Let’s not talk about it,
It’s “easier” that way
At first when I read “The President Has Never Said The Word Black”, I was quite confused about what exact message I was supposed to get from the poem so I decided to move on to the article, “The Grammar of Police Shootings”. This article discusses the importance of how language is used in order to manipulate the public and to downplay the severity of crimes and mistakes made by the police. Author Radley Balko displays the contrast between how civilians’ crimes use verbs to show intended actions such as fired, produced, and striking with the help of adjectives like numerous to show that the acts they commit were intentional. When the murder of a 10-year-old boy by a police officer occurs, phrases such as “The deputy’s gun fired one shot,” and “not clear if the gun was accidentally fired by the deputy” is used taking all responsibility away from the cop’s careless actions and instead puts the blame on unfortunate circumstances. The clear difference in how similar events are described as “circumstantial” is no coincidence. With the recent focus on police brutality, it seems that there is an importance on how to cover up the countless mistakes which lead to death made by the officers who are supposed to protect and serve, rather than teaching officers how to correctly react to situations they are placed in. It seems that now a day’s the only people police departments are meant to protect are themselves.
If Long Soldier hypothetically wrote “everything is in the language we do NOT use”, she would be discussing the downplaying of situations through elementary language in order to not draw attention to the true severity of the matters being presented. By purposely eliminating the focus on topics through vague language, we draw away attention from them, hoping whatever the author is trying to cover up will stay that way; covered up. Balko wants us to feel dissatisfaction with how information is presented so we can better analyze future readings to see the discrepancies and truth that is being hidden about specific situations. After coming to this conclusion I then got a hint at what Parker’s poem was trying to say. The president at the time was Barack Obama, and Morgan Parker feels like he did an injustice to the black community by never addressing their struggles as black struggles. It is insinuated that while he can refer to those who are black as his “brothers and sisters” he cannot identify himself as black, as if he is afraid or embarrassed by the word. This all ties back to the language we do not use, by holding back on such an important identifying word, it creates a harmful message that one shouldn’t be aware of who they are and what role that plays into the injustices they experience. Overall these two pieces showed me that there is more to writing than picking the right words and structure to my sentences. They taught me that I have to be observant of the language I choose not to use, and to analyze why that is so and how it affects the message of my writing.
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Something that I really liked here as an artistic decision with my writing was introducing one reading and tying it in with the other in order to garner an internal and external understanding of the true message behind both readings. This post definitely explored the inclusivity of language and or the lack thereof by analyzing the erasure of “colored” language and being proud and identifying who you are. There needs to be further conversation on how we use language in our spaces to be inclusive and to not make anyone feel ashamed by the lack of diversity in our speech and scurrying away from the word black or colored as if it isn’t something to be celebrated. This blogpost specifically feels like a sliver of personal growth on paper where I learned and realized how the language I choose not to use is just as important as the language I do. I just love how passionate I was about these readings, and rereading this post I feel that passion still flowing within me and it makes me want to write in similar mediums to shed light on these issues within our modern linguistic landscape. This post is something I’m proud of and is an example of how my writing has developed over the years to have meaning rather than to be fluff to get an assignment done.
Hi Jane! First off, let me invoke my Brittish heritage/enculturation when I refer to your title as “cheeky”. However, “cheeky” is a GREAT thing in this case, as the notion of “not talking about something because it’s easier” actually mirrors the sly nature employed by journalists and neoliberal thinkers who purposefully chose to omit language when speaking on race. In layman’s terms, you’ve employed a layer of subconscious satire within your title. However, aside from the title itself, this is a beautifully written piece, that captures not only your ability as a writer, but your ability as a reflexive human being and thinker. I love how you mention the need to pay special attention to what’s not being said in a given conversation or piece of writing. I think the notion of paying attention to omission presents us with a personal responsibility to better vet the thinkers that we engage with on a regular basis. Great work! You have a lot going for ya so keep it up.
I remember reading this blog post because I was confused about the reading and I absolutely loved it! Your post had a seamless structure and I’m so proud of you for reflecting on a class reading in your own personal life and using it to grow.