#I’m not downplaying protests I’m pointing out that community involvement is important too | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

animatedminds · 4 years

Text

Splash Mountain, Br’er Rabbit, and the Tragedy of Being Represented By Other People.

So, this is probably going to be the realest post I’ll make for a while - or at least until The Boondocks arrives, but it seemed apropos. Immediately after this I’ve got rants about sci fi and Star Wars and other unrelated things coming up, but for now we have my earnest opinions on a decision I feel should have been better thought out than it was. This is going to read more like an article or an essay than a review, but I think it needs to be said.

It hasn’t come up too often on this blog, but I am African American. It’s my life and my perspective. And as an African American, a lover of animation and - though this definitely doesn’t come up on the blog - a passionate folklorist in what you could call an academic sense (in that I’m a writer and a student, and folklore is the subject of most of my research), people I know in real life have asked me more than once what my opinion on the removal of Splash Mountain in favor of Princess and the Frog, how I must be glad it’s finally being removed, what my take on the history there was, and…

Well…

To really give that opinion, I’ve got to start at the beginning. Not Song of the South - that, if anything, is the very middle. We have to start with Br’er Rabbit and who that character was. Sit back students, info dump incoming.

Br’er Rabbit is an folklore character of African American origin with - like many folkloric figures - a difficult to place date of origin, but he was known to have existed at least since the early 19th Century, He has obvious similarities to the far older figure of Anansi - with several Br’er Rabbit tales even taking elements of Anansi stories verbatim - though with a the notable difference that unlike Anansi, Br’er Rabbit was more often a heroic figure: an underdog and seemingly downtrodden figure who used his wits and his enemies’ hubris rather than physical force to win the day. The meaning of that kind of figure to an enslaved people is obvious, especially when you compare Br’er Rabbit to another, contemporary trickster figure in African American history by the name of John. Br’er Rabbit’s stories could even arguably be seen as a more child-friendly version of the John tales, in which a human trickster pulls the same kind of momentum turning ploys on villains - but those villains tended to be explicitly slave masters or overseers, and John’s payback often came with explicitly deadly results. The existence of John as escapism for the enslaved or just-post-enslaved (IE Reconstruction) populations is clear: a person who with no power who could fight back with nothing but their mind, preying on the fact that their enemies see them as incapable and helpless, and the connection of Br’er Rabbit to that message is difficult to deny. If anything, Br’er Rabbit comes off as a somewhat more child-friendly version of the concept.

But the most important thing to glean from this is who and what Br’er Rabbit is: a product of the African American community and its history, as a means of those people to express themselves and their values in the face of oppression.

Now we fast forward to 1881, and along comes Joel Chandler Harris: a white Georgian. Harris was a folklorist himself, and travelled the country collecting stories - most famously Br’er Rabbit stories. His stated reason was to bridge African American and white communities by sharing stories, but he was tainted by the perspectives of his world and his place in it, infamously creating a framing narrative for those stories in which the character telling them exuded the imagery of subservience and simplicity that was typical of perceptions of African Americans from the post-Civil War Southern environment in which he collected them: Uncle Remus, in other words. Harris is hardly the only white curator who adapted stories of black or brown peoples in a way that played up the people the stories came from as something of a theme park piece, as if noble in unintelligence and simplicity, but he’s one of the most famous ones to do so - and that’s because of the adaptation. To note, when people criticize cultural appropriation, this is the kind of thing that really triggers the outrage. Not any situation in which a white person is inspired by someone who isn’t white and creates something accordingly, but situations where someone else’s creation is taken and used for the fame and profit of others, to the detriment of the people who made it. It’s these situations like the one Joel Chandler Harris created centuries ago, specifically, that people are trying to draw attention to - even if sometimes social media gets a bit trigger happy sometimes, that’s the real, underlying problem. With that in mind, let’s put that aside and move forward.

