According to Richard Dyer, why is it important to study race and images of race?
How are whites typically seen or spoken about?
What are the problems associated with examining whiteness?
What role does non-white have in defining white? Why is it difficult to make a criticism of this role?
What are the paradoxes of whiteness?
Dyer stated “ racial imagery is central to the organization of the modern world.” What Dyer is implying is that the image of a given person’s race will yield judicial presumptions in another person’s eyes, and these judicial presumptions can influence the person’s occupation, education, and other important socioeconomic standings. Therefore, it is important to study race and images of race.
Whites are typically seen as the undefined majority. This being said, Dyer argues that whites are seen as the norm, while people of other colors are seen as non-norm.
In examining whiteness, difficulties arise due to the melting pot that creates the white race. Most people get offended with such coinage, and studying whiteness unveils a thorough history of degradation of non-white races.
Non-white plays the sole role in defining white. You are white if you are not another race, typically. It is difficult to make a criticism of this role because it focuses soley on appearance. Over time, the defined whiteness vs non-whiteness has changed, and continues to do so as society progresses.
The main paradox of whiteness is the fact that white typically is supposed to mean nothing, yet it can mean everything.
No comments:
Post a Comment