|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: melodeonboy Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:09 AM Here's two alternatives: a) The Morris dancers are allowed to dance. Everybody has a good time, and no one tries to make an issue where none exists. A large number of children from ethnic minority groups in the area get exposure to an aspect of British culture which they might otherwise not see, and another small step towards the appreciation of cultural diversity is made. b) The Morris dancers are not allowed to dance. The press get hold of the story, which then makes the actions of the Head (and, by implication, the anti-racist movement in general) look stupid and petty in the eyes of Joe Public. The far right can then cite it as yet another example where white British people are being pushed around by others. Which one is more likely to benefit the BNP? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Rasener Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:14 AM To take that a step further. I book a singer for my club and stupidly do not check them out, before booking. Later on, I realise that the singer is a capella. I don't like a capella. So I ring the person up and say "Sorry, but can you do your songs accompanied by a guitar or some other instrument. The singer says no. So I tell them that I can't book them after all. Has that singer now been banned from appearing at my venue? Of course not. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,Tom Bliss Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:21 AM Well put, Pip. It's the media images and end-of-the-street views which matter here, not the the squire's speech. The BNP claim they are championing English trad arts. Blackface is a 'brand-builder' with strong image associations which 'fit' the BNP claims. If, God forbid, I was designing an a campaign for Griffin, blackface morris would be near the top of my list. It presses all the 'right' buttons. Sorry about that. Tom |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Ruth Archer Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:35 AM Hmmm. The BNP apparently has its own Border Morris side, who dance out at its annueal Red White and Blue Festival. Wonder if they black up... |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Howard Jones Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:42 AM "... and they don't care if anyone says it looks racist." No, because they believe it isn't racist, but to concede the point would imply that it is. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:56 AM 'they believe it isn't racist, [and]to concede the point would imply that it is.' But supposing they are wrong in this belief? You see in matters of promotion, you have to start with the perception of the 'market' and work backwards, to find the path down which you can send your message. The 'marketplace' currently thinks blackface is racist. It those sides had a budget to change that perception, they might do it - though it wouldn't be easy given the politics of some dancers and the historical facts. But they don't have a budget. just a chance, not always taken, for some street crying. and those opportunities are reduced by, for example, schools not booking them because they present as intransegent. The BNP does, however, have a budget, and is pushing at an open door. Tom |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,tom bliss Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:00 AM sorry, me. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Phil Edwards Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:03 AM Melodeonboy - A large number of children from ethnic minority groups in the area get exposure to an aspect of British culture which they might otherwise not see, and another small step towards the appreciation of cultural diversity is made. A large number of children from ethnic minority groups are presented with white people dancing with their faces painted black. Do you honestly not think there might be a few objections? Howard - they believe it isn't racist, but to concede the point would imply that it is. No, no, no, no, no. To concede the point would imply that they care what other people think - no more and no less. But to refuse to concede the point says that they don't care if other people think they're racist. Not only that, it says that if you aren't willing to accept blackface, then you don't get any Morris dancing. Now, which group of people do you think is more likely to object: (a) people strongly opposed to racism or (b) racists? And if Motley's attitude was widespread (which thankfully it isn't), where would you be more likely to see Border Morris: at an anti-racist event or a BNP festival? If Motley were an original Border side (is there such a thing?) I'd have some sympathy for their position. Since they're not - they're in Essex and they've been doing it since the 1980s - they strike me as stiff-necked short-sighted idiots. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Jack Blandiver Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:07 AM I'm still waiting for those non-racists reasons for blacking-up. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Morris-ey Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:23 AM "I'm still waiting for those non-racists reasons for blacking-up." It's the fashion - you've been told this before but ignore it. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Phil Edwards Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:35 AM That's not really an answer. As I'm sure you'll remember, punks in 1977 wore swastika armbands because it was the fashion - it was still an offensive symbol. In the case of punk, of course, the entire point was to offend people, but I didn't think that was the idea with Border Morris. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Morris-ey Date: 10 Jul 09 - 06:05 AM "That's not really an answer. As I'm sure you'll remember, punks in 1977 wore swastika armbands because it was the fashion - it was still an offensive symbol. In the case of punk, of course, the entire point was to offend people, but I didn't think that was the idea with Border Morris." Of course it's an answer. Your problem with it is that it does not fit with your interpretation or beliefs. I suspect, but don't know any more than you do, that most blacked up sides do it because of the fashion started by the Bedlams in the 70s and do not do it to offend. Some here insist on believing it is either racist or done with intent to offend and will accept no other explanation. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Phil Edwards Date: 10 Jul 09 - 06:31 AM I suspect, but don't know any more than you do, that most blacked up sides do it because of the fashion started by the Bedlams in the 70s and do not do it to offend. Yes, I think we're all agreed on that. Some here insist on believing it is either racist or done with intent to offend and will accept no other explanation. No. It's a fact that blackface makeup has a racist history and racist connotations. What non-racist history does it have - 20 years of dancing, maybe 30 at the outside? What non-racist connotations does it have - "we do it like this because we like doing it like this"? Going back to the swastika armbands, if punks were told they were dressing offensively, they could answer that the entire point of the look was to be offensive. Is the point of blackface to offend? If not, what is it? And what is the problem with using a different colour? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Morris-ey Date: 10 Jul 09 - 07:16 AM "It's a fact that blackface makeup has a racist history and racist connotations. What non-racist history does it have - 20 years of dancing, maybe 30 at the outside? What non-racist connotations does it have - "we do it like this because we like doing it like this"? This is why the whole argument is pointless - "It's a fact" you say. Whatever else it may be it is not a "fact". The race card is an interpretation of history that suits your personal viewpoint There are very few real facts in history and revisionists like to interpret history through their modern sensibilities. They then use their interpretation of the "facts" to support their current dogma. It is perfect really - you prove your historical point by reference to your current opinions then use that historical proof to support your current dogma. All your objections are based on the single premise that black face is racist, but you have no objective evidence. In "fact": " What non-racist history does it have - 20 years of dancing, maybe 30 at the outside? Yes, it has 30 years of non-racist history – until a few days ago… |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Phil Edwards Date: 10 Jul 09 - 09:02 AM Moz - it is a fact that blackface makeup has a racist history: I'm not saying it doesn't have any other historical associations, but we know it has a racist history. It's also a fact that it now has racist connotations - again, it may have others, but we know that the racist connotations exist. I'm challenging you (and others) to say what its non-racist history is and what its non-racist connotations are. I'm not hearing much, apart from "we like doing it this way, and we've been doing it this way ever since we started doing it this way". What's the problem with using a different colour? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Morris-ey Date: 10 Jul 09 - 09:22 AM Pip If by "Moz" you are referring to me, where is it established that black face in modern Border, (circa Shropshire Bedlams - was/is John Kirkpatrick a racist then?) has racist history or connotation? It is for those alleging the crime to prove it not for those accused to disprove it. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,John from Kemsing Date: 10 Jul 09 - 09:34 AM For a number of years certain television programmes and films have had a prior warning broadcast advising viewers ...." the following programme contains scenes of a sexual nature, violence from the beginning and language that may cause offence...", or words to that effect, the viewer then deciding to watch or not. Then why not advise potential viewers of our cultural pursuits that the performance may contain aspects liable to cause offence. You pays your money, you takes your choice. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Jack Blandiver Date: 10 Jul 09 - 09:43 AM So, the reason why certain Morris Dancers black-up is because they are (surprise, surprise) dedicated followers of fashion. I'm disappointed, especially when the opening posts of this thread lead with things like: Surely they should have been given the time to explain the tradition. And: Ignorent [sic] people immediately assume the wrong thing and do not take the time to look into the tradition. This is what I was wanting to see explained here, just what The Tradition is, if, indeed, it really is something other than racial mockery. Could it be that a mere fashion dating back to the 1960s and otherwise seemingly void of all symbolic meaning is somehow The Tradition as eluded to above? In which case it would seem there is no reason whatsoever for blacking-up, other than to fly in the face of a decency one would have assumed is the duty of every thinking person on planet earth. In which case, shame on the lot of you. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,tom bliss Date: 10 Jul 09 - 09:53 AM 'It is for those alleging the crime to prove it not for those accused to disprove it'. You are applying the statute rule of a court of law to the very different court of public opinion. This is about assumptions and precoceptions, not laws. You HAVE to start from the status quo of the vast majority. Morris is undervalued and misunderstood - blackface is seen as reactioary or worse. Supporters have an uphill task to change those views . That task may call for compromise over the contentious issues, specially if the send an erronious message (which it'll be VERY hard to change), and definitely if that message is in fact correct (as I think we have established it is). Morris-ey. Can we take it you dance? Do you black up? Tom |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Morris-ey Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:20 AM Tom I think this must be my last word on this because we could go back and forth until old age brings it to an end. There is no "court of public opinion" outside of the very insular and parochial world of this forum. The vast majority of normal people in England don't give a toss about morris dancing generally or Border in particular. I see no evidence that the majority of folkies, let alone any in the general population, consider black face to be an issue. Therefore I see no erroneous message even if I were to accept, which I don't, that your interpretation of racism were correct. I also cannot see what earthly difference this would make to the BNP, its supporters, or to those who might be thinking of joining them. Supporters of the BNP, again generally speaking, come from areas of deprivation where they feel mainstream politics has let them down. They are probably right. We might spend our time better in addressing what is so lacking in "traditional" party politics that people turn to extreme parties, rather than wasting time on the politics of morris dancing. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: manitas_at_work Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:26 AM The issue isn't even being discussed on the Morris Dance Discussion List ! |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Phil Edwards Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:28 AM where is it established that black face in modern Border, (circa Shropshire Bedlams - was/is John Kirkpatrick a racist then?) has racist history or connotation? I've never said that blackface in modern Border has a racist history or connotations. I'm saying that blackface as such has racist history and connotations. If the history and connotations of blackface in modern Border are so different, then, er, what are they? The Villan, on your side of the argument, said: Ignorent people immediately assume the wrong thing and do not take the time to look into the tradition. So, what would they find if they did look into the tradition? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:39 AM I saw a comment by another poster down the thread, regards 'gothic' and 'mytho-pagan' stylings in Morris. All good fun to me, and yes the gothic costumes of people like the Witch Men does indeed suit a black face. Though in order to fully dissconnect any possible associations of the blacking to racial-parody, why not take it one small step further and add runes, pentagrams, ogham (or otherwise pagan/gothic symbols/sigils unique to the side), to the otherwise black face make-up? I've also mentioned it elsewhere, but sides adopting such mythic and fakloric pagan imagery might do well to take a look at Nigel Pennicks fascinating book about guising traditions in Europe. Lots of varied inspiration from other real guising traditions, for any such mytho-pagan side to draw from contained within. A review Here: Crossing the Borderlines: Guising, Masking & Ritual Animal Disguises in the European Tradition. Not available from Amazon: Buy here. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,Tom Bliss Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:40 AM Morris-ey. So your justification is that Morris is a private club that can set its own rules? Well, I'm sorry but that won't wash. The head teacher was thinking of the wider issues, as Motley shoul have been. As I said way up the thread, morris is colourful and noisy, so punches above its weight in the folk promotion stakes. Dancers have a duty, as we performers do, to think about our actions for the good of the movement. I notice that when I ask about your make-up you announce you retirement from the debate. is that an expession of interest? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Morris-ey Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:54 AM Tom ffs I have said before that what is not illegal is OK by me in so far as I respect the right of others to cause offence whether knowingly or unknowingly. "The movement"! On the tiny moonlet of morris it might mean something but not in any real world. I now longer dance and when I did it was Cotswold so we wore white - probably offensive to in a too "white" sort of way. If I had or were to dance Border I would have no problem blacking up. Any "interest" I have is the wider interest of freedom of expression under the law and to uphold the right of others to express views contrary to my own. You should try it. And that is my last word. If you wish to claim victory from my silence hereinafter, feel free... |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,Tom Bliss Date: 10 Jul 09 - 11:10 AM Thanks for that clarification. I shall assume nothing from your silence. Before you go, may I once again point up the crucial differencs between giving offence over conscious choices like faith, creed, politics, philosophy and fashion - which may require caution but is often healthy, and giving offence over things you can't change like skin colour, disability and gender. A lot of people here seem not to understand the difference. If you're happy for morris to remain a misunderstood minor sport, fair enough - though I'd repeat my points about the BNP threat. Me, I want English folk music and dance to be as important here as it is in Scotland and Ireland. I may be leaving the field but I still think it should be an objective for all. Specially anyone with a high media profile. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,John from Kemsing Date: 10 Jul 09 - 11:44 AM Tom, There is no crucial difference. If you offend, then you offend. There is no situation where you only half offend, in exactly the same way as one cannot be partially dead. I refer to the earlier post, if it`s not your cup of tea and you have been advised then don`t watch it or read it. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,Tom Bliss Date: 10 Jul 09 - 11:53 AM I disagree - strongly. In matters of people's choices its all about context and manners. In matters over which people have no choice then offence should be avoided and tolerance and empathy are called for. If you stick with that basic rule you won't go far wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: GUEST,John from Kemsing Date: 10 Jul 09 - 12:10 PM I would not be surprised if, from when "man" live in caves, he and she have taken part in lampooning, ridiculing as well as extolling others due to differences and it has probably contributed to the strong psyche that exists in humans today. The alternative seems a grey, drab world. But, until these activities become illegal, live with it and ignore and treat with disdain those that are not your cup of tea. For example, there are not, if any, marches around Westminster calling for the head of Bernard Manning but at the same time I doubt there are any members of ethnic groups support his performances by attending. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:31 PM I doubt there are any members of ethnic groups support his performances by attending. Well they couldn't if they wanted, since he died in 2007. So far as blackface and offence is conbcerned, I would suspect that it's the idea and not the reality that's the problem. Say "black make up" and the image people have is of performers dressed up and behaving in a way that parodies black people. Which in this case could well be the image likely to be conveyed by children to their parents, which teh school was worried about. The reality of blackface, whether Border Morris style or Rochester sweeps, is very different, and I very much doubt if many people coming across it in its natural habitat, the street, ever see this as being anything to do with parodying black people. Common sense in these matters is important - and it would have made every sense in a school performance to adjust things so as to avoid this kind of misunderstanding. In fact it would have been basic good manners to make such an adjustment by switching to a different colour for the occasion. specially since there is no longstanding tradition involved which can be seen as a matter of principle. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Smokey. Date: 10 Jul 09 - 06:39 PM What on earth are 'non racist connotations', and how might morris dancers articulate them? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Smokey. Date: 10 Jul 09 - 07:47 PM I'm still waiting for those non-racists reasons for blacking-up. I can well see how blacking up could be used to highlight or enhance the offensiveness of some act of racial hatred or discrimination, but to the best of my admittedly limited knowledge, morris dancing has never had that aim. I'm assuming Motley do primarily it because they want to. That is a non-racist reason I can certainly live with. I expect if they start getting significant negative feedback from black people at gigs, they'll think again, but if their 'gimmick' is not motivated by racial hatred, discrimination, mockery etc., then I don't blame them for their stance in this sorry incident. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Smokey. Date: 10 Jul 09 - 07:50 PM I'm assuming Motley do primarily it because they want to And I'll talk gibberish if I want to. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Aeola Date: 11 Jul 09 - 04:54 PM I wonder what our PC friends would make of our early miners returning from work!! |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Smokey. Date: 11 Jul 09 - 10:09 PM Perhaps they could wear black ski-masks or balaclavas. That aside, I found this on John Kirkpatrick's website, taken from an old interview: "We used to sing the words, "There was a little nigger but he grew no bigger ... " but we've changed them to avoid offending black people. I don't think there's any cause for offence in blacking up, but singing about niggers is rather different. I must say we have rarely come across blacks where we live, obviously by travelling around we see more, but they usually either seem to understand the point of the disguise or they don't make any connection at all. The first time we ever danced out, we were all driving up to the pub in our blacking for the first time, nobody could recognise anybody else, and this carload of Africans turned up in full flowing robes. This had been set up by one of our members and he hadn't told the rest of us, so we were shitting ourselves even more than we were already. But they loved it. " |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Vic Smith Date: 13 Jul 09 - 09:58 AM Of course, if Motley Morris no longer have an outlet for their skills at school fetes, they could always turn their talents to Table Morris Dancing |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: akenaton Date: 28 Jul 09 - 04:54 PM We don't have Morris dancing in Scotland, as far as I know, but I have read that the original "Moorish"? dancers were "black" or brown. If this is true, would it affect how some here view the blacking up of the Morris team? What are the origins of Morris dancing? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Jack Blandiver Date: 28 Jul 09 - 05:03 PM What are the origins of Morris dancing? Aaaaarrrrgggghhhh!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 28 Jul 09 - 05:27 PM Could we have a tune for that? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: akenaton Date: 28 Jul 09 - 05:37 PM I take it by that reaction, that all Morris dancing is offensive....whether the performers are blacked up or not? :0) If it was originally performed by blacks (there is some evidence of blacking up from the early 1800's) wouldn't some here consider all Morris dancing as "racist"? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Jack Blandiver Date: 28 Jul 09 - 05:44 PM I take it by that reaction, that all Morris dancing is offensive....whether the performers are blacked up or not? :0) I love Morris Dancing, even Fluffy Morris, I just flee in horror from discussions on the origins thereof - although it would seem Fluffy has the more genuine claim to being actually Traditional, as oppose to a revivalist fantasy. Please note: I have no problem with revivalist fantasies, just as long as they don't pass themselves off as a) traditional or b) keeping the tradition alive. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Sandman Date: 28 Jul 09 - 07:52 PM I would like to put forward two points[these are not necessarily my opinions]but I think they are worth considering. 1.the blacking up is different from the blacking up of the black and white minstrels,there is no whiting up of the eyes and mouth. 2.the intention[as far as I can make out from discussing with morris dancers] is a disguise,not an imitation of black and white or earlier minstrels,or black people,nor is the intention as far as I can ascertain,an attempt to ridicule black people. having said all that as a white person,who has only suffered a tiny amount of racial abuse,it is difficult for me to know, how it must feel to be a black person who has suffered racial abuse,and how the majority of black people,feel about Blacking/Browning up |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Jack Blandiver Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:52 AM nor is the intention as far as I can ascertain,an attempt to ridicule black people. It hasn't been made clear yet what the actual intention is, other than it being, somehow, fashionable to do so. Even if the intention is not racist, it is just plain stupidity than cannot see that a white person blacking up for fun has overriding racist implications. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Smokey. Date: 29 Jul 09 - 04:46 PM I can see how some people might perceive racist implications, but not everyone. Perhaps it requires intelligence. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 29 Jul 09 - 04:53 PM "Perhaps it requires intelligence." Funny! Because the most intelligently expressed posts on this thread by far (bar R. Bridge's IMO) have come from individuals articulating their thoughts about why blacking-up might not be supportable as a so-called 'traditional' practice. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: The Sandman Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:54 PM I would like to ask ,whether is it true,that Morris sides that black up will not be booked at Sidmouth. I see this as a very grey area,the morris sides that are blacking up,are not putting on the same disguise on as the black and white minstrels,or the earlier minstrels[please note I am not using the offensive word] there have been suggestions that the morris sides should be masked,because that removes the minstrel association,but then the corking up of morris sides is different from the minstrels[although, it is closer than the masked disguise]. are the bacup coconut dancers next to be criticised for blacking up? |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Phil Edwards Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:14 PM I think any blacking-up needs to be justified, and the justification needs to be a bit stronger than "because we felt like it" or "because we wanted to dance Border and that's how you do it". The Bacup Coconutters have got a stronger justification, in the form of actual tradition. So no, I don't think they're 'next' to be criticised after Motley - that would be A. N. Other Border Side, closely followed by Yet Another Border Side and Oh No Not Another Border Side. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Old Vermin Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:26 PM And as for how that there new side from Purple face -paint works far too well with purple rag-coast. Works so well your eyes'll cross just a-trying to look at it. An' as for purple and green, I asks you.... The way forward has to be green and purple. And black, which is the new black. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: Smokey. Date: 29 Jul 09 - 06:32 PM It's a grey area. |
|
Subject: RE: Motley Morris banned ! From: akenaton Date: 30 Jul 09 - 02:39 AM There are obviously people here who know the dancers concerned, what they have to ask themselves is "do they think these people are racist"....if they know them and don't believe they are racist, they should shut the fuck up. It is none of their business what colour the dancers paint their faces....as the posters above have said every colour could give offense to some minority or other. "Perhaps it requires intelligence."....I think I agree with Smokey!! |
| Share Thread: |
