Posted on 03/25/2006 12:50:58 PM PST by Libloather
Rosemary Roberts: Close book on Black History Month
Friday, March 24, 2006
From time to time, this column focuses on local topics, so herewith are some observations:
Let's start with Leonard Pitts Jr., the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist whose syndicated column appears in this newspaper. I'm a huge Leonard Pitts fan because he writes well, thinks deeply and gores sacred cows.
Pitts was in Greensboro this week speaking to a sold-out audience at the UNCG Friends of the Libraries Annual Dinner. His topic, "Bearing Witness," pertained to racial issues. Pitts, who is African American, made a statement that made me want to cheer.
Pitts said he doesn't like the idea of having a Black History Month. (Since the 1970s, February has been designated Black History Month.)
Pitts said that devoting a month to black history smacks of segregation. He thinks black history should be better integrated into American history texts, not separated by a special month.
Pitts is not the only prominent African American with that view. Morgan Freeman, the Academy Award-winning actor, made a similar point in an appearance on CBS's "60 Minutes" last December.
Freeman called Black History Month "ridiculous." He said, "You're going to relegate my history to a month? I don't want a Black History Month. Black history is American history," he said, pointing out that there are neither white nor Jewish history months.
Freeman thinks black history belongs as an integral part of American history, not a separate entity. And so do I. But I thought differently years ago when Black History Month was established. Back then, generations of Americans, black and white alike, had not learned about black history in school because textbooks glossed over it. I thought a special month would correct that glaring omission and promote knowledge about black history.
Now, however, textbooks are more inclusive and tell the fuller story of American history, warts and all. The media also have presented more comprehensive accounts of the evils of slavery and segregation and publicized the achievements of previously ignored blacks Americans.
Why haven't I said sooner that I think Black History Month should be retired?
Because I happen to be white and knew I'd probably be branded a racist. It took Leonard Pitts and Morgan Freeman, who are black and with the credentials to say it, to give the idea respectability.
But what about Women's History Month, enacted by Congress in 1987, which occurs every March? Its purpose is similar to Black History Month: to promote knowledge about women in American history, including discrimination against them as well as their overlooked achievements.
Once again, I thought Women's History Month was a good idea back in 1987 because women's history had largely been omitted from history books. (Historians who wrote those histories were mostly white males and saw history from that perspective.)
But now? Time's up. I'm an integrationist (in every sense of that word) and believe that Women's History Month should simply be an integral part of American history, not a separate one.
In fact, both commemorations have become trivialized and lost their intended purpose.
Now we have to recognize women's history? Great. Just how long have THEY been around?
"Ain't it just like 'The Man' to make Black History Month, the shortest month of the year." - Nat X
"Black History Month? If it isn't resplendent, then we must end it!" J. Jack***
"I really don't know what you mean, my fine fellow Man o' God." Al Sharpie
(Sighs) "Al, what it is--if it ain't cool, it don't rule!" J.J.
"No, not that--I don't know what 'resplendent means." A.S.
Black History Month serves to keep blacks separate from whites as Americans, so yeah, we should trash it. Even though it's an understandable and sympathetic reaction to segregation, it serves to perpetuate the ideal of segregation and racial preferences. Very harmful, IMO.
I'm with Freeman here with one important qualification - one month of the year dedicated to any kind of history is more than most Americans manage.
It was a black scholar who first came up with the idea of "Negro History Week" in February which eventually turned into Black History Month. Anyway at least three days in January are devoted to celebrating Martin Luther King, Jr.
It always seemed to me that Black History month forced black kids to decide at a very young age whether they were blacks who happened to be Americans or Americans who happened to be black.
I also cannot understand why there are sections in the libraries and books stores labeled "Black Authors". Why in the world would an author want to be labeled by their race?
I want Norwegian-German WOMENs History Month. And I want it now~! And make it a long month, not one of those penny-ante short ones! I would be so insulted!
What about blind, left-handed, Lesbian, Albanian Women's History Month?
I go along with Pitts on this if that is what he really believes. But even a broken (analog) clock is right twice a day. I have not been impressed with anything of his that I have read. Usually the first paragraph is as far as I can stand to read with his work.
Not until we have Vast Right Wing Conspirator's History month.
Dear Ms Roberts.
Black History Month and Womens History Month have always been about what you, Morgan Freeman, and Leonard Pitts have recently concluded that it should not be about - the seaparations of Americans in isolated and hpefully warring groups. It has never been about history but instead about creating conflict.
It is wonderful the charade has nearly run its course.
How about "Lets Discover the Space Bar" month?
My ancestors are from England. I want British history month.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.