Author: Roger

I'm a librarian. I hear music, even when it's not being played. I used to work at a comic book store, and it still informs my life. I won once on JEOPARDY! - ditto.

The Curse of Canaan (or Ham)

The explanation that black Africans, as the “sons of Ham”, were cursed, possibly “blackened” by their sins, became increasingly common during the slave trade of the 18th and 19th centuries.

When we were investigating some aspects of black history this year at church, I was intrigued by the fact that, for a time in the mid-17th century, slavery based on race wasn’t really codified in the United States. There were white indentured servants and black slaves, but the former were often given ever-changing terms of servitude, making them functionally little better off than slaves.

In the 1670s, Bacon’s Rebellion “demonstrated that poor whites and poor blacks could be united in a cause. This was a great fear of the ruling class — what would prevent the poor from uniting to fight them? This fear hastened the transition to racial slavery.”

The status of blacks in Virginia slowly changed over the last half of the 17th century.“The black indentured servant, with his hope of freedom, was increasingly being replaced by the black slave.” So why bother with indentured servants who, after 7, 18, or 21 years [would have to be freed], when you could have Africans serve their lifetime, and serve in perpetuity through their children?
curse-of-ham
But HOW was the idea of permanent black enslavement developed? In part, from the Bible. Specifically from Genesis 9, starting with verse 18. After Noah has too much wine, “Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brethren outside.” Noah curses Canaan (not Ham) to be the lowest of slaves “to his brothers,” specifically to Ham’s brothers, Japheth and Shem.

From the Wikipedia:

While Genesis 9 never says that Ham was black, he became associated with black skin, through folk etymology deriving his name from a similar, but actually unconnected, word meaning “dark” or “brown”…

The explanation that black Africans, as the “sons of Ham”, were cursed, possibly “blackened” by their sins, was advanced only sporadically during the Middle Ages, but it became increasingly common during the slave trade of the 18th and 19th centuries. The justification of slavery itself through the sins of Ham was well suited to the ideological interests of the elite; with the emergence of the slave trade, its racialized version justified the exploitation of African labour.

Read Black Slavery as the “Curse of Ham”: Bible Truth or Racist Apologetic?

The notion that blackness is equal to sin, used to “prove” black people’s “natural” inferiority, and lack of moral character, also shows up in the Book of Mormon, published in the 1820s (2 Nephi 5:21):

And [God] had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people, the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. And thus saith the Lord God; I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities.”

Sometime in the last few years, a good Christian woman, who reportedly has studied the Bible carefully, indicated, more or less out of the blue, that I was descended from Ham. Yet, in spite of my “cursed state,” the love of Jesus Christ was still available to me. Circumstances warranted that I had no opportunity for reply.

THIS is my reply: lady, your “Biblical history” is BS.

MOVIE REVIEW: Cinderella

The short before Cinderella was Frozen Fever, a sequel to the massively successful movie, with most of the original cast.

This was to have been a family outing a couple of weeks ago, to see the new live-action adaptation of the story Cinderella but we were all, in turn, under the weather. Finally, it’s school vacation week, the film is about to leave the Spectrum, so the three of us, plus a friend of The Daughter finally get to see this Disney film.

At some level, the Wife and I wish we had seen it sooner, for while it reviewed reasonably well (85% positive), it’s always the thumbs down that the mind remembers.
disney_cinderella_2015
Truth is, I’m not sure we NEED another Cinderella film at all. Still, it looked quite fine, the sets, and lovely costumes, and the production design. Director Kenneth Branaugh does a decent job with pacing this. One of the better scenes was the deconstruction of the carriage, shortly after midnight.

One of the complaints was that there was a lot of death in this film. Hey, there’s ALWAYS death in a Disney film from Bambi’s mother to (Finding) Nemo’s mother. In fact, one gets to actually get to know Ella’s mother (Hayley Atwell, Agent Peggy Carter in the Marvel TV show), and feels sad when (CAN THIS BE A SPOILER?) she dies. Often in the Cinderella narrative, she’s quickly, or already, dead. This narrative was a good choice.

Her father (Ben Chaplin) spends enough time with his daughter (Lily James, Lady Rose MacClare from Downton Abbey) before he decides to remarry. Cate Blanchett is, unsurprisingly, masterful as the stepmother, and we get a sense of why she’s so wicked. Her daughters (Sophie McShera, Daisy Robinson Mason from Downton Abbey; and Holliday Grainger, who has played villains Lucrezia Borgia and Bonnie Parker) are far more ugly inside than out.

