Look at this ad from an old issue of TV Century 21. Does it offend you? Maybe I'm an 'innocent', but I don't remember ever thinking that Golliwogs were an example of racism when I was a kid, probably because the concept of racism was then unknown to me. Perhaps, in my subconscious, I assumed that Golliwogs were a separate strain of creation, like the Smurfs or the Wombles (though they hadn't yet appeared on UK TV), or I considered them as caricatures of black people in the same way that Fred Flintstone and Barney Rubble were caricatures of stone age 'white' men. Never really thought about it to be honest, but I certainly never found myself having any negative or hostile thoughts about black people because of Gollies.
Gollies were well-loved, being seen as 'cute' and adorable, and I doubt that there was anything about them that inculcated seeds of racism in the minds of their young owners. However, maybe you feel differently. If so, can you articulate why Gollies are seemingly not acceptable nowadays, or do you think that accusations of racism are levelled by those who are simply determined to take offence at every little thing in order to beat 'whitey' over the head with a stick and coerce us into apologetic mode? My own view is that anything that isn't intended to demean, criticise, ridicule, or oppress isn't racist, and I find myself continually surprised by what falls under the umbrella of racism these days.
Some Scots see the portrayal of a knock-kneed man wearing a kilt, tam o'shanter, and gnarled cane (think Harry Lauder) as a racist stereotype, but I'm not one of them. I think it's time people loosened up and stopped looking to take offence wherever they can find it. We used to be able to laugh at, as well as with, one another in this country, though having said that, I don't remember anyone ever laughing at a Golliwog - smiling maybe, but only because they were so loveable. What's wrong or racist about that?
Make your feelings known.
******
Perhaps a case could be made for the ad being sexist though. 'Free for every boy'? Didn't girls collect Gollies as well? Maybe the fact that TV21 was considered primarily as a comic for boys might explain the seeming sexism?
18 comments:
I tend to agree with your thinking but I also recognize that, as an old white guy, I don't have the right to decide if a black caricature is offensive. I can't help but feel, though, that many who do find such things offensive do so largely, if not solely, because they feel or have been told that they SHOULD find such things offensive. We are all of us far too easily influenced these days.
FFS give the "culture wars" bullsh*t a rest. We live in a different world now and golliwogs aren't acceptable anymore.
Well, few of us can predict (except in well-worn situations) what others will take offence at. But that's the key word - 'take' - because it's not always the case that something was intended to 'give' offence. However, I'm in total agreement with the rest of your comment. I suspect that taking offence with some people is all about control, in order to get others falling over themselves to apologise and make some kind of amends. Thanks for dropping by, feel free to do so anytime.
That's your last ever comment, CJ, for being a cheeky, rude b@st@rd, who doesn't even take the offered opportunity to explain why Golliwogs are considered unacceptable anymore. For someone who involves himself in the most trivial of 'conversations' on other blogs, I'd have thought you'd have welcomed a chance to engage in a deeper line of thought. Just shows how shallow you are. Give the 'culture wars' bullsh*t a rest? You should be saying that to those who started it and are still pushing it at every opportunity. Say hello to your 'pet' sheep for me.
I think the problem with the gollywog (or any other caricature) is that it is taken on by those with racist views to degrade people of colour. For example I clearly recall black footballers being called gollywogs ( along with foul language) , it was also used in 70s TV shows, by politicians and by nationalist (NF) groups to denegrate black people. And of course it contains the word "wog" which it is thought was used first from shortening the name gollywog as a VERY offensive term. Florence Upton who created the character was outraged by its racist use . For me while I am not 100% sure if the golly was ever initially intended to be racist it is certainly the case that mindless knuckle dragger minority groups have hijacked it and it is those people that we should be getting annoyed at. I disagree with your reply to Colin that culture wars were started by (I assume) the PC brigade, the culture wars were started by those persecuting those they think inferior using everything we have negatively.
That's interesting, McS, and an intelligent response to the question. I wasn't suggesting that 'culture wars' (CJ's term, not mine) were started by the PC Brigade, but by those who insinuate that most or all whites are racists and therefore any and all of their interpretations of a black character must by definition spring from racism. However, should we allow those 'knuckle-draggers' to hijack an innocent character for their own purposes? I've always said that if anyone calls a black person a 'black b@st@rd', the offensive insult there is in the use of the word 'b@st@rd', not 'black', and I know that many black kids once had Gollies so they clearly didn't consider them a racist symbol at that time.
However, in my quest to make my blog a springboard for intelligent and reasoned discussion on controversial issues (on occasion) I thought it worthwhile to address the matter, after seeing the ad while browsing through my back issues of TV21. No one should ever fear honest enquiry and you have responded with food for thought - unlike CJ, who obviously doesn't regard considered examination worthwhile. It should be remembered that with a blog, sometimes whatever material is to hand has to be 'mined' in order to supply readers with something to read (and think about). Otherwise no blog!
