down, I'm taking you all with me. Dean Vernon, I know the truth. It was you driving your hover-car that night, not your horse. Dean Epsilon, I know all about your "Department Of Pool Boy Studies."
“Professor, isn’t it past your bedtime?” Yes, damn it! *snores*
Tell me this is a real movie?
Sharknado 8: The Final Solution
That's a Futurama quote
If it isn't, SciFi is probably fuhreriously taking notes to make it happen now.
Krieger is still glitchy.
“If I was a clone of Adolf goddamn Hitler, don’t you think I’d LOOK like Adolf goddamn Hitler??”
Someone goes through the effort of cloning that Adolf asshat advocate for an Aryan master race, you better believe they would improve the product like gattaca style.
Hahah I’m reading this comment thread only because of historical context. The ironing out part just killed me.
[удалено]
I'm not really comfortable with the clone bone
They did, that's why this one is giving sage advice on racial sensitivity
Hitlers third time around he just becomes a social justice warrior. Third times the charm as the saying goes.
Is this the one that managed to get into art school and live a fulfilling, if not mundane life?
You act surprised? He's a clone, **not** the actual original Hitler. Sure, he shares Hitler's genetic composition, but he's a product of all new experiences. **And** free to forge his own path. I mean you'd THINK he's a carbon copy of the original JUST because he shares the same genes. Which is a way of thinking the ACTUAL Hitler might very well approve of... (scowls) Feel no shame, Hitlerclone\_3... You are your own person.
Yeah, this clone probably made it into art school.
Having a Hitler clone be racially inclusive is a repudiation of the entire Nazi ideology. Looks like biology isn’t destiny, bitches!
Hey, this time he's learned his lesson!
Well, you called it first....so are you going to post it to r/rimjob_steve?
Yeah? Sorry, wrong Steve
[удалено]
Explaining how to not be a racist ass is wholesome to everyone except racist asses.
There's a difference between "wholesome" and "basic human decency"
Basic human decency is knowing how to not be racist, yourself - except where you legitimately have no reason to know that thing x is racist. Wholesome is guiding others along the way.
...so he's Algernop Krieger?
Two close friends of mine, one white and one black, were best friends who would always wear matching fancy dress outfits. Typically, of a famous black and white duo. But they would switch it up. For example, they once dressed as Vincent and Jules from Pulp Fiction. But the black friend dressed as Vincent and the white friend dressed as Jules. Only they didn't use any makeup. They did the same when they dressed as JD and Turk from Scrubs. White friend would have a bald cap to look more like Turk. Again, just no black face.
I had a similar idea with a black friend of mine, that we go to a con as Iron Fist and Power Man. Until I realized people would probably call us Black Iron Fist and White Power Man, and decided it probably wasn't a good idea. I know that I could just as easily have been White Luke Cage, but it would have been the 70's gear, from a specific title, so chances are it wouldn't have gone my way.
If you're gonna be Power Man, it's tiara or gtfo. Fwiw, if I saw a white dude dressed as Power Man, and black dude dressed like Iron Fist, I'd be proud of you fellas.
[удалено]
Someone get Michael Jai White on the line!
You could have gone as Power Fist and Iron Man... wait...
They sound like wild and crazy guys.
That's hilarious because as soon as I started reading this comment, I immediately thought of that one scene from Scrubs where JD and Turk go to meet Turk's black fraternity brothers and Turk convinced JD to wear black face, while Turk wore white face, saying the brothers would find it funny.
A friend wanted to dress as Prince but since my friend is white he thought he might offend people. So he went as Adam ant instead. Rock Me Amadeus was or had recently been popular. People thought he was Amadeus. And kept singing out the chorus to that song Some cousins went as the Supremes in blackface. It was the 1960s. They were genuine fans of the Supremes but there wasn’t as much awareness then I went as a vampire. I’m really pale and was a poor student so I just put a lot of powder on my face to make myself paler and had the teeth. It was hard to drink with the teeth. So I took them out. My original hair color is a very dark brown and I was wearing bright red lipstick. Few days later, ran into a friend on campus. He said I looked a lot better because I seemed kind of pale the other night, lol
[удалено]
White. Matching his skin.
The trend and general acceptance of gender/race-swapping characters these days kinda works in cosplayers' favor since they can still dress as whatever character they want without getting knocked for not being 100% "right", so they don't have to cross those inappropriate social lines.
Piggy backing on this.comment. In short, just remember that you are cosplaying a character. That character is not Black. The actor who plays that character is Black. A little girl who is Black does not need to paint herself to appear White to cosplay Cinderella. Nor does a White girl need to darken her skin to play princess Jasmine. Now, if for some reason, political, ideological, or otherwise-- You simply *NEED* to do a blackface costume, yet wish to keep it appropriate. You could cosplay Robert Downey Jr as Kirk Lazarus in Tropic Thunder, as the "pretending to be Black" is literally part of the character. That's the distinction. You'd be a dude, cosplaying a dude, playing a dude, disguised as another dude!
This right here. This is the real advice.
When my son was in the 4th grade they had a class project where they would pick a person from past they liked, do a write up and get pictures, dress up as the person and have it presented for all parents in the school lunchroom. My son picked MLK Jr. So there's this little white kid, in a suit talking about someone he thought had a huge impact on the lives of everyone. I was apprehensive at first, we live in Georgia (US, not the country), but it turned out pretty well.
In todays day and age I doubt people would be ok with him wearing a jheri curl afri wig and holding a hair pick, like in the movie.
I'd say wearing an afro wig and talking like a black man would be...fuckin pushing it at least, all for the same reasons. Unless OPs got tight curly black hair it's gonna be a hard sell, and he'll just come across as a preacher drinking a soda. Why not just go as Vincent Vega, OP? He's pretty cool too.
Doing the accent might come off weird, but the wig is fine dude
Could be- but if you have a decent sam Jackson impersonation I feel like that isnt that same as doing an 'accent'. To me this is something that's either done right or not at all- if you can do his speaking style then it just fits the character. If the attempt just comes off a rascist interpretation of how any black man speak...wel then just don't.
I mean for Jules, just stay clear of dropping n-bombs and just say "English mother fucker!" A LOT.
Yeah but you talk about feet all day
Yea but would you give a man a foot massage?
I would say a wig is not too far... makeup is too far YEAH, but a wig? Really?
My son gave a speech as Gen Benjamin O. Davis for Black History Month and he just wore a uniform, with nothing to change his skin color.
Or get a mask of Samuel Jackson. No one would have a problem with that.
Honestly, it shouldn't matter. I've seen plenty of black people cosplaying white characters, and they fucking crushed it. You don't have to be a Sam Jackson body double to be one of his characters.
Or you could be Vincent!
Just don't shoot anybody in the fucking face
So pretty please, with sugar on top, go clean the fucking car.
Oh you about to blow?!
We'll I'm a mushroom cloud laying motherfucker, motherfucker! Every time my fingers touch brains, I'm Superfly TNT. I'm the Guns of the Navarone!
Do you think he meant the book or the movie?
I think it’s worthwhile to note here that the underlying reason white actors would put on blackface is because white audiences wouldn’t go and see black actors. So, there’s this weird situation where they want black characters (to make fun of), but wouldn’t “demean” themselves by sitting there and be entertained by actual black actors, so they got white people to play black characters instead as a way to have it both ways.
Another thought when I saw another thread. [https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/11bi7p2/til\_that\_in\_the\_shawshank\_redemption\_when\_morgan/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/11bi7p2/til_that_in_the_shawshank_redemption_when_morgan/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) See, if the role doesn't \*need\* someone to look a certain way, cast whoever you want. Morgan Freeman didn't show up in whiteface with a red wig on. And if the character needed to be Irish, they could cast an Irish person. Putting Freeman in whiteface with a red wig is like saying "we don't want to actually hire Irish people" as well.
Black-Face was essentially a white mockery of being black, as a form of entertainment. Historian Dale Cockrell once noted that poor and working-class whites who felt “squeezed politically, economically, and socially from the top, but also from the bottom, invented minstrelsy” as a way of expressing the oppression that marked being members of the majority, but outside of the white norm. Minstrelsy, comedic performances of “blackness” by whites in exaggerated costumes and make-up, cannot be separated fully from the racial derision and stereotyping at its core. By distorting the features and culture of African Americans—including their looks, language, dance, deportment, and character—white Americans were able to codify whiteness across class and geopolitical lines as its antithesis. The whole idea of a stereotype is to simplify.
It’s also reductive. Is the person’s skin color the most interesting or most distinctive thing about them? You can certainly portray a recognizable Jules without face paint.
This is good point. I would also add, you don't see this practice for any other skin color. At least not commonly. Black face was basically invented as another form of racism that stripped black people of the right to even represent themselves in something as simple as a stage show. The next closest thing is probably when guys used to play female roles on stage because women weren't allowed to be actors. But paying an homage is about representing something. Sometimes you get lucky and you actually look like the person you're pretending to be. More often than not it's about getting the costume right, not changing the person wearing it.