That Ella meets the prince (Richard Madden, Robb Starkin in Game of Thrones) before the ball makes the narrative less the “Suddenly, their eyes meet, and they fall in love” of other iterations. It’s a bit more empowering without being too heavy-handed.

My favorite character may be the captain of the guard (Nonso Anozie from Game of Thrones), but there were other nice performances, by Stellan Skarsgård as the Grand Duke, Derek Jacobi as the King, and especially Helena Bonham Carter as the somewhat dipsy Fairy Godmother. Oh, the mice were good too.

The short before the film was Frozen Fever, a sequel to the massively successful movie, with most of the original cast, but none of its joy, unless you like the one joke, which is about booger snowmen. I was going to say it left me cold, but I was forbidden from doing so.

Finding your own activism

I was also fascinated by the media guru who posted the item, who admitted that she’s “someone who has never been a protester.”

siena.billboardThis is one of those stories that wasn’t particularly interesting to me UNTIL other people piped up.

Some students at Siena College, in a suburb north of Albany, protested about a billboard they found offense. I was unaware of the controversy until the local media guru posted the response from one of the local radio deejays, a guy named Chuck, with whom I was unfamiliar, on her Facebook feed:

I believe apathy is a dangerous thing and it’s particularly depressing when I see it so frequently exhibited by young people. For that reason, I actually admire the fact you are willing to take action against something you deem offensive and misguided.
With that said, here is my unsolicited advice. Devote your energies to a cause that might actually make a difference in someone’s life.

THAT response rubbed me the wrong way.

Among the Facebook discussion that ensued: “While it certainly wouldn’t be reason enough for me to protest, I’m certainly not going to condemn someone else for taking a stand on something! we need more social engagement in this country and young people have to start somewhere!”

That more or less was my position. Yet, as I reread Chuck’s blather, I got more and more irritated. Maybe it was because I was feeling unwell.

I wrote, “Chuck’s response is a classic diversion stance of ‘Aren’t there more pressing issues?’ Of course, there are, but this one engaged these people in this moment, something that they might change in the moment.”

Chuck had written further in his response:

“You really want to help women? There’s a strip club a couple miles up the road. Maybe some of those women could use your help. Their lives truly ARE dependent on men.”

I noted, “Telling them about a strip club that they might not have even known about, and suggesting they ignore what’s right before their eyes, is patronizing and insulting. Good for the protesters.”

Ultimately, I thought there was less sexism in the ad than in the snarky response by the deejay.

Chuck wrote, “Somehow you have whipped yourselves into a frenzy…a storm of wild indignation and self-righteousness…fooling yourself into believing you are doing something noble and important. I hate to break it to you but….you’re not.”

The subtext to me of his comments was clear: they were silly, overly sensitive “girls” who didn’t know about “real life” or “marketing.” Someone wrote of the DJ: “You are perpetuating the many stereotypes assigned to women over the years who get passionate about unpopular ideas” which sounds about right.

I was also fascinated by the media guru who posted the item, who admitted that she’s “someone who has never been a protester.” As someone who has protested a lot of things over the years, I’m interested to see how someone, albeit half my age, could not moved by some cause, some issue. It’s just foreign to me.

The professional challenges of being a librarian

EVERYTHING I have read suggests that books, paper books are generally preferable.

Librarian_black_grandeNear-twin Gordon, whose birthday is the day before mine, only a few decades later, says:

OK, here’s a question:
Working in the librarian/information field, what do you see are your key professional challenges?

On March 14, 2015, I attended this workshop primarily of the board of the Albany Public Library. I was invited as the president of the Friends of the APL. One of the issues was that very subject.

One of the challenges is that some people associate the library with only books, not realizing that libraries do so much more than lend tomes. Almost every librarian I know have asked whether the library will be defunct in X number of years, AND that, because of Google, there will be no need for librarians.

Frankly, it used to irritate me, but now I laugh, LAUGH, I do. Because one of my primary responses is that a lot of the things found on Google is, to put it mildly, CRAP. Part of our job is not to find the first answer that shows up on an online search but to discern what is the USEFUL and USABLE information.

Statistics show that about 90% of all people in the US are in support of libraries, conceptually, but most people don’t quite know what they DO. This is both a challenge and an opportunity.

The Albany Public Library, specifically, engages in online database use, has developed local history expertise, lends eBooks and audiobooks, has a 3D printer and other skill tools.

The library is often the only free Internet some folks have, which people use to look for and apply for jobs. There’s this myth that young people magically understand the newer technology, but that’s only true if they have ACCESS to it. Lots of kids use the computer rooms at APL, and undoubtedly, most libraries.

For me, as a business librarian, the wonder that is the Internet means two specific challenges.

