Zwarte Piet

RobYourBuilder

bodice ripper wrote: »

I am entitled to an opinion, even if no one else cares.

Its exactly as old as Minstrel shows in the US, would we defend that as tradition?

Of course I wouldn't. Minstrel shows were intended to demean the Afro-American population of the time. That's unacceptable.

Black Pete is a tradition that started well before there was a sizeable black population in the Netherlands. There is no malice behind it.

You're looking at this through a very American-centric prism. Just because blackface has bad connotations in America, doesn't make that true for Zwarte Piet. Would you be an American, by any chance?

bodice ripper

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Of course I wouldn't. Minstrel shows were intended to demean the Afro-American population of the time. That's unacceptable.

Black Pete is a tradition that started well before there was a sizeable black population in the Netherlands. There is no malice behind it.

You're looking at this through a very American-centric prism. Just because blackface has bad connotations in America, doesn't make that true for Zwarte Piet. Would you be an American, by any chance?

One of my parents is american, and this character was created by an individual in 1850, and the blackface/earrings/wig/lips became popular in the 1920's, so it is entirely contemporary with the minstrel image. there is a massive movement against Piet amongst the black population here, who strenuously object to Piet in schools. this is generally met with "go back to your own country", despite these people having been in the Netherlands for generations. Which is why the denfense is creepier than the character.

the Netherlands has a history of slaving, the just sold to other people.

Why not hire black people to play the character?

bodice ripper

bodice ripper wrote: »

you'll note I didn't say it should stop. I have Dutch friends who are very passionate in their defense of Zwarte Piet, and I do not think less of them for it.

I also am not that fond of restricting anyone's freedoms, even if it is causing offence.

However, the way in which it is defended is frequently more distasteful than the character itself, and the particularly pig headed way in which some Dutch people refuse to even see how it could be offensive to someone other than themselves does their point no favours...

Quouted for those with selective reading...

wexie

bodice ripper wrote: »

One of my parents is american, and this character was created by an individual in 1850, and the blackface/earrings/wig/lips became popular in the 1920's, so it is entirely contemporary with the minstrel image. there is a massive movement against Piet amongst the black population here, who strenuously object to Piet in schools. this is generally met with "go back to your own country", despite these people having been in the Netherlands for generations. Which is why the denfense is creepier than the character.

the Netherlands has a history of slaving, the just sold to other people.

Why not hire black people to play the character?

eerrr.....because that would be considered racist (hiring people based on skin colour is bad hmmmkay?)



just because it is contemporary with the minstrel image doesn't mean it's comparable, Zwarte Piet, overall, portrays a pretty positive image of friendly and happy helpers to St. Nick. (aside from the whole 'if you're bad they're going to bring you back to spain' thing).

bodice ripper

wexie wrote: »

eerrr.....because that would be considered racist (hiring people based on skin colour is bad hmmmkay?)



just because it is contemporary with the minstrel image doesn't mean it's comparable, Zwarte Piet, overall, portrays a pretty positive image of friendly and happy helpers to St. Nick. (aside from the whole 'if you're bad they're going to bring you back to spain' thing).

surely you jest

http://www.animaatjes.nl/cliparts/speciale-dagen/zwarte-piet/animaatjes-zwarte-piet-50067.jpg

wexie

bodice ripper wrote: »

surely you jest

http://www.animaatjes.nl/cliparts/speciale-dagen/zwarte-piet/animaatjes-zwarte-piet-50067.jpg

okay yes, in appearance, however the intent and meaning behind it aren't even remotely comparable.

I find this whole notion that 'blackface' by definition is racist absolutely laughable. This discussion seems to come up every year and apparently if I wanted to dress up as Mr. T for Halloween that would have been racist.

To me the mere fact that people attach quite so much meaning to skin colour is worrying on it's own. It's just a physical attribute, no more than freckles, red hair or floppy ears. There shouldn't be a value attached to it.

Nodin

wexie wrote: »

just because it is contemporary with the minstrel image doesn't mean it's comparable, Zwarte Piet, overall, portrays a pretty positive image of friendly and happy helpers to St. Nick. (aside from the whole 'if you're bad they're going to bring you back to spain' thing).

Alas no.

"The transformation, however, is not complete with the outfit and greasepaint. The character must speak poor Dutch with a stupid accent, and must act childlike and mischievous when performing. And from mid-November, when Sintaklass and his servants arrive, you can see Zwarte Pieten all over, on television programmes and commercials and on the streets, acting the fool.
At schools across the country, children sing songs referring to the skin tone and character of the black servant "...even if I'm black as coal I mean well…", "Saint Nicolas, enter with your black servant", etc, and there are other old songs about Zwarte Piet in which he's made out to be a little bit stupid, a little bit clumsy, more akin to a child than an adult, the same generalisations previously applied to black people, but which can no longer be made explicitly."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/05/black-pete-race-netherlands

wexie

Nodin wrote: »

Alas no.

"The transformation, however, is not complete with the outfit and greasepaint. The character must speak poor Dutch with a stupid accent, and must act childlike and mischievous when performing. And from mid-November, when Sintaklass and his servants arrive, you can see Zwarte Pieten all over, on television programmes and commercials and on the streets, acting the fool.
At schools across the country, children sing songs referring to the skin tone and character of the black servant "...even if I'm black as coal I mean well…", "Saint Nicolas, enter with your black servant", etc, and there are other old songs about Zwarte Piet in which he's made out to be a little bit stupid, a little bit clumsy, more akin to a child than an adult, the same generalisations previously applied to black people, but which can no longer be made explicitly."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/05/black-pete-race-netherlands

and you get this information from an English newspaper.....right...I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

rozeboosje

I think the whole hoopla around "Zwarte Piet" is utterly bizarre.

Why anybody would think that that character is "racist" is beyond me; in fact I think that those who make the loudest noise about how "racist" Zwarte Piet is should take a long hard look at themselves. What makes them connect this clearly fictitious character who has a skin colour that can't be observed in any actual human being, who wears makeup that nobody in their right mind would ever wear, and who wears the kind of attire that you'd only ever see on stage with any living human being?

It reminds me of Doug Loates, who wrote a letter to Coca Cola. Coca Cola had printed combinations of English and French words on the inside of bottle caps for people to discover as they opened their bottles. On one occasion, the English word in question was "YOU" and the French word was "RETARD", but of course that is also well known as an English word. But this is where the story gets bizarre, as Doug happened to have a daughter called Fiona with Cerebral Palsy....

Doug had a hissy fit over this. What if Fiona had opened that bottle? How would YOU feel if you had a daughter like that and you opened that bottle? What if SHE had opened that bottle!?

But here's the rub... The combination of those two particular words in that order was a random occurrence caused by an impersonal piece of software. Nobody in Coca Cola deliberately set out to insult anyone. The fact that that particular bottle ended up coming to the attention of Doug was, also, the result of a totally random sequence of events. Nobody set out to insult Doug or anybody in his family deliberately.

But most importantly, when Doug DID become aware of the bottle cap and what it said, HE immediately thought of his daughter Fiona.

Let that sink in for a moment.

I think the whole furore about Zwarte Piet is not all that different. If one sees a Zwarte Piet character and one immediately connects that character to "black people", maybe one should examine one's own prejudices rather than play the Political Correctness game.

RobYourBuilder

bodice ripper wrote: »

One of my parents is american, and this character was created by an individual in 1850, and the blackface/earrings/wig/lips became popular in the 1920's, so it is entirely contemporary with the minstrel image. there is a massive movement against Piet amongst the black population here, who strenuously object to Piet in schools. this is generally met with "go back to your own country", despite these people having been in the Netherlands for generations. Which is why the denfense is creepier than the character.

the Netherlands has a history of slaving, the just sold to other people.

Why not hire black people to play the character?

Bringing slavery into it now. How very American. With the Zwarte Piet character there wasn't any intent of creating an offensive racial stereotype, let alone create a representation of slavery. After all, in Holland, it would make more sense for the character to be of Indonesian descent if that were the case. Perhaps his character originated as a Moor in order to scare children into thinking he would take you away if you misbehaved, but there's no confirmed reason as to why exactly Zwarte Piet is black, which is probably because there isn't one.

There is a history of these type of characters all across Europe: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_Man

As far as most people are concerned, Zwarte Piet is Sinterklaas' servant that according to an old children's book, simply happens to be a Moor because he lived in Spain and it would make for a pretty distinguishable character.

