Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Please write me an essay 900-1000 words | Abc Paper
+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

1. Read the articles on Michelle Obama, Serena Williams, and Caster Semenya. 2. Watch the Life and Times of Sara Baartman documentary.3. Write a reflection of 900-1000 words on the similarities and/or differences in the manner in which Sarah Baartman, Michelle Obama, Caster Semenya, and Serena Williams have been described/talked about in public space. [Your work must be posted by the end of Lesson 14]Article 1 : http://globalcomment.com/is-serena-williams-the-new-sarah-baartman/#Article 2 and 3: AttachmentVideo: Rubric: Attachment
rubri.png

michellle_obama_under_cuviers_microscope__1_.pdf

caster_semenya_hottentot_venus.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
Chapter Ten
Under Cuvier’s Microscope:
The Dissection of Michelle Obama
in the Twenty-First Century
Natasha Gordon- Chipembere
Who might be a part of a terrorist cell?

Whose fist-knocks may summon the devil from hell?

Michelle
Rah! Rah! Smear! Rah! Rah!
“A Smear- Cheer for Michelle Obama” (Trillin 2008, 6)
***
Ludicrous as the opinion may seem, I do not think an oran- outang
husband would be any dishonour to a Hottentot female; for what are
those Hottentot. They are, say the most credible writers, a people
very stupid and very brutal. In many respects they are more like beast
than men; their complexion dark, they are short and thick-set, their
noses flat, like those of a Dutch dog; their lips very thick and big their
teeth exceedingly white, but long, and ill set, some of them sticking
out of their mouth like boars tusks; their hair black, and curled like
wool . . . taking all things together, one of the meanest nations on the
face of the earth. (Long 1774, 353)
This is the language one engages when climbing the precipitous
slope connecting the legacy of the colonial [British and Dutch]
“encounter” with the KhoiSan peoples of Southern Africa in the
fifteenth century with contemporary popular culture discourse
on the First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama. My
chapter posits two arguments, namely that nineteenth- century
© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
166
Natasha Gordon-Chipembere
European scientific racism etched a language that became the
cornerstone for representations of Sarah Baartman, which in
effect was transferred onto millions of African and African disaporic women’s bodies, culminating in the current display, discussion, and dissection (ala Cuvier) of Michelle Obama. Secondly,
I suggest that Michelle Obama has succeeded in disrupting this
lens and language through the ownership of her body. The last
two years (2008–2010) of international media flurry has solidified the schizophrenic relationship the North has had with black
femininity. Placed on the dissection table of the Western gaze,
Michelle Obama’s body has been serrated with questions of
her human-ness by the simple nature of her black womanhood
(Barack Obama’s dissection is not nearly the same as Michelle’s
and gender plays a central role in the difference. See Karlien van
der Schyff’s (chapter 9) for a focused discussion of gender and
exhibition spaces).
As First Lady, Michelle Obama has been left to defend herself
in the face of, what I consider some of the most insidious, racist
castings of the twenty-first century. She has been charged with
epithets ranging from being “ape-like” to a “terrorist” to a “bitter, angry Black woman” to President Obama’s “baby mama.”
These blatantly disrespectful, linguistic cartwheels have reached
profound and frightening proportions. The most startling is the
fact that such discourse, in both print media and the blogosphere,
exist without someone pulling in the reigns. Michelle Obama’s
final months on the presidential campaign trail with her husband
and his first year in office produced a plethora of voices who
indulged in the absolute freedom of airing their most intimate,
racially disparate thoughts without censure. Historically in the
North, very few had the ability to protect the black woman’s body,
especially in the hands of white ownership. Michelle Obama has
taken on the fight and thus far she remains a disquieting figure
among mainstream narratives of perceived black womanhood.
With her class status and education, Michelle Obama becomes
an elusive and thus a troubling figure to mediate and control.
Thereby, the mere possibility of her presence as First Lady warranted such a reactionary response, one that continues to equate
her with her enslaved forebears of two centuries ago, despite her
modernity.
© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
Under Cuvier’s Microscope
167
I suggest here that the negative, visceral reaction to the possibility of her as First Lady and the later celebratory role as “fashionista” and domestic “Mom-in- Chief” are all part of a silencing,
insidious trajectory of objectifying her in ways that most white
first ladies (besides Hillary Clinton who was rendered masculine)
have escaped. Michelle Obama’s blackness distinguishes her and
makes her body (one that has been historically viewed as available
and expendable), the landscape upon which the American public inscribes their most virulent frustrations about the emerging
power of blackness and the possibilities about the “end” of whiteness. Though many assert that with the election of Barack Obama
the United States has moved into a “post-Black”/nonracial sensibility, clearly the particular attacks made on the body of Michelle
Obama indicate that race and racism in the United States remain
at its core.
I find much of this troubling public response surrounding
Michelle Obama’s Green Garden agenda and “Let’s Move” program for fighting Childhood Obesity. People do not know what to
do with her! Michelle Obama has unconditionally claimed her body
as whole, as beautiful, as black and without shame (see Gabeba
Baderoon’s chapter 4 on black women and shame for a fuller discussion) while planting lettuce in the White House garden or making football moves in partnership with FIFA and South Africa’s
World Cup’s reps in Washington, DC during March 2010. The
statement is clear—Michelle Obama owns her body. She is also in
a consistent struggle with those who have historically assumed the
ownership over black womanhood (from the colonial male gaze to
Cuvier’s dissection of Sarah Baartman to the Trans-Atlantic slavery to the modern day genital testing of South African track star,
Caster Semenya). I suggest this is a brazenly defiant statement in
the face of a Western gaze whose underbelly pines with the desire
to metaphorically lynch her. In owning her personhood and serving as an active agent of her blackness, Michelle Obama uses the
tactic of responding to these attacks through action, reminding
others of her humanity, which is in constant question because of
her blackness. I ultimately suggest that Michelle Obama disrupts
this trajectory of dehumanization, through a direct movement
from an assumed silence to implicit, directed, and historically and
culturally grounded “alter” acts of celebration and liberation.
168
Natasha Gordon-Chipembere
Oh, Sarah Baartman
© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
Jennifer Morgan notes that the British representation of African
(Khoisan) women’s bodies, in particular their genitalia, became
part of a larger racialized ideology of difference:
Confronted with an African they needed to exploit, European writers
turned to black women as evidence of a cultural inferiority that ultimately became encoded as racial difference. Monstrous bodies became
enmeshed with savage behavior as the icon of women’s breasts [and
genitals] became evidence of tangible barbarism. (1997, 192)
The Khoisan peoples (comprising many nations including Khoi,
San, Griqua, and Quena) are indigenous to the Southern African
region. The general European perception of these people was that
they were stammerers, and thought to have no language, voice, or
literary traditions. Essentially, they were beasts, thus informing the
conditions under which Baartman was subjected. The presumption
of inferiority about the Khoisan people by the Dutch and British led
to eventual genocide. Pieterse further states, “Speculation amongst
naturalists about the missing link dated from the beginning of the
eighteenth century . . . and it was the Hottentot . . . [whom many
scientists] considered to be the missing link between apes and
humans” (1992, 41). S.G. Morton, in 1839, labeled the Hottentots
as the “nearest approximation to the lower animals . . . the women
are presented by [European travelers] as even more repulsive in
appearance than men” (quoted in Wiss 1994, 13). German writer,
Gotthold Lessing wrote in 1766:
Everyone knows how filthy the Hottentots are and how many things
they consider beautiful and elegant and sacred which with us awaken
disgust and aversion. A flattened cartilage of a nose, flabby breasts
hanging down to the navel, the whole body smeared with a cosmetic of
goats fat and soot gone rotten in the sun, the hair dripping with grease,
arms and legs bound about with fresh entrails. (Quoted in Aduonum
2004, 290)
Here begins a documented entry point for the black body that must
be controlled and contained; Michelle Obama struggles against its
legacy, as she attempts to define new terms of black personhood.
The uncontrollable, wild black body lingers in contemporary
© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
Under Cuvier’s Microscope
169
perceptions of black women’s sexuality throughout the African
Diaspora, which by default brought their humanity into question.