Fast forward again to 1946. Walt Disney Productions, then less the company of grander, wider scale stories of epic quests and emotional upheaval that make us all cry and more a company more known for folktale adaptations in general, were looking for a but of American folklore to headline a live action, animation mix - a medium that allowed a bit more financial benefit, as straightforward animation was not always particularly profitable those dates. This wouldn’t be the last time they produced an adaptation of an American folktale or short story - their version of The Legend of Sleepy Hollow a few years later being actually one of the more faithful adaptations of that short story put to film. Disney, who evidently read Chandler Harris’ stories, put together a project to see if they could adapted. Which they did. Pretty much verbatim. This is actually worth pointing out: the actual Br’er Rabbit stories in the films are very accurately adapted, and the actors involved in the story (including James Baskett, how also played Uncle Remus) did a fine job characterizing them. The issue is that Disney also adapted Chandler Harris’ stereotypical and offensive framing device pretty much verbatim, bringing Uncle Remus. And therein lies the problem.

To put the issue with Song of the South in perspective, the movie - with the framing device - can be categorized as something called Reconstruction Revisionism - which is basically a genre of post-Civil War media meant to present the pre-war South was perfect and idyllic, and that people are racially more natural in that environment’s dynamic and never should have left. One of the most infamous movies in history, Birth of a Nation, is the crowning example of this genre. Obviously, Song of the South is nowhere near as awful and inflammatory a movie as that, but there’s a degree to which it was seen as the straw the broke the camel’s back for black depictions in media, only a couple of years after Disney’s Dumbo also did the same. The end result, an African American creation was used in a film that ultimately demeaned the African American community, a decision that Disney has been ashamed of ever since.

Fast forward to now. Disney is removing Splash Mountain, the sole remnant of Song of the South that focuses exclusively on Br’er Rabbit - a choice we’ve had reason to suspect was coming for about a year now, but which was unveiled conspicuously in the middle of protests and campaigning for better treatment of people of African descent worldwide. The reveal was a rousing success, with people applauding the decision to finally wipe away the rest of that movie - though remember that for later, that the response relies on the perception of Br’er Rabbit as something that starts with Song of the South - and replace it with something else. Surely, as a black person I should be happy that they’re finally getting rid of that racist character for good and replacing him with something more positive? And again, well…

To put short, Br’er Rabbit has finished his journey from African cultural symbol to discarded pariah, all because others used the character in racist ways that they themselves now regret. And for that… let’s be clear, I’m not angry so much as saddened. I’m not railing against the company for making the choice, since I can see how from their point of view it was the wisest and most progressive thing to do. Song of the South is a badly old fashioned movie that they’re right to want to move on from, and it’s their right to downplay characters within their purview if those characters reflect badly on the company. I’m just outlining the tragic waste of it all.

For now, compare Princess and the Frog - the thing they’re replacing it with. I do love the movie, or at least any problems I have with it have little to do with representation, and I definitely don’t have anything against Musker and Clements and their beautiful visions and creations, but it’s difficult to deny that its an adaptation of a European story, adapted by a collection of mostly white creators (with Rob Edwards comprising but one third of the screenwriting team, but not of story conception), that’s ultimately just dolled up with African Americans characters and a very Hollywood-esque depiction of a African diaspora religion (Voodoo, which unfortunately has a long history of such portrayals). If we’re talking about representation specifically - which this move had definitely been presented as a champion for - it’s not the perfect example, more of a story with a surface covering of the black experience than one with an especially strong connection. That wouldn’t necessarily be a problem (Tiana and her story do well depict strong black characterizations, and approach an interesting (if light_ implication about racism and hardship during the 1920s) if Disney had yet created any other franchise that was another actual adaptation of an African or African American tale or story (with involvement from such actual people), but Song of the South is actually it. They legitimately have nothing else to call on.

This is something I feel we should do more to remedy. I am a writer/prospective screenwriter myself, and trying to put more stories out there is one of my primary focuses and goals should I ever truly enter the industry, but at the moment we just don’t have very many options.

This is hardly the only time that people of color have had little control over depictions of their own culture - literary and film history is full of such situations in both minor and terribly major ways - but it’s something that stings especially hard due to being such a current example, and because of sheer irony of the end result. Now we have a situation where African Americans are being told that something their people created to represent themselves is negative and wrong, because years ago other people appropriated that creation and used it to paint a negative picture of the people who actually held claim over it, and now the enterprise that those people created wants to save face: another example of culture being treated like a possession of the ones who are poised to make money of off it. And what’s worse, while the culture is used and abused like trash, the people are now presented with this removal like it was a prize - like they’re finally being given something - when little has really changed.

Ultimately, the Splash Mountain news - though it had been coming for a while - made me rather upset for that reason. As a studier of folklore, I suppose I knew better than most where these things came from, and so the buzz around the move being a belief that Br’er Rabbit was an intrinsically racist character just highlighted the tragedy of how African Americans and their culture tended to be tossed about by American media. So no matter what, I can’t feel particularly happy about it.

Let me iterate, in the film industry, being represented by people who aren’t of your culture group is basically inevitable. That’s essentially how the industry works. I’m not saying we should rail against anyone who would try to represent cultures that aren’t their own. The people who produce and create are few, and eventually the truth is that you have to be represented by other people - at least for the moment. We shouldn’t be railing against representation by others in general, as that wouldn’t be cognizant of the situation and thus self destructive. What I’m saying is that we - both we trying to be represented, and those doing the representing - should be aware of the problem there: that when others choose to represent you in media, you essentially have to trust them to have a real interest in you and your best interests when doing so, and when they don’t that depiction is there forever. So it behooves us to try to be the ones who are representing ourselves as much as possible, and in situations where we can’t, to remind those who want to represent us that they have a responsibility to do so effectively.

This is Animated Minds for Animated Times, and really this blog is ultimately about emphasizing what makes animated media work, what makes it fun, and what makes it worthwhile no matter how old you are. And so in several years of sporadic and infrequent reviews, reactions and fandom posts it’s been rare for me to get this real about a topic, but this is something that is a serious issue feel was overlooked. Representation is complicated. And more often than not solutions that are handed to us are more band-aids that look like cures than necessarily being actually helpful, and that’s what happens when ultimately the decisions about how you’re represented lie in the hands of other people. Representation is one of the biggest things we need to work on in coming years, especially with stories and adaptations - which refer to history and culture that are often not widely known or accepted. Ask someone if they think there should be an African princess, and they’ll tell you they didn’t even have kings and queens in Africa - something that’s bluntly wrong, but is widely believed simply because those elements of culture are never represented.

And that’s the sum of my thoughts on the subject. I hadn’t updated the blog in months because this whole thing was stewing in me, and I couldn’t really go back to cheerful posts about new things until I got it out. I’ve got great thoughts about the Owl House, Amphibia, the new seasons of BH6 and Ducktales that are totally coming up soon. But for now, just a few sobering thoughts from someone who grew up loving cartoons, and desperately wishes people like me had more to look at in that field beyond apologies and promises.

#splash mountain #disney #song of the south #the princess and the frog #brer rabbit #social commentary #black lives matter #representation #walt disney world #joel chandler harris #uncle remus #cultural appropriation #real talk

82 notes · View notes

jestbee · 7 years

Text

June 25: Ships that pass in the night (Chapter Five)

#my fics #phanfiction #fanfic #fanfiction #phanfic #phanfic fluff #dan and phil #dnp #fedij #fic #fic a day #fic every day #fic every day in june #fic project #fic prompt #phan #phandom #phanfic au #prompt fic

67 notes · View notes

delhi-architect2 · 4 years

Text

Journal - Pascale Sablan on Architecture’s Role in Fueling Social Change

Architects: Showcase your next project through Architizer and sign up for our inspirational newsletter.

If there’s any silver lining to the chaotic, tragic mess of 2020, it’s that deeply entrenched issues that are routinely ignored and downplayed have been brought to the fore. The two most clear examples of this are the COVID-19 pandemic, which has exposed the frailties of the American healthcare system, and the senseless murder to George Floyd, highlighting the fact that racial injustice has and continues to brutalize black people. The gravity of both of these occurrences has been exacerbated by poor leadership, complacency and most of all systemic racism, which is ingrained in every facet of American society.

The events following George Floyd’s death have embroiled America in a state of social unrest, with countless ongoing protests calling for greater accountability and major systemic changes. Everyone, from individuals to entire industries, have been placed under a microscope to see how they’ve perpetuated and benefited from the oppression of others.

While it’s easy to identify the police as a major agent of systemic racism, it’s much harder to do so for entities that act on a much more subtle level. This is dangerous. When it comes to the architectural profession, it’s difficult to immediately recognize its place within today’s social climate. However, it is not exempt and, in fact, its role in fueling racial injustice is quite large. To better understand the role architecture plays in framing American society, and the ways in which the industry can fuel the advancement of people of color, we spoke with architect and mentor Pascale Sablan.

Pascale Sablan, image via AIA

Pascale Sablan is only the 315th living black, female architect to receive licensure in the United States. She is a senior associate at New York-based firm, S9Architecture. With a career spanning more than a decade, Sablan’s work includes a number of commercial, cultural and residential projects across the U.S., Asia and the Middle East. Pascale Sablan’s accolades include the AIA New York/Center for Architecture Emerging Professional Award in 2014, National Organization of Minority Architects (NOMA) member of the year in 2015, and the 2018 AIA Young Architects Award.

On top of this, Pascale Sablan is also the founder and executive director of an organization called Beyond the Built Environment, which aims to address inequality by creating platforms and greater visibility for women and diverse designers. Pascale Sablan’s work and achievements go on, and they’re incredibly pertinent to the current state of the world. Read below, in her words, the way we can design a better future.

Nathaniel Bahadursingh: How do you think architecture is situated within issues of social injustice?

Pascale Sablan: Our role as architects is to listen, to hear, and to feel the cries and what is being demanded by the communities for these injustices, and serve as a resource for not just wealthy clients, but for the greater public. Our charge is making sure the world is more equitable and just. So really, our approach is not to assume that we are leaders here, because for us to be leaders would mean that we’d be highly educated and understand the process and the dynamics of a suppressive infrastructure well. These are expertise we do not have.

Therefore, this is a moment for us as architects and designers to pause our thoughts and listen to what is being said, do research in terms of the injustice, work collaboratively with the community to get those answers, and find a solution together.

SAY IT LOUD – New York, View of Exhibition, Curator Pascale Sablan, Designer Manuel Miranda; image © Cameron Blaylock

In your opinion, what are some immediate actions that firms and educational institutions can take to initiate change in this critical moment?

First, I think putting out statements is important. It’s critical that all designers and architects participate in this conversation and make actionable items in these statements. Remove the pressure that the statement must solve everything in one statement. It should be two, three, four, five statements. It’s an ongoing conversation on a very complex issue that we are all trying to solve, and that’s going to take time; it’s going to take dialogue. So, I think putting out actionable statements is important, and I think putting actual dates and metrics of success for measurement and accountability is equally important.

As the founder and executive director of Beyond the Built Environment, I’ve put out my statement for dismantling injustice that basically launches three major initiatives. The first is called SAY IT WITH – MEdia. The idea and root of this initiative is to have publications take a commitment to tracking and increasing the content of diverse designers in their publication by 5% annually until 15% at a minimum is reached, whether that be print, digital, or broadcast. This is about removing the entire burden and onus of us to elevate our identities and distribute this commitment with media outlets. This pledge by publications works in tandem with elevating the stories of under-represented groups, researching the history of women and diverse designers, and tracking, maintaining and publishing our progress of increasing women and BIPOC representation of those featured in their publication.

The second initiative is the SAY IT LOUD – Now Exhibition. SAY IT LOUD is part of a traveling activation exhibition series that elevates local diverse designers, where we’ve produced and curated 15 exhibitions that have successfully elevated the contributions of 250 great diverse designers. The goal of this initiative is to double our library to the number of 500 profiles of diverse designers, not just in the US, but all over the world. We have a call for submissions and September 1st is the deadline. We are seeking diverse (Black, Indigenous, People of Color and women of any ethnicity) designers (architects, interiors, landscape, planners, environmental, engineers, students, and artists) that have an impact on our built environment to submit their work. The biggest challenge is convincing diverse designers that they are worthy of praise and elevation.

The third initiative is Data to Define Policy. As a designer and an architect, I’m a huge advocate that throughout the design process, we need to engage the community and ask them the questions that cultivate an understanding of what they need. The same is true with the advocacy process. As leaders, board members and people of power work to create policy that will help solve some of these issues, the first thing we must do is ground the work. To make our efforts relevant and effective, we must communicate and have conversations with the oppressed communities that we are fighting for in order to understand their unique stories and needs.

Therefore, after we’ve reached our goal of 500 new profiles and having a database and network of 500 diverse designers, we’ll pair up with Remesh, a live communications software that will allow us to have discussions about injustice, where they’re receiving it, and how they’re dealing with it. That will allow us to identify institutions and key characters that are pushing those oppressive agendas and find ways of dismantling them.

In a time that feels clouded with performative gestures, how can the architecture industry ensure sustained, meaningful change?

I want to echo the previous point that we must not just put a statement in camaraderie and solidarity, but to actually put action items. It’s not enough to show up to a funeral and your condolences; it’s to bring the lasagna too. How are you contributing to dismantling the system that brings pain, injustice and oppression? How are you going to leverage your position, work and power to fight to eradicate racism from our profession, our built environment and in society as a whole? Then it’s not a gesture; it’s a plan of action.

When it comes to the advancement of Black people in architecture, what does individual advocacy look like? What responsibility lies on the individual architect?

Well, many architects tend to look towards their employer or their firm leaders or even organization leaders to give us direction. We are frozen while we wait for those in charge to define how to change our industry, to make meaningful changes, how to be proactive, and how to be effective in the work. Unfortunately, the reality is that not all firms will take any positions on the matter that is gripping the heart of our society. It’s incredibly important for us as individuals to feel empowered to make a difference, to make a change, and to work towards justice with or without our firms.

Through volunteering with organizations such as NOMA, the National Organization of Minority Architects, or other similar organizations that have always been advocating for justice in both the built environment and in the profession, we can find the leadership we are seeking from our firm and industry leaders, and push for immediate action.

However, I would also like to offer that advocacy work can and should start on your block, in your neighborhood, in your community. See what injustices are impacting your town, and take that as a beginning standpoint. Once you’ve identified the community’s specific oppressions, whether that be architectural or other, you should reach out to the community leaders and get more information, understand the politics of the issue, understand the institutions, and the characters that perpetuate the injustice. Together with that deeper level of understanding, ask how you can get involved. Let’s make the fight for justice personal; bring it home to your family, your neighbor, your block and your community, and make them better and more just.

SAY IT LOUD – United Nations Worldwide, United Nations Information Centre New Delhi, Curator Pascale Sablan; image © United Nations Information Center

What do you think the barriers are to finding greater representation in architecture and design?

The answer to this question led me to my first dismantling injustice initiative, SAY IT WITH – MEdia, which is really to stop trying to put the onus on us to elevate ourselves, but also having publications and awards juries to seek out our information as well and to elevate us. To cease the practice of only elevating one designer of color or one woman design and make them the end-all-be-all to showing diversity in the profession. The publications must dismantle that barrier and really work to elevate the plethora of us that exist. I think about the young students that we mentor who go home and Google “great architects”, a search that yields 50 faces and names. One is a woman, nine are people of color, and zero are African-American.

The list of 50 ranges from contemporary all the way down to when architects were Ninja turtles, like Michelangelo and Rafael. I visited Google’s headquarters and spoke with their team, and asked them why was this the outcome of the search. Their statement was “Pascale, there’s not enough content on the web that actually specifically calls you all as great.” Understanding that, I launched the Great Diverse Designers Library, where we are identifying and profiling these designers as great.

We showcase their work, their bio and headshots, their journeys and their proudest achievements. It’s a way to avoid these superficial articles / lists that just gives us 2 or 10 or 15 or random numbers of people to be aware of without showing their impact to the built environment. This library, which is composed of all the information we gather from our various SAY IT LOUD Exhibition, is now serving as a business development directory for people to be able to find and identify local talents in their region. Being able to hire them to do work serves as a way of creating more content that call us great!

SAY IT LOUD – United Nations Worldwide, United Nations Information Center Bujumbura, Curator Pascale Sablan; image © United Nations Information Center

How would the built environment look different if more black voices were in power in architecture and design industries?

I don’t want to make the assumption that just because one is Black or Latino or Asian that they’re only going to work in their own communities, because historically that hasn’t been the case. But, the idea is by creating a more just and equitable profession in the built environment, you will then be creating diversity and inclusion. J.E. = D.I. The way that the built environment would look different when we eradicate racism and oppression from the world begins with the removal of poorly appointed architecture, together with the creation of reformative spaces that serve as a scaffolding of support for the community’s hopes and aspirations for the future. There isn’t a prescribed aesthetic or form of this Just world; it will be formalized once the profession accepts the task of envisioning and constructing it.

For instance, when USGBC was creating their LEED certification process, they studied the issues and developed criteria that would solve an enormous environmental crisis. The idea was that, by developing these metrics of accountability, it would make architecture more sustainable. During that process they were careful to not script or force a “green” design, instead allowing the industry to be inspired by these challenges, and to respond through their designs.

Therefore, this effort is to change architecture’s role of perpetuating racism and injustice to one that strives to eradicate it. The resulting design of that new world is left to the imaginations and talents of the architects and designers who rise to that challenge. The work starts with understanding of how racism manifests into the built environment — how it shows up in the brick and mortar — so that we can disassemble it and make sure that is not part of our design, technique and process moving forward.

Currently, Black people are fighting on a lot of fronts, from combatting structural racism to navigating a day-to-day life in white spaces. How can this burden be divided? And if so, what would that look like?

The reality is that many people of color, from Black to Indigenous architects and designers in the industry, have been carrying multiple identities and being careful about which part of their culture or identity they allow to be present in the workplace. One of the biggest challenges is ensuring that the people who are being oppressed do not take on the burden of solving it alone. Making suggestions to provide information and clarity will really allow everyone to participate in the disassembling of racism and oppression. Therefore, as employers, firm and organization leaders we must be vigilant to avoid tasking your diverse designers with the lion’s share of the work.

It is powerful and important to understand that we’re all behind this mission to ensure that racism is not part of our future as a country and as a people. Regardless of your gender and/or race, we are working towards that mission together. Although I am guilty of this as well, it is important that we do not overburden ourselves with taking on the responsibilities of solving these issues. It’s not our part, it’s not our role to take; it’s an effort that’s going to require the entire community to participate in.

However, I will say as architects, if we do not show up for this call to action — if we decide to maintain our irrelevance in the fight for civil rights — we will be left behind. This is not a fad. This is not a trend. This is not going to go away. Justice will be found in the built environment and I really hope that, as architects, we are part of the conversation and a positive force in that movement.

If not, we will be taught the same kind of lessons that ADA, the American Disability Act, taught us. People pleaded with us, the profession, with regards to making our structures and our projects more accessible, but we ignored them. We chased glossy high rise buildings that were higher than the one previous. The oppressed community responded by going to city hall and literally climbing the stairs on their forearms and elbows to show visually and figuratively how the built environment has failed them. Now it is law, rightfully so, and all new construction projects must be accessible.

The American Disability Act is one of the most powerful and most inspiring moments of protest and advocacy. It shows us as architects that in order to maintain relevance, we must be a positive force towards justice. We need to hear, listen to the cries of those who are oppressed, and if we do not show up in a meaningful way, the community will find another way to reach the justice that they deserve.

If you are a diverse designer, submit your profile for the SAY IT LOUD – NOW initiative. Prizes include:

Feature in the SAY IT LOUD – NOW Virtual Exhibition

Inclusion in the Great Diverse Designers Library

Name, business or work promoted in publications, on websites and social media

Per your election, application will be considered for future SIL Exhibitions

Potential to be featured in the Great Diverse Designers Textbook

The deadline for submissions is September 1st 2020. Head this way to submit.

Architects: Showcase your next project through Architizer and sign up for our inspirational newsletter.

The post Pascale Sablan on Architecture’s Role in Fueling Social Change appeared first on Journal.

from Journal https://architizer.com/blog/inspiration/stories/pascale-sablan-on-architecture-and-social-injustice/ Originally published on ARCHITIZER RSS Feed: https://architizer.com/blog

#Journal #architect #architecture #architects #architectural #design #designer #designers #building #buildings

0 notes

firstumcschenectady · 6 years

Text

“Change Bearer” based on 1 Corinthians 8:1-13 and Mark 1:21-28

In the midst of all the news that swirled around this week, one little line caught my ear. A Congressman was accused of sexual harassment of a staff member, and within his reply was the idea that he didn't think he had any power over her. He thought she could consent, or could reject his advances, because he ran an egalitarian office. In fact, he was quoted as describing his office saying, “There is no hierarchy.”1

I've heard such malarkey before, and it infuriated me then too. Most significantly, at one point a District Superintendent informed me that he didn't think of himself has having power “over” the clergy in his district. This came up in a conversation when I was indicating that I didn't think he should date clergy he was supervising, and he was justifying his behavior. Simply denying the power one has isn't the same thing as not having it.