Wearing blackface in America, however, while bearing similarity to the Zwarte Piet character in facial make-up, has completely different origins. Instead of originating from a children's book as a character that simply happens to be black, it originated as a theatric, exaggerated racial stereotype of an African slave worker. That's a big difference.

bodice ripper

wexie wrote: »

and you get this information from an English newspaper.....right...I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I am getting my information from seeing it in person. The Piets generally speak with an insulting caricature of a Surinamese accent, totally unconnected from the mythos, but mocking a good chunk of the Netherlands' black population.

bodice ripper

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Bringing slavery into it now. How very American. With the Zwarte Piet character there wasn't any intent of creating an offensive racial stereotype, let alone create a representation of slavery. After all, in Holland, it would make more sense for the character to be of Indonesian descent if that were the case. Perhaps his character originated as a Moor in order to scare children into thinking he would take you away if you misbehaved, but there's no confirmed reason as to why exactly Zwarte Piet is black, which is probably because there isn't one.

There is a history of these type of characters all across Europe: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_Man

As far as most people are concerned, Zwarte Piet is Sinterklaas' servant that according to an old children's book, simply happens to be a Moor because he lived in Spain and it would make for a pretty distinguishable character.

Wearing blackface in America, however, while bearing similarity to the Zwarte Piet character in facial make-up, has completely different origins. Instead of originating from a children's book as a character that simply happens to be black, it originated as a theatric, exaggerated racial stereotype of an African slave worker. That's a big difference.

so before, I didn't get an opinion because I am foreign, now its because I am american. with those criteria, and my background, I never get to hold a view on anything, anywhere.

In Amsterdam, they are trying to move away from the big red lips and earrings, which regardless of whether you think that is only insulting to americans, is clearly a racist stereotype.

Nodin

wexie wrote: »

and you get this information from an English newspaper.....right...I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Is there a list of approved nationalities that can provide information on the topic to hand?

bodice ripper

Nodin wrote: »

Is there a list of approved nationalities that can provide information on the topic to hand?

and do the opinions of black Dutch citizens count?

Nodin

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Bringing slavery into it now. How very American. With the Zwarte Piet character there wasn't any intent of creating an offensive racial stereotype, let alone create a representation of slavery. After all, in Holland, it would make more sense for the character to be of Indonesian descent if that were the case. Perhaps his character originated as a Moor in order to scare children into thinking he would take you away if you misbehaved, but there's no confirmed reason as to why exactly Zwarte Piet is black, which is probably because there isn't one.

There is a history of these type of characters all across Europe: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_Man

.

I'm not seeing a pile of golliwogged faced helpers in there, tbh.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

golliwogged faced

[Raises eyebrow]

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

[Raises eyebrow]

That's what they're done up like.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

That's what they're done up like.

Is that what they look like TO YOU? Hmmmm.

Don't get me wrong. I'd be happy to accept that when Zwarte Piet was invented, its inventors may have been raging racists who were simply being a shower of knuts. But acknowleding that historical fact is not the same as attributing "racism" to those in the Netherlands who now simply include the character in their Sinterklaas celebrations because it has become a cultural artefact, and without ever thinking about "black people" when they see a Zwarte Piet. THAT is where the PC kneejerking has gone too far.

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

Is that what they look like TO YOU? Hmmmm.

Don't get me wrong. I'd be happy to accept that when Zwarte Piet was invented, its inventors may have been raging racists who were simply being a shower of knuts. But acknowleding that historical fact is not the same as attributing "racism" to those in the Netherlands who now simply include the character in their Sinterklaas celebrations because it has become a cultural artefact, and without ever thinking about "black people" when they see a Zwarte Piet. THAT is where the PC kneejerking has gone too far.

I agree completely. I don't think the people who are into zwarte piet are racists. And I can see why they think "I am not racist, so Piet isn't racist", but I don't understand why there is quite a stubborn refusal to see how a black Dutch person might find it offensive.

rozeboosje

bodice ripper wrote: »

I agree completely. I don't think the people who are into zwarte piet are racists. And I can see why they think "I am not racist, so Piet isn't racist", but I don't understand why there is quite a stubborn refusal to see how a black Dutch person might find it offensive.

I would understand it if - like you pointed out before - the person playing the Zwarte Piet character mocks a Surinam accent or something like that. Then I can see it as being "racist" as the person doing it would be parading it as such. But simply dressing up in the outfit including the face paint and handing sweets to the kids? Nah.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

Is that what they look like TO YOU? Hmmmm..