As European naturalist discourses, which codified racial difference, gained strength in the nineteenth century, new categories
were constructed in which one’s morality and humanity were
linked with one’s biological makeup. Wiss concludes “by such a
process the sexual difference of Hottentot women came to signify
a form of racialised difference so extreme as to create a new, and
devalued racial type” (2005, 11). The “classical” European body
was morally sound by virtue of its civility. The grotesque body,
in this case Baartman’s, was designated to the margins, a nightmarish construction external to the “normal” European form.
According to Wiss
The classical body—as closed, homogeneous, and symmetrical—came
to be perceived as marking out the identity of progressive rationalism itself. These binarily opposed body types constructed the ideal
bourgeois self as individual, progressively rational and self-contained
against the body of the outsider as plural, regressive and incomplete.
(1994, 12)
Thus the non-European, captured, labeled, and exhibited, was
viewed within these categories of difference and pathology that
lent permission to the “salvaging” work of European colonialists
and others who sought to save the souls of “wretched” Africans.
Baartman’s otherness fixed firm the European positionality of
being the norm. Baartman, not seen as an individual woman with
a voice or history, became the entryway to a “systemized radical otherness—the exotic and foreign other as an example of [her]
race” (Wiss 1994, 13). Rendered monstrous, the “Hottentot Venus”
was a fabrication based on what was beyond the intellectual limits
of Europeans at the time. Baartman/Venus is a myth necessary
for the European imaginings of righteous self-representation and
morality.
Qureshi explains how Cuvier’s writing and observations of
Baartman contain their own pornoerotic perspective:
During the [three day] examination at the Jardin de Plantes, Cuvier
pleaded with Baartman to allow an examination of her tablier; but she
refused and took great care to preserve her modesty. Cuvier only succeeded when her cadaver lay before him. His meticulous description of
170
Natasha Gordon-Chipembere
© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
the tablier, including its length, thickness, and appearance folded and
unfolded, takes up a long passage that is graphic and violating . . . and
makes clear that Cuvier’s attempt in scientific resolution of the tablier
was a personal triumph. (2004, 243)
Hobson adds that the European fascination with Baartman’s buttocks and genitals were not for scientific purposes as much as they
were for hidden erotic desire (see Ilaria Oddenino’s discussion on
pornography and the erotic in chapter 7) where white audiences,
both male and female, projected their own sexual desires to exploit
the black female body as a means to create racial superiority. Sheila
Meintjes adds:
The history of this woman’s life is one saga of the humiliation and
brutality of the colonial experience. It captures the bizarre fascination
of colonial scientists with the anatomical differences between racial
types . . . scientific racism. (2002, 1)
The black female body became a location for the forbidden. These
notions continue to be etched into the language used in Western
popular discourse on the body of Michelle Obama; two hundred
years later, one encounters a black female body as a site for the
unspoken, forbidden, monstrous, and hypersexual, the body that
needs to be “redeemed” (or killed) by the civilized observers in
the media, acting as mouthpieces for the American (and world)
public. Indeed the media, using the “world” as shorthand, disguises the extent to which intellectuals and journalists assume to
know/represent public opinion, when in fact they shape the way
people are thinking on an issue. Media analysts drew attention to
Michelle Obama’s physique and made it a necessary problem for
the average person to absorb and dissect.
The Metaphorical Lynching of
Michelle Obama
Because of her sudden (and may I suggest highly unexpected)
emergence onto the international public stage, Michelle Obama,
as potential First Lady, had no place within the imagination of
the dominant culture. Caught unawares, the immediate visceral
response to Michelle Obama, as black woman, as educated, as
© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
Under Cuvier’s Microscope
171
intelligent wife and mother, was rage. How dare she?! In the freedom
of cyberspace, a viral lynching (see image at http://kathmanduk2
.wordpress.com/2008/05/23/michelle- obama-lynching-from-the
-dailykos/) began of Michelle Obama as she was “exhibited” in
cartoons, dissected across front covers, and made “terrorist” in
newspaper headlines.1 The alacrity with which, in particular, the
American media sunk its frothing teeth onto the body of Michelle
Obama, I suggest, is equally as severe as what Baartman’s body
experienced under Cuvier’s microscope and dissecting knife. It is
this particular language, etched into Western racist/sexist scientific memory, which supplied the unrestrained approval that the
universal exhibition of the African/diasporic black woman’s body
was par for the course, dead or alive as it was with Cuvier and
other Naturalists in 1815. From “liberal” scholars to political
pundits to journalists to bloggers, there were no barriers between
those who had the right to engage the body of Michelle Obama.
