GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1997-04 > 0859921523


From: Gordon Fisher <>
Subject: Re: Racisim vs. Common Sense
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 14:05:23 -0500


At 10:29 AM 4/1/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Why does the word black bring out the worst in people's minds? It seems
that whenever someone feels an innocent remark is racist they pick up the
whip and start flogging even those who meant no harm. It is so bad now that
if it gets much worse we may have to ban the manufacture of black paint -
because someone will feel that color is racist. I've heard no one on this
site condemn anyone because of their color - white, black or red. Come on,
loosen up. Don't see a boogyman where none exists.
> I was always told that when black was used in a name, such as Black
Bart or black Dutch or Black Irish, it meant an eye or hair color. Sometimes
it meant a swarthy complexion like ruddy indicates a facial color but never
did I find this used to demean someone.
>Angus Robinson
>
>

Would you say that this isn't a black and white issue (i.e., has
gradations), or that it *is* a black and white issue (concerns differences
between people based on skin color)? Years ago there was a chain of
hamburger shops called Black and White, named I believe from the black and
white tiling used in their construction. Do you suppose such a name could
be used today with impunity (who, I believe, may have Latin origins)? :-)
:-?

Then there's le rouge et le noir, Black Monday on the NY Stock Exchange in
1929, the Blacks and the Tans of Ireland, the White and the Red in the Wars
of the Roses, and of course the Yellow Rose of Texas (a state in the USA,
somewhat against it'w will).

But this is gen-medieval/soc.genealogy.medieval, so I ask you, is Fulk the
Black's character to be condemned throughout, or shouldn't certain whites be
concerned with Fulk the Black?

Sorry, words take me over sometimes, and I have a low resistance to sending
messages to this list/group.

Gordon Fisher

This thread: