‘—

Michael Li week 7 HW

Hooks describes the relationship between primarily white people and, in general, people of “Other” races, but specifically black people and culture for examples to explain her arguments. She notices that this relationship can be observed by focusing on its correlation with consumer culture.

It seems that it is not beyond the understanding of the white males Hooks describes, while in a university town, as being unaware of the history of white supremacy and rationalizes their contemporary behavior and goals as being against those ideals. She describes their desires of sleeping with as many non-white women to leave their sheltered and uncultured lives and enter into a world, with these women as witnesses, of excitement that these cultures have to offer (Hooks, 368). The avenue of experiencing this culture is through sex and is a campaign not viewed as a conquest. Hooks, argues otherwise. Racism is exercised subtlety, as these white males want to consume the bodies of these women and enter their culture, leaving their more safe and reserved ones behind. The Others’ culture is highly sexualized.

For one thing to consume the other, these two entities must be separate. The metaphorical idea of consumption expresses Hooks concepts of the consumer being a dominant force between the two – the white males and women of the Others. This separation achieves two things. The first is to set a foundation on which one can return to and feel safe while the second is to open an opportunity to leave this safety and experience a perceived sense of accomplishment by exploiting the differences of the Other. This indulgence of the dominating group is achieved by taking from the Other group, hence a consumption, and not allowing the Other to retain an equality.

The desire to dominate and impose suffering on the Other is masked by the new narrative of the dominator as having been seduced whereby the seduction is a choice of the other (Hooks, 369). This is caused by subtle racism. The idea of seduction contradicts the ideals of past racially charged conquests which, without scrutiny, will disguise racism and even paint he dominator as a good doer. This is institutionally enabled by the commodification of the Others’ cultures whereby they are promised recognition, but in contradiction this actually does more social harm than good because it allows an avenue of asserting dominance by non-Others(Hooks, 370).

In more objective examples, Hooks draws upon the economic exploitation of the Other culture(s) through consumer culture. Through examples of modern advertising, we see that Other cultures only silhouette whiteness. The focal point is whiteness and it serves to pierce through the primitive (Hooks, 373). This creates a degenerating cycle that harms the cause of the Other(s) because it culturally appropriates them. They will then defend by responding with nationalism, which is interpreted by white intellectuals as naive essentialism, a predisposition to behavior based on inherent traits.

As to why cultural appropriation is so damaging to the Other(s), Hooks expands on the concepts of essentialism. She mentions Langston Hughes and his essay, “ Hip, and the Long Front of Color”, and how a critic of his work, Andrew Ross, describes it as a complaint (373). Hooks raises a defense for Hughes saying that he was simply making a point that the art created by his culture had been robbed and how it was a way for it to be expressed and separated from white culture to achieve a sense of freedom. This sense of freedom is indeed needed in the context of a culture, political and economic system that so heavily favors, presumably, middle class and higher white people. As mentioned before, Ross would be an example of someone who does not understand the difference between nationalism as a way to reclaim relevance to resist a dominating force and essentialism.

Taking a part of the Other(s) culture and appropriating it results in consuming said culture. The consumer gains by decontextualizing causing the culture being consumed to lose by not being accredited for this avenue of indulgence and being denied their opposition against a history of the aforementioned oppression. The concept of consuming the Other(s) explains how the dominant consumer participates in the relationship without regard for what the Other is gaining, or losing.