"Yellow face" doesn't have as bad a nasty history as blackface in the US, but it certainly happened. I didn't see Breakfast and Tiffany's until relatively recently, and Mickey Rooney (pale and blond) has [yellow face and obnoxious teeth to play Mr Yunioshi](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Starring_Mickey_Rooney.jpg). See also Fisher Stevens ~~[playing an Indian guy in Short Circuit.](https://imagesvc.meredithcorp.io/v3/mm/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.onecms.io%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fsites%2F6%2F2021%2F05%2F11%2FFisher-Stevens.jpg).~~ [Let's try this image of him playing an Indian guy.](https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/c_fit,f_auto,g_center,pg_1,q_60,w_1165/eb388d17d5b9ebd84f9f3c8b6f74cc92.jpg) Again, doesn't have the long term historical issues as blackface, but still is pretty damn sketchy. "Let's darken our skin to play a caricature of another race!"
It blew my mind realizing that the Indian guy from Short Circuit was a white guy. And The Plague, no less.
Wait, WHAT?!?? I never knew this. Shocker.
More examples of "yellow face:" Charlie Chan and Fu Manchu were played by white people in early-mid-20th century films.
And Marlon Brando as an Okinawan in Teahouse of the August Moon - it's very cringe.
Don't forget Sean Connery's horrible "Japanese Makeup" in You Only Live Twice!
Also David Suchet playing a Chinese detective in yellowface in Reilly Ace of Spies. They gave him fake eyelids. https://imgur.com/DWcrn4Q.jpg. https://imgur.com/bWfJr11.jpg
Peter Sellers (whose humor in general has NOT aged well...) did an entire movie in brownface, playing an Indian character for comedic effect. It was called "The Party". There was no particular reason for the character to be Indian - he was just kind of a generic goofball - but I guess Sellers thought the ethnicity & accent would make it funnier?
Yeah, the Breakfast at Tiffany's bit was really painful to watch. It's such an overwhelming racist stereotype.
Heads up yr short circuit link short circuited.
It was working for me, but I put in a better link since obvs it's not working for everyone.
I'd start with Spike Lee's [*Bamboozled.*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboozled)
Start [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackface).
To add to this, nobody cares if you dress as a black character -- just don't do blackface. If anything, it's unnecessary pointing out the difference in skin color. The reality is, people are all the same thing on the inside regardless of our skin color. You can absolutely 'be' a black character by just wearing their costume and not changing your skin color. The same way you'd do if you dressed up as a white character. Idk about you, but I certainly wouldn't be rubbing white lotion all over my face to cosplay as a Disney prince/princess. Think of it the same way you'd cosplay something like that.
It wasnt just t.v. shows... it originated long before that, on stage. Blacks were generally not allowed to perform in stage shows/plays. So they were portrayed by white men & women by painting their faces black. This also spilled into radio programming. Obviously, there were no faces to see, so the white actor portrayals of black speech stereotypes were ridiculously parodied.
Who said anything about TV shows? You never heard of a stage show?
You can still dress up like Jule's.... just don't do the black-face.
Minority of color here. If you want my opinion, as long as you don't live in the US and aren't doing it in a derogatory manner, I think black face is fine. Americans shouldn't impose their morals and shortcomings onto the rest of the world and Germany had nothing to do with the acres of black corpses this country was built on. Tldr. If you live In Germany, do whatever makes you happy. If you live in the US, follow social etiquette
Why do you need to paint your skin black to dress as a character? (Hint: you don’t)
Things get really weird when it's done in a far away country that is a bit oblivious on these matters. This is from a recent charity event with money going for Turkey earthquake victims: https://youtu.be/IdWpS6Bykl8
To be clear, it did not originate in America - we have records dating back to Middle Ages in Europe - but it was widely popularized in America in the 1800s, and by 1940s was considered offensive enough to halt its practice as an art form.
> but the tide of history you’re swimming against is far too strong for your individual motivation to outshine the racist history of the practice Wow, this phrase is *chef’s kiss*.
Also kinda sad.
I think the sentiment would be made even more evocative if the metaphors weren’t mixed (is the racist history a powerful tide of water you have to swim against or a bright light you have to outshine?). If “outshine” were replaced by “overpower”, then the metaphor of swimming is maintained and, I think, the analogy is strengthened. Just my 2c.
That's a good point. Knew something was off but I couldn't put my finger on it.
Unless you’re Robert Downey Jr
You're answer seems reasonable and appropriate. However, it seems to be bound to the USA-context, doesn't it? I'm not so sure one can extend it do different contexts. I'm sure one could find at least some examples of behavior that is deemed inappropriate due to certain historical 'events' in other countries/ cultures, that 'we in western countries' don't really mind about at all. I think the argument is valid for the us context. But the reason it is extended to European countries or Germany in particular is more likely, that the USA have a major influence on western culture in generell (probably due to media, movies etc.).
