From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: The Literary Canon
Keywords: race canon
Date: 28 Aug 92 21:26:30 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Aug28.040140.16062@cheshire.oxy.edu>, rooney@cheshire.oxy.edu (Michael Sean Rooney) writes:
> In article <BtLF0C.EGy@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> msmorris@watsci.waterloo.edu (Mike Morris) writes:
> >Michael writes: 
# #  	When was the last time you saw Herodotos in the flesh, eh,
# #  Clayton?  Did he seem "indisputably white"?  There's little ethno-      
# #  archaeological evidence as to the "color" of the ancient Hellenes.
# #  They were probably about as "white" as similar east Mediterranean
# #  peoples, i.e., definitely non-Germano-Scandinavian.  Or were they
# #  mixed?  Perhaps "colored"?  Those from Asia Minor, "Asian"?  How
# #  indisputable, whiteness? 
# #  
# #  	Take your Afrikaaner logic elsewhere, Clayton.
# #
# #Your own is what I'm concerned about, Michael. The whole idea of
# #making these classifications in the first place irks me no end, but
# #I think Clayton was quite right. In terms of any *functional* definition
# #in North American society right now (i.e. whether you count as a visible
# #minority for purposes of affirmative action goals), modern Greeks are white
# 
# I wouldn't be so sure about that.  Are the modern Turks "indisputably
# white"?  I don't think so, by the "functional definitions" North Americans
# (e.g., Clayton Cramer) use today.  In my experience, there's little *on

Oh good grief.  First of all, I've never seen anyone make the claim
that Turks aren't white.  (Though I will admit, I don't read neo-
Nazi literature).  YOU DON'T FUCKING KNOW WHAT MY FUNCTIONAL DEFINITION
IS!  The only circumstance where I have a functional definition of
a person's race is for the purposes of identification.  "Can you
describe the person driving the other car?"  "Yes, officer, white,
dark hair, dark complexion, heavy."  That's how I would doubtless
describe a Turk (except, of course, for those red-haired, relatively
light-skinned Turks of mixed Celtic ancestry from Galatia).

# a purely visual basis* that distinguishes modern Greeks from modern
# Turks (not surprising given centuries of Ottoman rule).  Likewise, there's

Your ignorance is showing.  The Turkic people that invaded Asia
Minor AFTER the classical Greco-Roman civilization are substantially
different from the Greek population that lived there 2500 years ago.
The Turks are from Central Asia originally, and intermarried with
a variety of ethnic groups in the Ottoman Empire.

# really no way in hell anybody can pronounce judgment (as Cramer did) on
# the "indisputable whiteness" of the classical Greeks.

Oh fuck, I can't believe the ignorance that passes for liberalism
these days.

# #Clayton didn't say ancient Greeks were Germano-Scandinavian. He only
# #pointed out that it was a little bizarre for Michelle to complain
# #about the absence of minorities and women in the Great Books set, and
# #then use the apparently quite arbitrary notion of race that she did
# #to turn around and assert that the classical Greeks were non-white.
# #I mean, besides the Greeks, there're Dante and Machiavelli in the set,
# #and Cervantes, and the Roman authors, all as Mediterranean as the Greeks.
# #In fact, you'd end up with the assertion that a large fraction of
# #canonical authors is non-white.
# 
# We actually seem to closer to agreement than you think.  I responded
# because Clatyon made the ridiculous claim that the Greeks were somehow
# "indisputably white" -- a completely unprovable assertion.  I absolutely
# agree that drawing classifications about "whiteness" is silly -- who
# can say how white an ancient Mediterranean? or Dante? or a product of
# the mongrelization of the races, like myself?  However, the marginalization 

Mongrelization?  That's a word I expect to hear from a eugenicist.

# of other cultures (which is what Michelle was trying to get at, I think)
# is another matter (see below).

Then she should say that, instead of turning this all into a racial
issue.

# #Besides, irrelevant to what? To sociological studs? To
# #social-engineering notions of what would constitute
# #societal perfection?
# 
# Clayton is of the Ronald Reagan school of color-blind greatness.  I.e.,
# if there aren't very many blacks or women in Congress then they must not
# be trying hard enough.  This negative freedom-thinking (equal and free
# on paper = equal and free in actuality) conveniently ignores indirect
# (e.g., socio-economic) repression/racism/etc.

Where in the hell do you get that from?  I've said nothing of the sort.
Maybe you need to get over your bigotry, and listen to what I say,
not to what you want to believe I believe.

# #                Mike Morris
# Michael S. Rooney
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books