IT HAS become standard operating procedure for those on the radical left to tar anything they disagree with as "racist." The war to oust al Qaeda from Afghanistan? "Racist," they said. Ditto the war in Iraq. Before the war on terror, the same detractors directed their racism rhetoric against global financial institutions and free trade. "Whiteness: A Wayward Construction," now on display at the University's Bayly Art Museum, is the latest demonstration of this disingenuous disinformation campaign.
The denunciation of "whiteness" in our society has as much cogency as does the Bayly exhibit -- which is to say, none whatsoever. As the explanatory placards next to the "artwork" explain, "whiteness" is the "dominant value system" in our society that is "depicted as generic or the norm." Whatever this means, the artwork does very little to illuminate this wayward theory.
An untitled series of photographs by Clifford Le Cuyer depicts various amorphous porcelain "maquettes" (an artsy term for sculptures). "Collapsed Staircase" by Kavin Buck is a hodgepodge of rickety steps painted, of course, in white. In a very original pair of paintings titled "White Painting" and "Black Painting," Byron Kim apes Mark Rothko by painting the entire canvas tan and brown, respectively. (At least Rothko had the creativity to mix some different hues into his monochromaticity.) Even more puzzling is "Out in the Open," a painting by Richard Skelton depicting three men -- two Caucasian and one who could be Latino -- ogling three women -- two Caucasian and one whose physical race is indeterminable. What any of these pieces has to say about "whiteness" is beyond comprehension.
These "artists" are not entirely to blame if their meaning is not well understood. That is because the notion of "whiteness" in our society is pure nonsense. Tellingly, the only example of "whiteness" the placards manage to specifically enumerate is "consumerism." If consumerism is characteristic of whiteness, what are those Japanese doing toting their Prada and Burberry bags around Tokyo? Why are Chinese sporting the latest fashions from Ralph Lauren on the streets of Shanghai? Either these consumerists are trying to be white, or the notion of whiteness is an absurdity.
When the radical left rails against "consumerism," it seems what they're really after is capitalism; for what else is "consumerism" but the right to freely purchase and market consumer goods? Those on the radical left see capitalism and consumerism as the root of all evil, yet they disapprove of such theological terms. Thus, they talk not of "evil" but of "whiteness" in their condemnations of capitalism.
As an example of this equation of capitalism with "whiteness" and racism, Lynne Stewart, celebrity lawyer for radical leftists, has told The Washington Post, the "entrenched ferocious capitalism that is in this country today" justifies the use of violence to overthrow this institution of "sexism and racism."
Anyone crazy enough to think capitalism is an instrument of racism and "whiteness" should speak to the citizens of Hong Kong, who under British rule thrived in the world's most capitalist economy. Let them ask Hong Kongers: Did they rejoice when they reverted to Chinese control, thus freeing them from the racist, capitalist tyranny of their white British colonial oppressors?
Related to this resentment of "whiteness," another feature of our society the radical left often trashes is language. Standard English is viewed as racist because it oppresses those who would prefer to speak "Spanglish" or "Ebonics." (Curiously, nobody advocates that Asian Americans speak "pidgin English" to celebrate their heritage.) At the same time, people around the world are scrambling to learn proper English, not because they aspire to be white, but because it is simply the new standard for communicating in the global economy. One of the most poignant vignettes in the "outsourcing" debate is the migration of technical support call centers to India. Has anyone asked the Indians if they resent having to speak the racist language of their white colonial conquerors?
The notion of "whiteness" would be laughable if it were merely poppycock. But it's much more pernicious than that. The "whiteness" ideology teaches those who identify themselves as racial minorities to reject as racist skills that are vital in the global economy. By teaching minorities to opt out of basic economic activity, and learning standard English, the radical left is condemning them to a lifetime of poverty and alienation. Viewed in this light, the "whiteness" display at the Bayly Museum is not art; it's invidious propaganda for a form of soft slavery.
Eric Wang's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at ewang@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
