I recall reading, some time ago, another version of the depiction of blacks in the 20th Century. It was a more benign view than what people make of it now. At the beginning of the 20th Century, there were still plenty of people who remembered the Civil War. No few had fought in it. As war in Europe loomed, there was serious question whether southerners were going to be sufficiently loyal to the U.S. to fight for it.
In the middle of the war, but before the U.S. was in it (1915) the film “Birth of a Nation” was made. It portrayed blacks savagely, as serious, almost ogre-like threats to white people. The “minstrel show” type “darky” and slapstick buffoons were similar to figures like “Aunt Jemima” and “Uncle Ben” in that they portrayed blacks as almost ridiculously friendly, even comforting. Who couldn’t like “Aunt Jemima” or “Pork”, the black chef on some railroad’s luxury train ads in magazines of the time? Nobody could or would think of “Uncle Ben” or “Bojangles” as threatening, even if that image is demeaning to today’s consciousness. Who couldn’t like “Uncle Remus” in “Song of the South”. He’s banned now, of course. It was the “antidote” to the “Birth of a Nation” image.
In the 1970s another image gained currency; a threatening one. And it encouraged de facto segregation, particularly in the north. We were back to “Birth of a Nation”, with depiction of "Black Panthers, “Black Liberators” and “Black P. Stone Nation”, and some are trying to return us to that by endless portrayal of blacks as bomb throwers and looters. Why? To promote the “tribal politics” so beloved of liberal strategists.
Maybe all blacks resent “Aunt Jemima”, but I do wonder whether their concerns extend to such a trivial thing. After all, as I posted above, the “Cream of Wheat” black chef was portrayed as handsome and dignified, if a servitor, while Li’l Abner and his son were portrayed as goofy, unkempt, and married to a woman who couldn’t speak proper English.
It’s still ok to lampoon the stereotype of a “hillbilly” and it’s pretty plain there’s more than just joshing in that. Some really do despise the “irredeemables” as they see them, who live in “flyover country” and many of whom adhere to “Evangelicalism” as the left understands that. And people take that pretty well even so. If one goes to Branson, one can buy all kinds of hillbilly lampoon articles. A lot of the rides and shows are of that sort. And everybody takes it pretty well, even when there’s a bite with it. (Nobody likes being called “irredeemable” or a “bitter clinger”)
The day might return when blacks find the more benign stereotypes merely amusing. As an example, there is a well-known barbecue place in Kansas City that features one of the most overt black caricatures imaginable. But it’s black owned, so nobody cares. Liberals have not demanded that it be torn down because of that, and probably won’t.
I think the left wants the significance of those images to be misunderstood.
