It would be a fallacy to say that there ever has been a single black experience that has wholly defined “blackness.” However, I think it’s safe to say that as America becomes more and more progressive, it becomes increasingly hard to define what “blackness” really is. A person born in a rich family attending private school his or her life and a person born in the Chicago projects can both be black, but their life experiences are so diverse that it begs the question of whether “blackness” is even a thing.
I would argue, (and I would love to hear contrary opinions, this is just a thought), that as long as their is lingering racial inequality and prejudice present in American society, blackness will be a real construct that can unite people of totally different backgrounds. It’s hard to mention the origin of blackness in America without mentioning the struggle to overcome racism, and I think this struggle to overcome and thrive is something that has really united the black community and defined what it means to be black. The struggle has created social cohesion, in a sense. I’m not saying, though, that blackness is defined by struggle. Lots of culture that comes from black America does have a foundation in the struggle to overcome prejudice (lots of music and social movements, for example), but plenty of black American culture does not have a foundation in struggle. My point, then, is that the reason blackness exists in the first place, the reason that it acts as a social bond is because of a shared experience of black people, regardless of background, in facing prejudice. Despite the huge diversity in the black community in culture and socio-economic level, I think this experience of overcoming prejudice is something that actually does unite all (or at least a very large majority) of black people, keeping the notion of blackness alive. I think it’d be hard to find a black American who hasn’t experienced prejudice at some point, whether it be a kid in the projects or a CEO.
The question, then, that I submit is what would happen to “blackness” if in the future there was no prejudice. We’ve talked in class about the “beigification” of America, and how lines between races are becoming so blurred and complex that perhaps in a few generations race won’t even be an identifying factor for people anymore. In a society where everyone is just a shade of beige, would “blackness” still be around? Would losing “blackness” be a bad thing? The idea of of a society where race isn’t a factor may sound nice because it would mean no more racial discrimination, but is something lost when a rich culture fades away? Is it better to preserve blackness as a culture, or let it wash away as everyone is assimilated into a big societal melting pot? Take for example, Kendrick Lamar’s To Pimp a Butterfly. It’s an incredible album, backed in the issues of struggle in the black community. In a beige society, where race isn’t an identifier, we wouldn’t have pieces of art like TPAB that are tied to racial culture. However, the whole reason the album exists is because of struggle and strife (since most of the albums deal with these issues), and while it is a great album, perhaps getting rid of these issues is more important than preserving blackness. Or perhaps we can get rid of prejudice while still preserving blackness, but that begs the question of whether the tie of blackness will be as strong.
Sorry this was a bit rambly, but I think it’s an interesting topic! Also these convictions I have are just projections of what I’m thinking, they’re not set-in-stone opinions, so I would love to hear some different thoughts.
Great post Trevor!
You’ve raised several important questions, namely : is blackness predominantly defined against and through struggle and what would it mean to be black in a future where race ceases to matter?
In his book , Who’s Afraid of Post-Blackness?: What It Means to Be Black NowTouré ruminates on some of these same questions pertaining to blackness as an identity in the 21st century. While the book focuses on the heterogeneity of blackness, the myriad of ways in which one can inhabit blackness and really points towards infinite possibilities of what blackness can be against notions of a singular “authentic” and “legitimate” way to be black, it doesn’t quite get at some of your concerns, which seems to be about the constructed nature of race and how that construct has been made through racializing regimes and can/ should it be unmade.
In some ways Touré and others accept blackness as an ontological category, that is an object that really exists naturally but simply want us to expand the boundaries of this real object. Can we argue that it doesn’t exist though? Sort of, but for all practical purposes as we’ve discussed, it does exist. I don’t have a definitive answer to your question (important questions like these can’t possibly have one final answer) but I would suggest that the very existence of artistic forms, which outlive us, would keep alive the important history of blackness, which I don’t think should be forgotten. Outside of the strife and recounting of struggle there would also be various forms of joy, creativity and constructive ways of working through existential crises to which groups from all walks can relate and which can inform even a post-racial society.
Can there be blackness without struggle? I’d say sure. Can and should the memory of struggle be washed away? That seems dangerous. More broadly, would national identity , i.e. Americanness, come to substitute for race? But what is American culture if not an amalgamation of various influences? How would this change the global conversation?
Lots to think about!