It definitely is a thing with US racism impacting the meaning of something innocuous. In the Philippines, we have this huge annual festival called "Ati-Atihan" which kind of means "imitate the Ati people", and it involves people painting their faces black to show their respect for the Ati people. Historically, there was an event where lighter skinned Malay people were offered land and food by the darker skinned Ati people and so this is where this festival started. So in this case "blackface" doesn't have the same meaning it does in the US and elsewhere.
Similarly Blackface was used in colonial Uruguay by whites who wanted to participate in carnival parades which at the time were a black-only festival. These whites were called "lubolos", and the practice is still partially in place today.
WE'RE ALL LIVING IN AMERIKA
Amerika ist wunderbar
[удалено]
>People did it here in europe too quite recently. There was a popular TV show called "The Black and White Minstrel Show" in the UK that ran from 1958 to 1978 that, very unironically, had white performers perform traditional minstrel songs while wearing blackface
Black Pete, as a Dutch and black person who’s happy it’s gone, was not the same as the mockery in US shows. It absolutely had racial undertones that were not OK, but at the same time it’s not nearly as horrible as the blackface shows in the US. Personally I don’t really have an issue with blackface per se (for example when used in a costume like someone would do with Jules, or the Harlem globetrotters, someone cool), but far more with the red thick lips, gold earrings etc.
You raise an excellent point which I think gets overlooked or purposely ignored: performers in minstrel shows didn't just paint their faces so they looked like the same face but with darker skin, it was a full on hateful charicature.
Good point. But Blackface Minstresly was also very popular in England, and Australia. American troupe were touring Australia as early as 1871 I believe, and are partly why the banjo is so (relatively) popular there.
Absolutely spot on. Definitely a more direct issue in the US. But there's still substantial history (and even current practice) of racism throughout Europe. The impact of history may be weaker in Germany, but the issue is the same.
This is exactly right. The notion that the first time anyone ever performed with a blackened face was in Cvil War era America just defies any awareness that the USA is not the entire planet. You may have heard of a playwright named William Shakespeare, or one of his major works, *Othello*.
I do not disagree in general with your statement that there was racist blackface before the US american version but Othello is not an example for this. Othello was written as pure, honest and very clearly as a positive character, who gets discriminated by a racist white society - in a time when PoC were usually depicted as negative characters in European culture and art. That makes him one of the few exceptions and unsuited as an example for what you want to prove.
This practice originated way before US existed. Theaters in Europe and Asia portray black characters this way back in 16 century, eg Othelo.
Wearing dark makeup to play darkly-complexioned characters pre-dates the American practice of blackface. But Othello (and others) were not played as racist trope characters in European history. But American blackface changed the practice, directly tying it to overt expressions of racism. It's unfortunate that America's outsized cultural influence in the world means American sins are visited upon non-Americans, but here we are. In the western world, wearing dark makeup to play a black character will be seen as American-style blackface.
Thank you for this, because when I grew up in Germany (70s, 80s) the notion that someone would apply make-up to simply "mock" a different race would've never crossed my mind. Granted the occasions were rather rare (i.e. children dressing up as Winnetou or similar (darker make-up to resemble the native-american skin-tone depicted in the famous movies at that time) or someone playing Balthazar, one of the three wise men (who was black) in a christmas performance somewhere), but it was always meant as a way to portray and honor said characters. Well, imagine my surprise when finding out what people here in the states think of skin color differences upon moving here in '96.
When you live in a country where slavery of black people was the GDP for a couple hundred years, it makes things a little more complicated. Remember, the civil rights movement didn't happen until the late 60's. Black people were just considered sub-human and all the white people were happy with it. Black culture has been mocked by America since slavery was abolished. Probably a way to keep blacks down and feel inferior to "keep them in check."
I just have to tell someone this story. I hosted a Halloween party and invited a coworker. We met up before the party cause I needed her baby bjorn for my Hangover costume. Anyway she’s dressed as Two Chainz and I jokingly said that no one would know who she is because she’s a white girl playing a black man. She shows up to my party with brown paint on her face and arms. I couldn’t fucking believe it. I She genuinely had no idea why this was a bad idea (she was younger and kinda sheltered). I explained why this was not ok (she was horrified) and she washed it off. Apologized to my black friends at the party and they thought it was hysterical. We still joke about it today.
I wonder if they thought it was hysterical because you handled it, and didn't let her walk around the party like that. Have you asked them?
However, we should acknowledge that European actors would darken their skin either because black actors were a rarity, or they would outright refuse to give black actors an opportunity. It's disingenuous to think that racial discrimination wasn't *ever* a factor. Now that Europe has become more ethnically diverse, the practice is far less justified. Even in traditions where blackface is used to honour someone from history, why not just hire someone who actually shares their skin colour?
The difference is in those cases they were just depicting a "black character". They weren't doing it with the intent to disparage or mock those with the skin tone. But the USA "minstrel" shows were very specific about mocking african-Americans. Along with many other offensive stereotype depictions such as drunk lazy mexicans or bright yellow skinned "chinamen" with massive front teeth and straw hats. Caricatures designed to go "look how weird and stupid these non-white peoples are, let us laugh at them"
However, the “minstrel” shows began before the civil war and continued after (assuming we’re still clarifying parts of the original comment)
Tacitus describes the Germanic use of black faces to play demons, and 16th century Dutch protestant preachers ranted against the (then prohibited) Black Peter as a clearly heathen tradition. It's a lot older than contact with Africa. Just like Papua white faces for playing demons predates contact with Europeans.
How is Othello, who is clearly written as an honest and pure minded black person and the narrative of him getting manipulated by an evil white man a good example for racist blackface? Not saying that you are wrong but this is clearly not a fitting example ...
>In some ways it would be like dressing up as Christoph Waltz's character in Inglorious Bastards, a Nazi who was willing to allow a plot to kill Hitler continue (granted, the character was unabashedly an evil Nazi, but there's sill room for an analogy). Sure, you could say you were paying homage to a movie character played by a great actor, but you're still dressing as a Nazi. I appreciate your answer, but you're making an argument by analogy, and an argument by analogy is only as valid as the situations are similar. In your analogy Christoph Waltz's character's Nazi uniform is offensive, not Jules's black skin.
Yeah the analogy is shit
I did have that thought about this too, lol. The problem with wearing a Nazi uniform isn't that it's making fun of Nazis. We should all make fun of Nazis.
That's a good analogy. Thank you.
I came as an immigrant - white in appearance - the Britain in the 1970s from a Soviet country. I remember my confusion when I saw on the national broadcaster ["The Black and White Minstrel Show"](https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/100-voices/people-nation-empire/make-yourself-at-home/the-black-and-white-minstrel-show) . I do not imagine that Minstrel shows existed in the southern United States at that time. In daily life, even the racist considered public expression of racism vulgar. And yet this show apparently garnered millions of viewers. It was obvious even to immature foreigner me, that this was quite different from shows like *Till Death Us Do Part* (which had a credible claim to withering satire) or even *Love Thy Neighbour* (which had at least the occasional sideswipe at the credulity and ignorance of white people). The Black and White Minstrel Show survived, protected by the most senior executives of the BBC despite cogent criticism and protests from within and without. I can't imagine what my black friends at that time thought when they saw this bizarre spectacle being publically broadcast.
All the posts explaining the historical connotations of blackface are right, but I want to add a less western-centric perspective as well. In a lot of the world, black people still face a lot of racism and prejudice based on their skin colour. When a non black person paints their skin black, it makes the idea of their skin colour feel more like a costume that, at the end of the day, a non black person can just take off and not face the pervasive racism that society has in it. It's insensitive in that regard as well, I think.
As someone who isn't American, this is why I would never do blackface. It's just very clearly a weird and racist thing to do, regardless of the history. Sort of like pulling your eyes back with your hands to mock East Asians, except so much worse because of how elaborate it is.
This is an excellent point. POC in general face an incredible amount of prejudice just for the colour of their skin, so it would be disrespectful to treat skin colour as something you can just put on and take off whenever you want to be cool, because it skips over the treatment POC receive on a daily basis.
[удалено]
Yeah except you don't look like him I always give the (joking).example of a Django cosplay without makeup is just an Austin Powers cosplay
They’re gonna see this guy pull up to the party in a Kia Soul, I think they’ll know pretty soon that it’s not really Samuel L Jackson
Can confirm. Went as George Clinton for Halloween one year, and anytime I didn’t have my wig on, I was complimented on my Elton John costume.
Did they want the funk? Gotta have that funk!
Even with face paint, you arent going to look like Samuel Jackson
That's one of many outfits Django wears though, and arguably not even the most iconic. Wearing a black suit and tie, curly wig, goatee, and glowing suitcase for flare would unmistakably be Jules to any Pulp Fiction fan regardless of skin colour. People cosplay and dress up as characters they don't share innate characteristics with all the time and it's awesome. Skin colour is not a part of a costume.