To be fair, at almost the same time, I had an awakening that resulted in an ah-ha moment of my own. I was serving on the “Conference Leadership Team” for the Upper New York Annual Conference. I was regularly in meetings making big decisions, had regular time on stage during Annual Conference meetings, received subtle deference from colleagues because of my role, and had even shared in DRAFTING the structure of the Conference itself. AT THE SAME TIME, I was really unhappy with the way the conference existed in the world and felt helpless to make the changes I thought we needed. During an Annual Conference session, when I was on the floor with everyone else, someone mentioned feeling disempowered and uninformed in the Conference. I ALMOST empathized by saying “me too!” but JUST BARELY kept my mouth shut.

I realized that while I felt disempowered, uninformed, and generally cranky, I had about as much power in the system as ANYONE did. In particular, I had a heck of a lot more power than the person who was (rightfully) expressing his own concerns. And I realized that if I had spoken, and claimed to be as disempowered as he was, I'd have created a false equivalency. I simply wasn't disempowered in that system at that time, even if I didn't feel like I had the power to do what I wanted.

In that moment, I realized that I'd done a similar thing to the District Superintendent – I'd internally downplayed my own power. Downplaying, or ignoring, the power I held was dangerous because it made it much easier to abuse the power. Whenever a person ignores a power they hold, and pretends it doesn't exist, that enables the person to wield it irresponsibility and ignore the consequences for those who don't have as much power.

At that point I made a commitment to myself to ACKNOWLEDGE and NOTICE what power I do hold, and attend to holding it carefully, so that I wouldn't do accidental harm with it. I wanted to operate differently than those I saw abusing their power, and I wanted to have more integrity than I started with, once I saw the error of my ways.

Sometimes it is uncomfortable to acknowledge power differentials. Actually, it is often uncomfortable. (Perhaps especially in progressive circles where hierarchy is less valued.) It is far easier to pretend away hierarchy and to claim that the limits on our power make it useless. However, it is irresponsible and hugely dangerous.

The District Superintendent was engaged in sexual harassment (at least), and his SELF-JUSTIFICATION for it was in pretending away his power. His power over those he supervised didn't dissipate when he pretended it away though. It didn't give those he supervised easy ways to ignore or dismiss his advances. It just meant he didn't take that into account, and he got what he wanted without acknowledging to himself that he'd done so with the power he wielded. It meant he took away both others' consent and his responsibility for having done so.

This congressman did exactly the same thing. It is hard to believe that anyone who has the power to hire and fire their staff could be under the impression that their office is egalitarian, but clearly this misconception benefited the congressman and in his head justified his actions.

I suspect that ignoring the power one has over another is a common part of justifying sexual harassment, and many other abuses of power.

There is, however, an even more sickening reality. There are also those among us who claim the fullness of their power and authority and use it to harm others. In this case I'm taking about the Larry Nassars of the world, who not only set himself up to be in a position over young girls, he ENJOYED the ways that he was able to harm and humiliate them.

Larry Nassar, the “medical doctor” who worked with USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University, who used his power to sexually assault more than 100 girls. Around Larry Nassar and those like him, are a set of people around them who functioned with their power in a third problematic way. Unlike that congressman who pretended away his power and thus allowed himself to use it inappropriately, AND unlike Larry who claimed his power fully to do harm, there are those who had the opportunity to use their power for good and didn't. There are likely more reasons for this than individuals who didn't act, but the results are all the same: more children traumatically abused.

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.”2 There have been many, many people in the world who have passively accepted evil, and even used their power to silence those speaking of it.

One of the many gymnasts abused by Nassar was Rachael Denhollander. She was far from the first to speak out, but she was the first one to do so with her evidence and accusations prepared to force herself to be heard. Those defending him tried to silence her in many ways, but she kept talking anyway. She spoke with clarity and authority during his sentencing hearing saying, “I believed the adults at MSU surrounding Larry would do the right thing if they were aware of what Larry was doing, and I was terribly wrong. And discovering that I could not only not trust my abuser but I could not trust the people surrounding him has been devastating. It is part of the consequences of sexual assault, and it needs to be taken seriously.”3

That is, Larry Nassar's actions were an atrocity. So was the enormous cover up, people who decided that maintaining the status quo, or getting the next win, or keeping the organization from liability, or not upsetting the apple cart was more important than the protection of CHILDREN from sexual assault. Many, many people had the power and authority to step in and stop his actions, and they did not do it.

