Subject:  Some Butter and Gilman |
Author:
Azuka Nzegwu
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 13:13:50 04/19/01 Thu
Some Butter and Gilman
It has been weeks since we read Spinning into Butter. But, I will like to take a moment to reflect on critical issues this play brought up. Personally, I cannot read a book, leave it aside and forget about it. Some things have to be internalized and have to be given considerable thought. Rebecca Gilman's play does precisely that. For me, a lot has been taken out of this play (not excluding other plays we have read, like Hwang's M Butterfly) to reflect on thoughts that were formulated and then rethought in my curious mind. But whatever these thoughts are, I realize that the play had (and should have) provoked others to think about race and how we play a variable to this factor. And this is the exact sentiment that I bring when I think of Spinning into Butter.
Some of the points I will like to address are the question of authority, history, representation, and voice. Gilman talks about history, about racism, but more specifically about the hate that is rooted inside the university administration. While listening to some of the discussion in class about administration, I was somewhat surprised that my fellow classmates seem to regard Belmont College a school that has race problems failing to see the similarities that it had to Binghamton University. For anyone who keeps up to date with the affairs of the university would agree that racial incidents at Binghamton University have far been more serious than the letter writing at Belmont.
What I particularly liked about this book is how the author had focused less on Simon' s character, or any of the students of color concern with race problems in Belmont…and in America. I suspected from the beginning that Simon wrote the notes and it is not important that he did and there is no need to examine why he did. It simply does not matter. That is not the point of the play and I don't believe that is Gilman's main goal. Because the notes were a spark for the administration to confront their own hate and prejudices and also their sometimes "word or letter of campaign" against racism. By that, I mean that administration will use fancy rhetoric to combat the problems rather than finding real solutions because many of them embody those hate that they have so tried to distance themselves from. I think that is one of Gilman's point in the story which is it doesn't matter that Simon, the black student wrote the note. But the underlying issue is to show how racism is within the university system and also to show how the University officials (i.e, Deans) would handle such matter.
So, the play, at least for me, was about how these white liberals that had to deal with racism and how their racist notions, although even with the liberal minds, does no good other than to under serve the students of color. We see this throughout the play and in fact, Sara discuses it with Ross. I believe she used the term respect and equality to elucidate her point. In the play, we as readers know there are race problems in Belmont. I believe it started with Sara when she wanted to nominate Patrick for the scholarship. The conflicts with identity begins there because Sara's notion of Patrick racial and ethnic identity is different from the way Patrick categorizes himself. Patrick calls himself Nuyorican but Sara, the administrative personnel would rather call him Hispanic since it fitted nicely in those "What is your racial background" boxes. Patrick considers himself Nuyorican and not Hispanic because he is not. He refuses to be called Puerto Ricans as well…and why should he be called one. It is the case of African-Americans, who are descents of Africans, but they were born in America and are considered African-Americans. Are they Africans? No, not exactly. They are descendants of slaves who were brought here, their social and cultural experiences have not been the same of their ancestors, and last their history is not of Africans who were born and breed in Africa. Why is that? Because those two groups have different histories and identities. But the African-American is linked to Africa because of ancestral background. I believe that is Patrick standpoint. He cannot be called Hispanic or Puerto Rican because he is not one. He calls himself Nuyorican because it represents both his parent's cultural and historical background and his own identity as an American. I recalled that some in class had observed that he may have had issues but I think that is a haste decision. Just because he choose to accept both his background, therefore coining a term for himself that best describes what and who he is does not mean he has issues. In fact, I believe it shows the rigidity of those who have tried to categorize him. Patrick is both Puerto Rican (culture from his parents) and American (being born in America), and he chooses to identify himself as that.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 