X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Coffee House Culture House Daily

The ‘anti-racist’ crowd have resorted to the old politics of racism

7 March 2016

6:04 PM

7 March 2016

6:04 PM

The self-important slayers of ‘cultural appropriation’ have gone too far this time. Clearly they didn’t get a big-enough moral kick from chastising white people who do yoga (on the basis that yoga has ‘roots in Indian culture’), moaning about Beyonce donning a sari (‘how is this different from white folks wearing cornrows?’, the racial police demanded), and fuming about middle-class indie kids who wear Native American headdresses at music festivals (apparently this‘perpetuates damaging, archaic and racist stereotypes’).

So now they’re turning their fire on a black actress who, in their view, is not black enough to play Nina Simone. Yes, even black people can now be accused of being insufficiently black for certain cultural pursuits.

The actress in question is Zoe Saldana, a fine actress whose curious combination of vulnerability and steeliness has made her the darling of the modern Hollywood blockbuster. She’s one of the best things in the Star Trek reboot movies and she even managed to inject some humanity into James Cameron’s otherwise soulless, eco-miserabilist epic, Avatar. And next she will play Simone, in a big biopic, the trailer for which was released last week.

But the identity-politics mob isn’t happy. Why? Because Saldana is a light-skinned black person, a ‘half black’, as some have foully put it, and she used make-up to make herself as black as Simone.

[Alt-Text]


The internet went into meltdown over this revelation. Saldana, who is Afro-Latino, was accused of ‘blacking-up’. A writer for CNN said Saldana has resuscitated Hollywood’s ‘abhorrent history of blackface’. Simone’s own brother said Saldana’s turn as Nina is an ‘insult to our people’.

At the Telegraph, Emma Dabiri snootily decreed that Saldana is the ‘wrong black woman’ to play Simone. ‘With her long silky hair and brown tan skin, Zoe Saldana may well be black,’ Dabiri generously conceded, but apparently she isn’t ‘black enough’. On Twitter, meanwhile, where reprimanding cultural appropriation has become a favoured and feverish pastime, Saldana is being mauled, slammed as no better than a ‘white actress wearing blackface’.

It’s so ugly. The intensity with which Saldana has been slated in the press and defamed on Twitter, having her skin colour and identity pored over and policed by racially correct identitarians, is a reminder of how vicious the politics of identity can be. People who pose as progressive, as enlightened and anti-racist, are ‘calling out’ a black woman over her skin colour, effectively branding her a modern-day minstrel, a ‘blackface’, a not-real black person pretending to be black. They can’t seem to see the twisted irony of claiming to be anti-racist while obsessing over a black woman’s skin and shaming her for having the wrong racial make-up. This isn’t anti-racism; it’s the very definition of racialism; it’s racial thinking, and racial shaming.

The Saldana shamers don’t seem to understand that acting is all about empathising with and entering into the spirit of someone who is not you. And actors frequently use make-up and prosthetics to become that other person. Whether it’s straight actors pretending to be gay, able-bodied actors pretending to disabled, or perfectly nice gentlemen hunching their backs and going psychopathic to play Richard III, acting is a pretence — and one usually driven by a decent, humanist, cultural urge to embody a character and allow people to understand him or her.

The logic of the fuss over Saldana is that, in the words of movie director Judd Apatow, ‘actors should only be allowed to play themselves’. It is now ‘offensive to pretend to be other people’, Apatow quipped.

The reason identitarians are so obsessed with acting — whether it’s Eddie Redmayne having the temerity to play a trans person or able-bodied actors playing disabled people — is because their obsessive judgement of everyone according to their biological, racial and gender identities has made them blind to the fact that human beings can empathise with and depict other people. In their mind, everyone should stay in their racial and gender boxes, and never write about, talk about, study or borrow from the cultures of people in other racial and gender boxes. Saldana should stick with her Afro-Latinos and not presume that she can understand the blacker experience. What a foul, divisive and fundamentally anti-humanist worldview.

The shaming of Saldana shows that identity politics has horrendously re-racialised public and cultural life. These so-called progressives have replaced the old politics of racism with a new politics of racial etiquette, where everyone’s speech is policed for unwitting ‘racial microaggressions’, our cultural pastimes are checked for any over-borrowing from ‘other cultures’, and we’re implored to be racially aware all the time. It’s a PC version of race-baiting, where every issue and every piece of culture is turned into a racial minefield.

Some of us don’t want to be racially aware. We don’t want to judge people according to their skin colour. And when Nina comes out, we will see, not a ‘half-black person’ mimicking a ‘real black person’, but a good actress doing her very best to capture the soul and life of another human being. That’s what humans do — we reach across made-up racial and cultural boundaries in an effort to understand and feel what other people feel.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close