It's what they look like, the clothes, hair and exaggerated lips.

rozeboosje wrote: »

Don't get me wrong. I'd be happy to accept that when Zwarte Piet was invented, its inventors may have been raging racists who were simply being a shower of knuts. But acknowleding that historical fact is not the same as attributing "racism" to those in the Netherlands who now simply include the character in their Sinterklaas celebrations because it has become a cultural artefact, and without ever thinking about "black people" when they see a Zwarte Piet. THAT is where the PC kneejerking has gone too far.

I'm sure most don't see it as racist, nor have I attributed racism to the population of the netherlands. That, however, doesn't mean it isn't.

rozeboosje

... and I think that that is also why it has provoked such a visceral reaction. Nobody likes to be tarred with the broad brush.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

That, however, doesn't mean it isn't.

How is it racist? Assuming the person who dresses up as such doesn't start talking with a Surinam accent or something like that. Assuming that, please explain how it's racist.

rozeboosje

I mean, have you ever met an actual living person who actually looks like a "golliwog"?

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

How is it racist? Assuming the person who dresses up as such doesn't start talking with a Surinam accent or something like that. Assuming that, please explain how it's racist.

It's a caricature of African/Black features.

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

I would understand it if - like you pointed out before - the person playing the Zwarte Piet character mocks a Surinam accent or something like that. Then I can see it as being "racist" as the person doing it would be parading it as such. But simply dressing up in the outfit including the face paint and handing sweets to the kids? Nah.

Again, I agree completely. Its the stereotype lips/earrings/accent that are jarring. Other than that, isnt it nice that somewhere has any imagery including black characters in the lead up to Christmas?

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

It's a caricature of African/Black features.

Again ... that association appears to be happening in YOUR mind, not mine. Not in the minds of many people in the Netherlands that celebrate Sinterklaas either.

BTW - not saying that there isn't racism in the Netherlands. Just look at Geert Wilders and his merry bunch of fukkwits

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

I mean, have you ever met an actual living person who actually looks like a "golliwog"?

I have never seen a hunched, wizened, hook nosed jew before either. It doesnt mean that caricature isnt racist. ..

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

Again ... that association appears to be happening in YOUR mind, not mine. Not in the minds of many people in the Netherlands that celebrate Sinterklaas either.

I remember a similar conversation like this about Lawn Jockeys. You don't see it as racist because you've seen it all your life, and zwart piet means zwart piet to you the same as everyone else.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

I remember a similar conversation like this about Lawn Jockeys. You don't see it as racist because you've seen it all your life, and zwart piet means zwart piet to you the same as everyone else.

Well then, why kill the tradition off?

rozeboosje

bodice ripper wrote: »

I have never seen a hunched, wizened, hook nosed jew before either. It doesnt mean that caricature isnt racist. ..

Of course. And if you present that as "a Jew" then you'd quite rightly be accused of racism. But what if you had a tradition that features a hunched, wizened and hook nosed person in a positive light without any reference to what religion or ethnicity they are supposed to be, and then people who observe the tradition start telling you that you're being racist against Jews? That would be ludicrous.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

Well then, why kill the tradition off?

Because it's a racist depiction.

And certain aspects of it need to be changed, rather than kill the whole thing off. I'd say ditching the red lips, the hair and acting the idiot as well as the accent would make it grand.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

Because it's a racist depiction.

You can repeat that until the cows come home, but I'm not buying it. A racist depiction of WHAT?

Nodin wrote: »

I'd say ditching the red lips, the hair and acting the idiot as well as the accent would make it grand.

Nobody has lips or hair like that. Acting the idiot is part of the act. But yes, I agree, the accent is crossing the line.

EazyD

Nodin wrote: »

Because it's a racist depiction.

And certain aspects of it need to be changed, rather than kill the whole thing off. I'd say ditching the red lips, the hair and acting the idiot as well as the accent would make it grand.

Is it really racist though? While it may be of questionable taste I think labelling it simply as that is a bit of a stretch.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

You can repeat that until the cows come home, but I'm not buying it. A racist depiction of WHAT?.

It's how black people have been stereotyped for as long as black people have been stereotyped.

rozeboosje wrote: »

Nobody has lips or hair like that. Acting the idiot is part of the act. But yes, I agree, the accent is crossing the line.

See above.

Acting the idiot is part of the problem, unfortunately.

Beaner1

Ask the surinamese what they think.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

It's how black people have been stereotyped for as long as black people have been stereotyped.

See my observation about the hunched, wizened and hook nosed person, above.

Nodin wrote: »

Acting the idiot is part of the problem, unfortunately.

And "black people" are .... idiots? Is that what you're alluding to here?


I agree that anything that clearly identifies a "Zwarte Piet" as a member of any particular ethnicity, such as a Surinam accent, should be dropped. For obvious reasons. But I would argue against dropping other attributes just because they sometimes get used by racists in their caricatures. Instead we should slap racists with the clue stick every time they do it, until their own caricatures become an embarrassment to them.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

See my observation about the hunched, wizened and hook nosed person, above..

You aren't going to see it, as I alluded to before.

rozeboosje wrote: »

And "black people" are .... idiots? Is that what you're alluding to here?
.

No, I am obviously referring to what they've been stereotyped as. That's not the first time you've made that kind of remark in this thread and its getting insulting at this stage.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

it's getting insulting at this stage.

It's just as insulting to be told you're doing something "racist" just because somewhere in the world actual racists are doing it for racist reasons.

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

It's just as insulting to be told you're doing something "racist" just because somewhere in the world actual racists are doing it for racist reasons.

I don't believe the reasons are racist. The portrayal on the other hand...

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

It's just as insulting to be told you're doing something "racist" just because somewhere in the world actual racists are doing it for racist reasons.

I've only referred to zwarte piet as racist, nothing else. You don't and more than likely won't see it as such.

rozeboosje

So if we can all agree that before labeling something as "racist" we should take into account the actual intention of the person doing it, THEN we can move on. Happy with that?

rozeboosje

bodice ripper wrote: »

I don't believe the reasons are racist. The portrayal on the other hand...

Nope. Unless the audience is told that the "Zwarte Piet" portrays, say, "a Surinamer", or this can clearly be deduced from the fact that the "Zwarte Piet" is speaking with a Surinam accent, the character is not intended to refer to any living person, and as such it cannot be racist.

anncoates

Idleater wrote: »

I followed the unesco cultural envoy threatening not to list the Netherlands in some new ranked listing of culturally aware countries because of this last year. The response was as only the Dutch would : we didn't ask to be listed, nor do we care, it's our tradition for longer than you have existed.

I must confess to enjoying this.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

So if we can all agree that before labeling something as "racist" we should take into account the actual intention of the person doing it, THEN we can move on. Happy with that?

No, rather obviously.

rozeboosje

Nodin wrote: »

No, rather obviously.

So let me get this straight: you demand the privilege of insulting other people but you get annoyed when it's lobbed right back at ya? Ok. Understood.

And let there be no doubt about this: being told that the tradition that you've enjoyed all your life without a second thought about anybody's skin colour or any other physical attributes is "racist" is an insult. No ifs, buts or maybes.

Nodin

rozeboosje wrote: »

So let me get this straight: you demand the privilege of insulting other people but you get annoyed when it's lobbed right back at ya? Ok. Understood.

I don't believe I've insulted you, though I'm open to correction should you provide an example. You've been on the offensive and prickly since you began posting on the thread, however.

denhaagenite

Haven't read the whole thread so apologies if my points have been addressed already.

Zwarte Piet, while indeed slightly sinister in nature and conjures up memories of slavery, is a tradition in the Netherlands that children absolutely love, and that fosters an amazing sense of community that I have really never encountered before. I have a friend from London who's parents are from Ghana. He is black and has 2 boys with his Dutch ex- girlfriend, and when they were small they used to put black makeup on their faces and don the odd clothing, completely oblivious to any underlying messages. It was sweets, gifts, a bit of a laugh, nothing more.

The people who get up in arms about it here are the recent immigrants, of various nationalities, cultures and races. They're trying to make a problem anywhere they can, as far as I can see because they're unhappy with their lot. Friends I have of different race don't even give it a thought, mostly from Sint Maarten, Curacao, Surinaam, Indonesia. It's the people who aren't integrated and don't want to integrate are bothered by it.

My two cents? Children don't see a colour unless we point it out to them. I think it's a funny little parade, pepernoten in shoes and that's it. If they ask questions when they're older, maybe it's a good way to open the topic of the history of the Netherlands not so proud history of slavery and a way to educate. If I have children, that's certainly the way I'm going to handle it.

bodice ripper

rozeboosje wrote: »

So if we can all agree that before labeling something as "racist" we should take into account the actual intention of the person doing it, THEN we can move on. Happy with that?

nope.

Teyla Emmagan

I think Zwarte Piet is kinda cool.