I think it's a fair post subject Kid, talking about things like this is always good. Personally I don't think that in itself a golly is racist it's as I said it's just those that use loved "innocent" iconography in the public domain against certain groups, and by association against us all. They spoil everything and I'm so fed up with them. As you say "black's" not the bad word in any put down and the gollys not bad in itself. I don't think white people are mostly considered racist ( many black groups say that also) it's certain media outlets that like to say this instead of addressing the real problem groups causing the chaos. But it has to be said but quite a few whites are racist (in degrees) and let's be honest so are some people of colour are as well ( some with good cause fueled by these groups). I also know many white people who would be outraged if called racist but are happy to use racist language.
It's a complicated subject of course, but worthy of discussion, and I thought my readers would appreciate the opportunity to share their thoughts on the matter as you have done. I think Booksteve made a good point when he said that some people are offended by things because they've been told they should be offended by them, and I think that's true to a great extent. Thanks for your valuable contribution to the subject.
A lot of people won't be happy until we all have a chip inserted in our heads which can be used to rewrite history like The Ministry of Truth in 1984.
History happened, if it was bad it needs to be explained, not deleted.
Dave ( I spent my youth walking up and down Black Boy Hill in Bristol, named because it's where the slaves were marched down to the docks, reading the 'racist' Enid Blyton and going to concerts at the Colston Hall.)
That seems to be the agenda of some people, DW - don't learn from history, just delete it, good bad, or indifferent. Only British history of course, as everyone knows all other nations were absolutely top-notch.
One odd thing I noticed is that even though Alan Moore used a Golliwog in a somewhat disapproving way in BLACK DOSSIER, at least one online essayist bashed Moore for having used a Golliwog at all (though I confess I don't remember where I read the comment).
Never saw that, GP, 'cos I'm selective about what I read by Alan Moore, but he does tend to court controversy, doesn't he? I've actually got a Golly figure key ring, though I don't use it, it hangs on the wall. It doesn't make me think poorly or badly of black people, and I have nothing but the highest appreciation of it as something that makes people smile fondly, including me. A Golly just looks so nice (at least in the ones I've seen).
I grew up in London during the 1950's. I had two Golliwog dolls and several Golliwog Badges from Robertson's Silver Shred Marmalade, still my favourite marmalade.
I had friends at school and college that were of West Indian or African heritage and having lived in New York City for over forty years I have worked with African Americans and had had next door neighbours that were black.
People are people, I personally dislike incompetents badly doing a job and that isn't based on race or religion, they're just incompetents.
Having Golliwogs as a kid didn't make me racist and using the term Golliwog as an insult is the result of a racist's mind because if they were aware of the original children's story they would be heartbroken to know the Golliwog is the hero of the story!
To me, like to Kid, the golliwog comes with a warm feeling of childhood.
Here in the US, many educated Black Americans collect golliwogs and other cultural memorabilia of past American black icons. A major brand of Pancake Mix, Aunt Jemima, modified the Black Woman cook on the packaging, then dropped her image completely and from June the name Aunt Jemima will also be dropped. This in response to a country slowly tearing itself apart from racism.
Golliwog Good. White or Black Bigoted Racists Bad.
Brilliant comment, T47, and says it all really. I think more whites are offended on black people's behalf than black people themselves. I'll have to track down some Robertson's Gollies badges to add to my collection. They just look so great and make me smile with pleasure.
When I was young, Golliwogs seemed inter-changeable with Smurfs and other toys of colour. However I saw a documentary on the origin of the golly and sadly they were truly insulting and offensive so I can no longer put them in the same bracket. It’s a shame as our memories are of the sanitised Robertson’s style golly but it’s just too near the knuckle as a stand-alone character.
I've read conflicting reports of their origins, CN, so I'll have to do more research. However, the Robertson's Gollies are the ones most people think about when the name is mentioned, so I prefer not to jettison my more innocent ideas about them. Is it possible to be against Gollies with a bad interpretation, but FOR ones with a good interpretation?
Your post had me rummaging in the “odds-and-ends” box to find two of the advertised enamel gollie badges (the bagpiper and guitarist) alongside my Corgi Club badge and a few of steam locos. A memento of another time. I don’t think they were racially divisive, but looking back certainly they continued to foster a patronising view of black people as cheerful chappies predominantly good at sports and music (even the bagpipes!).
A few years back I did some STEM mentoring at a predominantly African-American high school on the south side of Chicago. These kids need role models and positive imagery that break down accepted racial stereotypes. So consigning gollies and other patronising images ( such as Aunt Jemima as mentioned by fellow correspondent Terranova47) to history is a necessary part of a drive for equal opportunity IMHO.
Well, I suppose it depends on whether you consider them patronising images or not, B. Sometimes it seems that those black people who are against things like Gollies, are against them simply because they were originated by whites, and therefore MUST be meant as some kind of putdown. The description you give in your first paragraph sounds like a positively flattering role model to me, certainly not negative. In my view, Gollies are affectionate cartoon caricatures, nothing more. Kind of like Popeye or Fred Flintstone. However, there's room for nearly all shades of opinion on Crivens, not just ones that are in line with my own.
Post a Comment