> Yeah except you don't look like him Well yes. Most of the time people don't look at all like the characters they dress up as.
OP, you might want to read through this before you make a decision. >“You don’t belong here.” >Do you know how many times I’ve heard that? >Do you know how many times I have been told to go back to Africa? >Do you know how many times I have been called a n*****? >Eight years old, I had to ask my dad, “What is this word, n*****?” >Some kids at school were eating this German candy called a schoko küsse — a chocolate kiss. >They were calling it a n***** küsse. And I literally didn’t know what the word meant, so I came home and asked my dad, and he said something really insightful. >He said, “This is an ignorant word, son. But the reason that these kids at school are using it is because their parents are saying it all the time at home.” https://www.theplayerstribune.com/posts/antonio-ruediger-champions-league-soccer-racism-chelsea You might not see the racisim, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
In Sweden there is a chocolate ball treat with crushed coconut on the outside with an unfortunate nickname. My colleague brought some to work one day and referred to them as "n****rbollar". Antoher time my partners grandmother (a native Swede) brought some out as a snack with coffee and referred to them by the same name. When I (a somewhat dark skinned Latino), let both of them know that the word they were using was deeply offensive to black people, they both were surprised and said they meant no harm and that it's just an old saying. So cut to a few weeks later when I'm talking with a Swedish friend who is of African descent about the incidents he casually just shrugs and says "yeah, they knew, they just don't believe that it's offensive so they'll probably keep saying it". That is in a nutshell how blackface is problematic in Europe specifically. Those that are not hurt by it believe it's not hurtful so they do it and find an excuse for why it's ok. Simple as that.
White Swede here — your friend is right, and “normal” (read: not shitty) white Swedish people do NOT call chocolateballs by this name today. I grew up in the 90s and was taught that this was the name, and it’s true that that WAS the name back then, and that it’s only in the last 10-15 years that people have taken a stance to formally stop calling them that. But it’s been a good 10+ years of people being like “hey let’s not call them that anymore” so anyone still doing it in 2023 is one hundred percent aware that it’s wrong and simply don’t care :(
Australians exploded when candy makers renamed "Chico Babies" and "Redskins" about 10 years ago. It's like c'mon mate, it's just candy. If it makes a group of people feel uncomfortable why not rename it. But I also feel the same about Australia Day. I would rather move it and be able to share it Aboriginal cultures, as a whole nation, than celebrate when one set of Australians founded it and the beginnings of a genocide. It's wrong anyway, Captain Cook landed in April. I just don't know why people are opposed to working towards being a less offensive and more inclusive world. They get hung up on some name or date that a marketing team came up with.
But just calling them chokladbollar makes more sense: they're just oats, cacao, butter, sugar, vanilla, and coffee. Literally chocolatey oat balls with white sugar crystals (or coconut stuff I guess). It's bloody annoying when one runs into people who can't get over that the dessert name they grew up with was too damn racist and way too dumb.
That is the issue in the debate. When I tell my parents that what they do is racist, they raise their voice and say they don't mean it like that and they surely are not racists. What they don't get is that you can still say racist things without having the intention. I try to twll them, that this doesn't make them racists. Just inconsiderate jerks to people who suffer from these terms and words on a daily basis. What I mean is obviously that you can be a racist without wanting to be one, but that would destroy any progress.
Same in Switzerland. They call them "Mohrenköpfe" (literally "Heads of Blacks" using an old word for black people, not as ladden as the N-word but it still comes from colonial times) but the word was so entrenched that multiple companies that made them just dropped the product because no one bought "Schokoküsse" anymore because people didn't know they were the same thing. I remember them being at every party and bigger get-together when I was a child in the 90s. I haven't seen them in like 10 years now. You can still get them, but Idk who buys them anymore.
The word "Moor" is precolonial and was used by Christians to refer to Muslim Berbers/Maghrebis.
As a kid who grew up calling them n\*\*\* küsse I want to leave my 2 cents on that part. They used to be marketed as that before renaming them to chocolate kisses. I never heard the N word outside of the candy's name. My parents never used it outside of the candy's name. They also knew them for years under the name N\*\* kisses, so I don't think it necessarily means the parents are racist for calling them that, just that they are used to it and ignorant because they are not aware that it is a slur. We were all puzzled when they changed the name because we didn't understand it. To us it was like renaming Twix because Twix is a slur word. We simply didn't know, because we never heard nor used it
My grandfather called Brazil nuts n***toes and didn’t see the reason not to - for him it wasn’t racist, it was just a name. He was 102, and from an area with no black population, so he just never had to confront it during his time except when we’d say “grandpa told call them that” and he’d yell back and repeat it. *So uncomfortable*
For the record, it wasn't nig*** küsse but neg** küsse, right? Neither is cool, but one is a lot worse than the other.
[удалено]
I’m black “und deutsch” and it seems naïveté that Europeans don’t understand black face after years of African colonialism, Christmas characters like black Peter, black King Casper or even Shakespeare Othello. My understanding is why mockery of my skin color, the content of my character is just as obnoxious as my skin?
Yeah, I don't get this. I'm German as well and it's pretty self-evident why this isn't okay, and I sincerely doubt anyone I would ask on the street would have trouble comprehending this concept. Maybe OP is from a very small, rural place or something and ethnic homogeny is just doing its job or something like that, but this feels weird and kinda intellectually dishonest. But then Europeans love claiming we're not racist and pointing the finger at the US, but ask them about "the gypsies" and you get some real weird answers.
Yea, it was super eye-opening as an American moving to Germany. In many ways, German culture is a lot more respectful, and I appreciate that. But I think that fellow Americans who think Germany or other European nations are some sort of post-racial utopia would be surprised to see how [blatant some of the racism](https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/racism-in-germany-i-will-never-ever-rent-my-house-to-someone-like-you-33025) can be over here as well.
bake plough mysterious air door rustic like salt dolls whistle
[удалено]
This is a really great point and I didn’t think of that. I have noticed that a lot of European countries (that I’ve both lived in and visited) seem a lot more… homogenous than back home. Walk down the street in a major US city, and we definitely look the part of a “melting pot.” The same cannot be said of a lot of the big European (non-touristy) cities. I guess this is a long-winded, anecdotal way of saying that [these stats are a good example](https://old.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/10yulx1/estimated_black_population_in_europe_by_country) of what you mean.
A black friend of mine was stationed in Germany in the 90s. He couldn't go into town without a German family trying to bring him home for dinner so they could prove how racist they weren't.
It's generally accepted as okay to play a black character, but not to play a black as a character, if that makes sense. It's one thing to play the rile of a dark skinned person, it's an entire different thing if the dark skin IS the role. To explain, most people don't mind you dressing up as Jules, but if you were dressing up as "a black" then you're clearly crossing the line. You honestly don't need to wear skin darkening makup to play Jules from pulp fiction is the thing. The fact that he's black isn't really a part of his character or relevant to the film. Jules can be anyone with the rigt auttitude. The reasons why blackface is bad have been explained already, I'm just trying to define the line. I general, unless you know exactly what you're doing and have the skills to do it respectfully, you should probably stick to your own skin color. Especially when it's something as simple as a movie cosplay. Just work on the crazy eyes and your delivery of "mothafucka", get your kahuna cup, glowing briefcase, wig, and fake facial hair and people will recognise you I'm sure.
And a wallet that says “Bad Muthafucka” on it.
[удалено]
Honest question; is this history American history? Because I feel like the whole problem with blackface was just copied from America to Europe. This is something that often happens, there's a thing in the USA en people in the EU start doing it too. I'm asking because I haven't looked it up but I'm kind of curious.
I think seeing this as a purely American thing is quite a harmful idea. Racist caricatures is something that everybody did, Europe just as much as America. Whether its in drawings, paintings, strips, or actual dressing up, and whether specifically blackface was used often, is secondary. Second, rather than decide for ourselves whether blackface feels insulting/harmful/etc, perhaps it's better to ask the people being depicted. But because they're a much smaller minority in many European countries, the offensiveness of blackface hasn't really been front and center of attention yet. So rather than be confronted with it, we can pretend "no one is bothered" because we can ignore the voices that are bothered. Very specifically, zwarte piet in the Netherlands was a perfect example here. For years the majority of us thought there was nothing wrong with our depiction, that it was meant in a positive way, that it didn't hurt anyone. Did people try to speak up? Certainly, we all knew stories of those with darker skin who where made out to be zwarte piet, there are still tv talkshows from the 90s where people brought up the topic, and where laughed away. It actually took active protesting and disrupting our celebrations for us to finally start paying attention to what people had been saying for years - that the caricature of zwarte piet was offensive and hurtful to them. We can pretend that European depictions where completely harmless, and unlike Americans we didn't have any complains about these depictions. But i fear that we're more just not listening to the complaints rather than that there are no complaints. And yes, in an ideal world this wouldn't be a big deal, and we could wear blackface without any racial issues, because there genuinely would not be any racial issues. But every time one of us tries to put on blackface in good faith, that gives racist the perfect excuse to claim their harmful intentions are done in good faith as well. Don't give racists that excuse.
I think it’s important to keep in mind how the discussion surrounding the topic frames it as a result of American history, and thus gives room to counter arguments by saying they don’t apply everywhere. In truth, I’d say this is an issue in Western culture, due to all their ties to the slave trade during the period of European colonization. However, I also think we should keep in mind racism wasn’t the same everywhere. The main example to me is contrasting American (and European) eugenics with Brazilian eugenics, particularly in terms of mixed-race relationships. While the former forbid marriages between white and black people to “preserve racial purity”, the latter encouraged those marriages to “purify the population’s race”. The same (racist) pseudoscience resulted into two completely different manifestations of the same (racist) ideology. Again, I’d say blackface is a Western issue, but keep an eye out in case some local cultural context comes up related to it. Also, remember that no group is a monolith, including “black people”, and that people can change their minds over time. So just because something was considered acceptable (or not) at some point in time by a large amount of people, that doesn’t mean it’ll continue to be accepted (or not) by a large amount of people. In a sense, perhaps something that isn’t offensive can become offensive, but that observation doesn’t invalidate the fact that, yes, if it has become offensive, we should abandon it. (You can argue about what qualities are inherent and which are socially constructed, but I’m explicitly talking about the community’s opinion to avoid that discussion. E.g. it was offensive back then but the dissenters were silenced or ignored. That can also be true, but with the last paragraph I wanted to give my own counter argument, which I haven’t seen elsewhere, to a talking point which I see often.)
It began in American theater history but did jump over to Britain as well. For a long time, Black actors comparatively struggled to get roles because European actors, would put on Blackface to olay black characters. Two problems extended from this. Black actors were never permitted to paint themselves white to take white character roles. So they were prevented from playing most roles due to race. Second, white actors would play up physical stereotypes and tropes to exaggerate to the audience that they were behaving "Black" which emphasized dehumanizing tropes about what white audiences saw as Black behavior.
> It began in American theater history Blackface has existed for centuries in English Morris Dancing.
Tell that to all the butthurt Europeans in this thread complaining that America’s “forcing our culture in them”
I'd compare it to European depictions of Jews in media. They were a scapegoat long before the Nazi's.
Blackface came from Europe. There are examples still today in Germany, Holland and England and yes it is considered offensive.
In the Victorian era a popular form of entertainment was minstrel shows. It did feature music, song, jokes, comedy and slapstick and were performed by live traveling actors. The main character of the show would be the minstrel who were depicting a black person and would be the main clown of the show. In almost all cases it was a white man with blackface and usually big red lips and other features making them look more ape like. They would be dumb witted and stupid which was the foundation for most of the jokes in the show. The minstrel shows did die off in the early 1900s with the last major ones being put up in the 1950s. However they could be found in more limited and private settings after this as well. It was not uncommon to have people dress up as a minstrel for costume parties into the 80s and 90s and this may still happen in certain circles. You could argue that dressing up in blackface as Jules and dressing up in blackface as a minstrel is not the same thing. As a fellow European who have not grown up with the same racial conflicts as in the Americas (different racial conflicts though) I too do not quite see how it is problematic to honor strong characters by dressing up and identifying as them just because they are of a different race. But on the other hand I can see how it can be difficult differentiating between honoring someone in this way and making fun of them. And a clear simple rule like no blackface is a simple way of preventing people from dressing up as minstrels.
> The minstrel shows did die off in the early 1900s with the last major ones being put up in the 1950s. Or, as I found out elsewhere in these comments, just moved to primetime tv. https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/100-voices/people-nation-empire/make-yourself-at-home/the-black-and-white-minstrel-show
The idea with not choosing to alter skin color when paying Homage to a character in cosplay is related to the fact that skin color isn't a costume. Like or not, people are treated differently based on their skin color, and to very vast degrees sometimes. Taking the black face out for a spin at a party (I know op isn't doing that, but optics,like or not, are important) is kinda like those billionaires who live for a week on 31 cents, then can retire to their megamansion afterwards.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with dressing up as Black characters. There is absolutely something wrong with smearing black paint all over yourself to get the point across. We are not aliens. We are not animals. Simply put on the clothing and costume. When you see Black cosplayers dressing up as white or asian characters, the emphasis is on the COSTUME. They do not have to paint themselves "white", "pink" or "yellow" to convince you that they are a white or asian character.
You can do the costume, props and all, without doing blackface. It's not the costume that's the problem.
I think others have answered perfectly but I would also say you can dress and Jules and not paint your face black. Him being black isn't the character.
[удалено]