Her body and therefore her person, as black woman, becomes the
territory of all those who could see it, access it, and dissect it. Who
protected Michelle Obama’s personhood/body during the Obama
Campaign and subsequent first year as First Lady? Why did some
Americans feel they were within their First Amendment rights to
display a cartoon lynching Michelle Obama? The image has a Ku
Klux Klan–based warning intimated that the black body, in this
case Michelle Obama’s, was always the property of whiteness and
one false step beyond its boundaries would lead directly to the
noose and tree.2
Concurrently and reminiscent of the now infamous caricatures
and aquatints of Baartman in London circa 1810, Michelle and
Barack Obama made the front cover of The New Yorker magazine in July 2008. Michelle, dressed in army fatigues, sporting an
Angela Davis–inspired afro and holding an AK47 issues the famous
“terrorist fist bump” to her husband, indicating their associations with all that is “foreign,” “evil,” “anti-American,” “Islamic/
non- Christian,” and ultimately subhuman. The media was at war
with these black people who presumptuously felt they too could
have a space in the American landscape of power and wealth. The
visual representation and the assumptions undergirding this image
was that Michelle Obama was the initiator of the fall from grace,
like Eve bearing the apple. After much damage control around
intention and humor, The New Yorker quickly removed the image,
172
Natasha Gordon-Chipembere
though it was forever a visual imprint of what the media wanted to
shape around the Obama ascension into the most powerful couple
“in the free world.”
© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
Sarah Baartman’s Legacy in the
Twenty-First Century
A legacy of demeaning Western representations of black women’s
bodies continues well into the twenty-first century. Sadly, many
African diasporic women have internalized this oppressive stance,
which, similar to Cuvier’s methods with Baartman’s postmortem
body, neatly dissects their body parts in order to attract—and possibly gain stardom from—a capitalistic male gaze. Most apparently involved in this process are contemporary African American
models and music video “dancers.”3 Though many black women
identify with the historical figure of Sarah Baartman, questions
about the beauty potential of the black female body remain. Today,
black female bodies are widely excluded from the Western dominant discourse’s celebration of beauty, yet visible in marginalized,
sexualized forums, namely hip-hop music videos and black male
magazines that are semipornographic in nature.
Contemporary black male hip-hop artists and white producers
corroborate with historical myths of the hypersexualized black
woman’s body, refusing to challenge ideas of “grotesque” or “deviant” black female sexuality. These men, in an attempt to capitalize on black women’s bodies, which are already encoded with a
legacy of lascivity, reduce black women to one essential body part:
their buttocks. From 2 Live Crew’s 1989 album “As Nasty as They
Wanna Be” to SirMixaLot’s 1992 rap, “Baby got Back,” hip-hop
has sanctioned the pornographic exhibition of fragmented black
women’s bodies through the mainstream music industry. Inherent
in this exhibition is the implicit act of silencing black women and
their realities; they are simply body parts of sexual fantasies.
History repeats itself. What I argue here are two major points,
namely that a eurocentric gaze continues to objectify and exhibit
African and diasporic women’s bodies, marked from the legacy
of Sarah Baartman’s exhibited body (alive and dead). This racist, patriarchal “othering” has sought to undermine and silence
any resistance by black women. Secondly, I suggest that there is
© Gordon-Chipembere, Natasha, Aug 16, 2011, Representation and Black Womanhood : the Legacy of Sarah Baartman
Palgrave Macmillan, New York, ISBN: 9780230359437
Under Cuvier’s Microscope
173
no other contemporary Western discourse most encroached in this
language of dissection and silencing as that found around Michelle
Obama. It is this language of deviance and hypersexuality that
has permeated media and the blog space without discretion. The
American public, which initially hated Michelle Obama during
the campaign because of her perceived “anti-Americanism,” has
now shifted to a collective “ohhhhh and ahhhh,” celebrating now
the most “famous” an …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

error: Content is protected !!