[JACKSON ZIEGLER]

This is the frame in which the world saw its first canonical black storm trooper. It is a frame from the teaser trailer of Star Wars: The Force Awakens. A big Star Wars movie had not been made in years, and a ton of people were deftly excited to see a new trailer. But the appearance of John Boyega (who plays Finn), a black man, in a storm trooper suit sent some tremors around the internet. Star Wars, like many science fiction movies,  TV shows, and books, consisted of a predominately white cast in its early days (and thus predominately white fans). This effectively made the films, world, and stories a white space. Over time, with Star Wars 7 leading the way, the casting has become somewhat more inclusive. And yet there are some people who see this as trespassing.

Some fans of the original Star Wars movies have made it clear through articles and social media posts (as well as hate mail and online harassment) that they liked having white men as the lead roles. People have harassed Daisy Ridley (the actress who plays Rey, the female protagonist of episodes 7 and 8), John Boyega, and especially Kelly Marie Tran (an Asian American actor who was fantastic in episode 8). This harassment and tumult shows how people become used to whiteness dominating media, and see anything that begins to change that as an attack. Even in an imagined space like Star Wars white space builds its walls.

It is also interesting to note that people complained about John Boyega playing a storm trooper in particular. The Empire in the old movies, and The First Order in the new movies are allegories for fascism and Nazi Germany, and have been especially white spaces on purpose. The fact that some fans consider a black storm trooper to be trespassing illuminates just what those fans see as their own space.

Photo: https://www.bustle.com/articles/131286-what-is-finns-backstory-in-star-wars-the-force-awakens-finn-is-so-much-more-than

• This reply was modified 5 years, 11 months ago by JACKSON ZIEGLER.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[JACKSON ZIEGLER]

This photo belongs to Chameleon Horse Art & Design, and captures the fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline in a striking way. It looks like a child’s drawing, with the graph paper, the cartoon illustrations, and the imaginative way it captures the conflict at Standing Rock. The picture becomes a child’s viewpoint of the conflict, reminding people that children are also impacted by the pipeline. They are those without voices, those who cannot vote. And yet, there they are in the picture, holding up signs, observing the violence and destruction. This picture is a reminder of exactly how pervasive decisions like the Pipeline are–they make their way into the lives of families, children, and future generations.

Furthermore, I simply love the image of the pipeline as a hideous serpent winding across the landscape, spilling oil and dollar bills in its destructive path. The fighters on its back and in front of it are bright, fierce, and heroic. It is a truly fantastic capturing of rebellion.

Article: http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2016/10/04/the-north-dakota-frontlines-between-a-standing-rock-and-a-hard-place/

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[JACKSON ZIEGLER]

I found this photo while trying to find more info on the Flint River. The article that harbors this photo talks about how long the Flint River is (142 miles), and that most of it is clean for drinking and ecosystems. While it is nice to know that much of the Flint River is safe, this article illuminates the direct environmental racism along the river:  “What many people see of the river is the stretch of it that runs near downtown Flint, which [Rebecca Fedewa, the executive director of the Flint River Watershed Coalition and the vice-chair of the Flint River Corridor Alliance] admits is “not attractive.” But she pointed out that there’s more than 140 other miles of the Flint River that many people don’t see.”

This article is unsettling because it brushes over the environmental racism that Flint’s residents must deal with everyday. This article is clearly trying to reassure other people that most of the river is clean and open to recreation activities (like kayaking); almost as if to say, “don’t worry about those people downriver, everything is fine up here.” Not every article can wrestle with environmental racism, but I thought this article (and photo) could be a little more courteous of those who are suffering. Overall, the Flint River shows how life can be incredibly different for people that live on the same river, just miles apart. And its all due to how highly the state/city values those people.

Photo courtesy of Flint Watershed Coalition. Article: http://www.michiganradio.org/post/flint-river-cleaner-many-think

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[JACKSON ZIEGLER]

This is a photo of the South Bronx taken during the “Decade of Fire.” During the 1970s, fires swept through much of the South Bronx, apparently damaging or destroying 80% of homes. Support from the city, state, and federal government was notoriously lacking. At times, Black and Puerto Rican residents were blamed for the fires, when in reality it was probably a mixture of unchecked building codes and not enough resources to keep the neighborhood safe. Overall, the countless fires in the South Bronx showed how little aid can be given to neighborhoods with predominately minority populations. People were living in danger, ash, soot, smoke, and fear, and the institutions that were supposed to protect them were simply not.

Photo supplied by Gretchen Hildebran at: https://urbanomnibus.net/2011/07/portfolio-decade-of-fire/

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[JACKSON ZIEGLER]

Who do you think lives in this house? Any of these houses? What is the first picture that comes into your head? Is it a family? What do they look like? Why do you think that way? Does this look like a “white person house”? If so, why? What does it even mean for a house to look like it belongs to a certain race, people, ethnicity, class? Shouldn’t all people have the opportunity to live in a neighborhood like this, with big clean streets, lawns, nice houses? Remember that the racial makeup of suburbs is/was not an accident, it was caused by institutions and violence. These days most talk concerning suburbs revolves around the negative environmental aspects of suburbs, such as urban sprawl and land waste (the article I pulled this picture from does). But we must not forget the racial history that made suburbia a thing.

 

Photo by David McNew, The Atlantic :https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/06/a-defense-of-the-suburbs/562136/

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[JACKSON ZIEGLER]

This is a photo from 1963 of a supporter of George Wallace, then the governor of Alabama. This photo struck me when I first saw it because the man’s face is so clear. His face is at the center of the picture, and he is looking at the camera. The sign tells us his is the face of racism, of segregation, of violence and oppression. But he looks like a normal person; he even looks like someone who used to live in my neighborhood. This picture struck me because it reminded me that any person walking down the street could have serious hate in their heart, and I would never know. There are of course faces that publicly represent racism and segregation (like George Wallace, who said “Segregation Forever”), but this photo exemplifies that racism does not have one face–it has many. Racism is a system and a history that is and has been continued by countless people for centuries. And so, fighting it will require the same time, effort, systematic approach and people (if not more).

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[JACKSON ZIEGLER]

Content Warning: Picture shows American Bison skulls. This is a picture from 1870 and shows the extreme extent to which American Bison herds were exterminated. Their number was over 50 million in America before settler colonialists arrived and began hunting them for goods and sport. Their number sank to below 500 at one point. Such wanton destruction was due to many factors: settler colonialists valued wealth over the natural world, their greed was extreme and without check, and the US Government endorsed killing bison because it would reduce Indigenous populations. This in turn would allow for more exploitation of land as the continent rapidly fell under the control of a predominately white capitalist government. Thus, each bison death represented more wealth and power falling into the hands of white settlers.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Author]

Posts