1) People see information out there that comes from some expensive research consortium and want that research.
2) People see information out there that is bogus and want us to verify it, or find out more about it.

Information has gotten expensive. We have access to some databases, and that helps our counselors assist their clients. One of the great advantages of using some resources, whether they be free or fee, is that you understand the nuances of what’s available.

I use freely available Census data a lot because most people can’t figure out how to use it. Heck, sometimes, I need help from people with greater expertise.

One of the things that is true of the vast majority of librarians is that they display collegiality by nature, rather than competitiveness. I noticed that even back at library school in the 1990s, a refreshing change from my failed attempt at getting a Master’s in Public Administration a decade earlier.

Fillyjonk reflects:

Riffing on Gordon’s question: What do you see as the future of libraries?

I think the answer depends on how well the supports for libraries tell the story. If they allow the narrative to be “libraries were useful once upon a time, but they’re so 20th century,” and this is not challenged, then libraries will suffer.

The New York State Library took some massive cuts in years past, which meant a reduction in public hours, and a slashing of staff. I knew people who worked there. Librarians, by their very nature, want to find the answer, but if you limit their ability to do so, it is very discouraging. I think the NYSL took a hit that it’s only starting to recover from.

Libraries nationally have suffered. The number of library workers is clearly down. Friends’ groups and others have to advocate for libraries, ESPECIALLY when politicians act inanely.

I participated in my very first Library Advocacy Day at the state legislature in February 2015. Staff can share their own narrative, but taxpayers think that they are just worried about their own jobs. USERS who tell the tale are much more powerful ambassadors for libraries.

What do you think about the college (can’t remember if it was a 2-year or 4-year) that decided to go 100% digital with its library?

I assume you are referring to this San Antonio library, which came up in our meeting. It’s a branch of a larger library/ Per public demand, it’s needed to be at least a drop-off and pickup point for actual books.

Follow up question: are those of us who prefer paper books going to be like dragons with hoards of inky treasure?

EVERYTHING I have read suggests that books, paper books are generally preferable. Better absorption of the information, less interference with sleep patterns, reduces stress.

This is not to say that books WILL win out. There are plenty of examples where the lesser technology (VCR over Betamax, e.g.) won out. But I have hope. Children, in particular, need books, which require the tactile adventure that electronics simply cannot provide.

Pictured T-shirt is available HERE.

Lincoln’s assassination, and the end of the American Civil War

As we mark the sesquicentennial of these important events, notice how many articles one gets when Googling “still fighting the civil war”.

Confederate General Robert E. Lee surrenders to General Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House in Virginia, ending the Civil War.
Lee surrenders to Grant at Appomattox Court House

Four years ago, I started to dread what I feared would be a media rehash of the American Civil War 150 years ago, battle by bloody battle. It might have happened, for all I know, but I managed to keep myself out of the loop. Surely I mentioned it rarely here.

This week, though, was quite significant. Confederate general Robert E. Lee surrendered to Union General Ulysses S. Grant in Virginia, though fighting continued elsewhere for another couple of months.

President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated, shot on April 14, and dead by the next morning; read about the funeral train. Given his prominence in American history, I’m nevertheless still fascinated that there have been at least 15,000 books about the 16th President. His death left that great unanswerable “What if?”

Had Lincoln lived, how would Reconstruction have been handled? Would slaves have received their 40 acres and a mule, and if so, how would that have been reflected in black people’s wealth in the United States today? What would have been the terms of the Southern states re-entering the Union?

Would Lincoln have died early from Marfan syndrome? He was only 56 when he was killed.

And after four years of reminiscing, we’re still at odds about what to call the conflict. The War of Northern Aggression is particularly popular in parts of the South. The Confederate battle flag is a sign of either regional pride or treason, as it appears on several state license plates and flags to this day.

As we mark the sesquicentennial of these important events, notice how many articles one gets when Googling “still fighting the civil war”. While several are from 25 or 50 months ago, for instance, from CNN and The Atlantic and Daily Kos, the latter citing a piece in the Washington Post, it appears that the conditions mentioned then are no more clarified now, and in fact have even hardened.

The New Republic published an article this week, Make the Confederacy’s Defeat a National Holiday, with a controversial recommendation: “The federal government should… commit to disavowing or renaming monuments to the Confederacy, and its leaders, that receive direct federal support.” Brian Beutler also said, “Those who would caution that a more accurate reckoning with the Confederacy would inflame racial tensions are merely restating the implication that the country is too weak to be introspective.” That, I would suggest, is, at best, an open question.
***
Could the South Have Won the War?

Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial