再三考虑

IF 0.9 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Lisa M. Beringer, Terrence T. Tucker, Joseph Litvak, Derek C. Maus, Juniper Ellis
{"title":"再三考虑","authors":"Lisa M. Beringer, Terrence T. Tucker, Joseph Litvak, Derek C. Maus, Juniper Ellis","doi":"10.5325/studamerhumor.9.1.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Editors: Reading Grace Heneks’s analysis of the Black satirical critique of the white embrace of postracialism in “‘We Cool?’ Satirizing Whiteness in Obama-Era Black Satire” made me think of Richard Pryor’s lament in his 1976 routine Bicentennial Prayer: “How long will this bullshit go on?”1 Heneks’s article documents the practices of casual racism, drawing on Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s concept of new racism, thereby pointing to the fine line between white liberalism and white supremacy: the white liberal fears being called racist; the white supremacist fears a truly postracial and pluralistic society. Both choose silence to maintain the status quo. White claims that we have entered an era of postracialialty—white claims, because Black folks know the idea is “bullshit”—shut down needed discussions of ongoing racial hierarchy and seek to make invisible the harm done by racism to those deemed “other” to whiteness. Heneks’s analysis of Key & Peele’s “Apologies” sketch and Black-ish’s scenes from the episodes “Lemons” and “Gap Year” offer an exploration of the fantasy that exists in white minds that underlies the white liberal fear of being called racist. By centering the subjectivity and humanity of Black people in these vignettes, the satirist is able, Heneks argues, to flip the narrative and deconstruct the fantasy of white liberalism, which is often (un) wittingly supportive of white supremacy. Most intriguing to me about “Apologies” is that in it Key and Peele are trying to have a conversation about Game of Thrones—a fantasy about white nobility and power structures—but they are repeatedly interrupted by white people trying to assert their “coolness.” I wish Heneks had pushed harder","PeriodicalId":53944,"journal":{"name":"Studies in American Humor","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Second Thought\",\"authors\":\"Lisa M. Beringer, Terrence T. Tucker, Joseph Litvak, Derek C. Maus, Juniper Ellis\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/studamerhumor.9.1.0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Editors: Reading Grace Heneks’s analysis of the Black satirical critique of the white embrace of postracialism in “‘We Cool?’ Satirizing Whiteness in Obama-Era Black Satire” made me think of Richard Pryor’s lament in his 1976 routine Bicentennial Prayer: “How long will this bullshit go on?”1 Heneks’s article documents the practices of casual racism, drawing on Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s concept of new racism, thereby pointing to the fine line between white liberalism and white supremacy: the white liberal fears being called racist; the white supremacist fears a truly postracial and pluralistic society. Both choose silence to maintain the status quo. White claims that we have entered an era of postracialialty—white claims, because Black folks know the idea is “bullshit”—shut down needed discussions of ongoing racial hierarchy and seek to make invisible the harm done by racism to those deemed “other” to whiteness. Heneks’s analysis of Key & Peele’s “Apologies” sketch and Black-ish’s scenes from the episodes “Lemons” and “Gap Year” offer an exploration of the fantasy that exists in white minds that underlies the white liberal fear of being called racist. By centering the subjectivity and humanity of Black people in these vignettes, the satirist is able, Heneks argues, to flip the narrative and deconstruct the fantasy of white liberalism, which is often (un) wittingly supportive of white supremacy. Most intriguing to me about “Apologies” is that in it Key and Peele are trying to have a conversation about Game of Thrones—a fantasy about white nobility and power structures—but they are repeatedly interrupted by white people trying to assert their “coolness.” I wish Heneks had pushed harder\",\"PeriodicalId\":53944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in American Humor\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in American Humor\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/studamerhumor.9.1.0004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in American Humor","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/studamerhumor.9.1.0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

编辑:阅读Grace Heneks在《We Cool?》中对黑人对白人拥抱后种族主义的讽刺批评的分析。“在奥巴马时代的黑人讽刺中讽刺白人”让我想起理查德·普赖尔(Richard Pryor)在1976年的例行200周年祈祷中哀叹:“这种屁话还要持续多久?1 Heneks的文章记录了随意种族主义的实践,借鉴了Eduardo Bonilla-Silva的新种族主义概念,从而指出了白人自由主义和白人至上主义之间的微妙界限:白人自由主义者害怕被称为种族主义者;白人至上主义者担心的是一个真正的后种族和多元化的社会。双方都选择沉默来维持现状。白人声称我们已经进入了一个后种族主义的时代——白人的说法,因为黑人知道这个想法是“胡扯”——关闭了关于正在进行的种族等级制度的必要讨论,并试图让种族主义对那些被认为是白人“他者”的人造成的伤害看不见。Heneks对Key & Peele的《道歉》小品和Black-ish在《柠檬》(Lemons)和《间隔年》(Gap Year)两集中的场景的分析,提供了对存在于白人头脑中的幻想的探索,这种幻想隐藏在白人自由主义者害怕被称为种族主义者的恐惧之下。亨内克斯认为,通过将黑人的主体性和人性置于这些小插曲的中心,讽刺作家能够翻转叙事,解构白人自由主义的幻想,这种幻想往往(无意地)支持白人至上主义。《道歉》最让我感兴趣的是,基和皮尔试图就《权力的游戏》(Game of thrones)展开对话——这是一个关于白人贵族和权力结构的幻想——但他们一再被试图维护自己“冷静”的白人打断。我真希望亨内克斯能更努力一点
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On Second Thought
Editors: Reading Grace Heneks’s analysis of the Black satirical critique of the white embrace of postracialism in “‘We Cool?’ Satirizing Whiteness in Obama-Era Black Satire” made me think of Richard Pryor’s lament in his 1976 routine Bicentennial Prayer: “How long will this bullshit go on?”1 Heneks’s article documents the practices of casual racism, drawing on Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s concept of new racism, thereby pointing to the fine line between white liberalism and white supremacy: the white liberal fears being called racist; the white supremacist fears a truly postracial and pluralistic society. Both choose silence to maintain the status quo. White claims that we have entered an era of postracialialty—white claims, because Black folks know the idea is “bullshit”—shut down needed discussions of ongoing racial hierarchy and seek to make invisible the harm done by racism to those deemed “other” to whiteness. Heneks’s analysis of Key & Peele’s “Apologies” sketch and Black-ish’s scenes from the episodes “Lemons” and “Gap Year” offer an exploration of the fantasy that exists in white minds that underlies the white liberal fear of being called racist. By centering the subjectivity and humanity of Black people in these vignettes, the satirist is able, Heneks argues, to flip the narrative and deconstruct the fantasy of white liberalism, which is often (un) wittingly supportive of white supremacy. Most intriguing to me about “Apologies” is that in it Key and Peele are trying to have a conversation about Game of Thrones—a fantasy about white nobility and power structures—but they are repeatedly interrupted by white people trying to assert their “coolness.” I wish Heneks had pushed harder
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in American Humor
Studies in American Humor HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
90.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Welcome to the home of Studies in American Humor, the journal of the American Humor Studies Association. Founded by the American Humor Studies Association in 1974 and published continuously since 1982, StAH specializes in humanistic research on humor in America (loosely defined) because the universal human capacity for humor is always expressed within the specific contexts of time, place, and audience that research methods in the humanities strive to address. Such methods now extend well beyond the literary and film analyses that once formed the core of American humor scholarship to a wide range of critical, biographical, historical, theoretical, archival, ethnographic, and digital studies of humor in performance and public life as well as in print and other media. StAH’s expanded editorial board of specialists marks that growth. On behalf of the editorial board, I invite scholars across the humanities to submit their best work on topics in American humor and join us in advancing knowledge in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信