Thus far, I've mentioned three ways power and authority is misused:

by being dismissed or ignored, and thus held irresponsibility.

by being used directly and intentionally to cause harm.

by being held passively, not being used to help those in need, which functions to support an abuser over the abused. (In some cases this crosses the line into intentional harm as well.)

This is all very interesting to consider when we have a Gospel passage that takes note that Jesus held power and authority very differently than the religious authorities of his day! Oye ve. “He taught as one who had authority, and not as the scribes.” This the thesis statement of or Gospel reading! His authority is said to be amazing to the people who heard it, it was one of the first things that drew a crowd to him.

The early Christian communities whose stories of Jesus formed the Gospels may well have thought that Jesus' authority seemed different because it was different. They may have thought that his connect to God was different than everyone else's, and this may have been their point. Or, it may be that the scribes taught as if they were a bit removed from the text, teaching what other people had taught them, raising the historical questions, doing everything other than speaking about God from their own experience and claiming authority from their experience. (I may also be projecting myself onto the scribes, as I often choose that path.)

Or, perhaps it was something else entirely. When I listen holistically to the stories of Jesus, it seems that one of the themes is his work of empowering the people. Apparently “authority” in Greek means more fully “the freedom to express one's powers.”4Perhaps he was using his “authority” to build up those he was speaking to. In this case, I'm drawing on the line from 1 Corinthians, “Knowledge puffs up, love builds up.” Authority used well builds up people, in love. It isn't used for the sake of the one who holds it, it is used for the well-being of the community that gives it.

Jesus speaking in the synagogue would have been speaking in his own voice, not just that of the tradition, but I suspect he was using his voice and his authority to encourage others to claim their voices and their authority in building the kindom of God. He was building them up so they could build others up and everyone together could build the kindom.

That's what it looks like to change the world. Power and authority used in the ways of the world are used to PUFF up the one who holds them, and to push down those who don't. We've talked about many ways they can be used to do harm. But our goal is not only to “do no harm” but ALSO then to “do all the good we can”. (The first two of John Wesley's “Three Simple Rules” as rethought by Reuben Job.) That means that ALL power and authority we have should be used to BUILD up.

This is a rather high calling. And it can be difficult. There are pitfalls in many directions, and discomfort to go along with it all. But that doesn't mean it should be attempted. We are, all of us, leaders in building up the kindom, and the first work of the kindom is building others UP.

So, dear ones, may we follow in the way of Jesus, and find the ways to use our power and authority to BUILD others up. Amen

1Chris Cillizza, “Oh, Pat Meehan. No, no, no, no.” on CNN politicshttps://www.cnn.com/2018/01/24/politics/meehan-analysis/index.html accessed on 1/25/18

2https://paradoxologies.org/2010/08/28/martin-luther-king-jr-on-complacency-mlk/accessed on 1/25/18

3 Alanna Vagianos ”She Was The First Woman To Go Public About Nassar. Read Her Statement In Full” ttps://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rachael-denhollander-nassar-impact-statement_us_5a690ef6e4b0e563007627aa 01/24/2018 08:46 pm ET accessed on 1/25/18

4The Jewish Annotated New Testament: New Revised Standard Version Bible Translation, edited by Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 61.

--Rev. Sara E. Baron

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 15.0px 0.0px; line-height: 16.0px; font: 14.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; color: #444444} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; line-height: 16.0px; font: 14.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; color: #444444} span.s1 {font-kerning: none}

First United Methodist Church of Schenectady

603 State St. Schenectady, NY 12305

Pronouns: she/her/hers

http://fumcschenectady.org/

https://www.facebook.com/FUMCSchenectady

January 28, 2018

#FUMC Schenectady #Thinking Church #Progressive Christianity #Build the kindom #UMC #Schenectady #Rev Sara E Baron #mark 1 #Power and Authority #Nassar #Pat Meehan #Build Each other Up

0 notes