blackprof.com

Either Or

Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:02:13 -0500

     I’m not quite sure what to say about Stephen L. Carter, the Yale law professor and side-pocket novelist whose second novel has just been published to near-universal acclaim. I may have to ramble a little in trying to get at it. Bear with me, if you please.
   Being allergic to massive media hype, I had to wait until I found Professor Carter’s first novel, The Emperor of Ocean Park, on the discount table at B&N for $6.99 before reading it. To say I cracked the spine prepared to sniff might be an understatement. Having read Carter’s nonfiction Reflections of An Affirmative Action Baby some years before did not help create an open mind. Nor did knowledge of Carter’s record-breaking $4 million advance for his first two novels. (Playa-hating alert: those of us who have dedicated our professional lives to mastering the art and craft of fiction just love it when interlopers slip in unnoticed and scoop up all the play.)
   But worst of all were the gushing reviews crowning Carter the black Dreiser, the black Henry James, the black etc. for pulling back the silk damask curtains on the hidden world of the black aristocracy. White reviewers cooed in amazement and delight at discovering not all of black America was perpetually hobbled, while Our Kind of People (shout out to Lawrence Otis Graham) reportedly shook their fingers at Carter for letting the secret out . Being a member of neither group, I just wasn’t sure I cared.
   But credit where credit is due. To my surprise I found Emperor, though at times melodramatic, overblown and needlessly wordy, immensely readable. And Carter’s closely-observed depiction of the lives of the black upper class was interesting, though perhaps nothing for them to gush about. In the work of Stephen Carter this group comes off not only as elitist (natch) but petty, self-loathing and hopelessly obsessed with what Carter calls (ad nauseum) “the paler nation.” (By the one hundredth mention of the “darker nation” and the “paler nation” I wanted to hurl the novel into the fire nation, i.e. my gas oven. Forgive me, but is this the way the black bourgeois really speak? Does one need a verbosity tag to sit on the beach at Oak Bluffs?)
   There’s a lot to say about the black class divide, but I’m not going to say it, at least not now. Instead I’m interested in one of Carter’s persistent themes, that of divisiveness in black America. As a conservative, Carter is naturally most concerned with the way this family feud manifests in the drumming from the race of black conservatives by more mainstream (or liberal or progressive, depending on your take) types. In The Emperor of Ocean Park, the protagonist laments the way many black leaders turned on his Clarence Thomas-like father as he sought, unsuccessfully, a seat on the Supreme Court. The Darker Nation, Carter writes, being unable to influence a single event in white America, has been reduced to constant internal bickering:
   “... we waste our precious time and intellectual energy maligning each other, as though we best serve the cause of racial progress by kicking other black folks around.”
   No one knows better than I not to confuse writer and character. But we can assume Carter shares such sentiments, as he made much the same point in Reflections, lamenting the sharp, sell-out accusations often leveled at Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, etc.
   Setting aside the question of African-American influence on the course of American history, I wonder: is this just a conservative tactic, suggesting that anyone who disagrees with Shelby Steele is either trying to silence dissenting political voices, or, more condemning, thoughtlessly following the politically correct herd? Is this just rhetoric, suggesting that black people who (hold their nose and) vote Democratic, or support affirmative action, or despair of Clarence Thomas or otherwise take a position on the opposite end of conservative thought do from ignorance or stupidity or simple inertia or lazy manipulation by the patronizing liberal elite? As if black people don’t remember their lives under opposing administrations. As if black people aren’t smart enough to clearly consider two evils and choose the one that might damage them the least?
   Or is Carter getting at something here, just a little? Are we all, as my grandmother used to say, just a bunch of crabs in a barrel, pinchers out, ready to pull. Is there some space for legitimate and forceful disagreement on the critical issues that face us as people, some space between Pollyanna thinking and going upside one another’s heads? Do some folks legitimately deserve to be drummed out of the race? Or can we make room for all?
     Just asking. If I knew the answers I’d be running the place.
   The problem is that we are in crisis. These are not theoretical discussions for black America; this is not some high-school-debate-team exercise where we can all shake hands afterwards and go on out to lunch. Our lives and the lives of our children are at stake here, so maybe we can’t simply agree to disagree. Maybe things are just gonna have to get a little hot.
   But does it have to be an either-or-proposition all the time? Must it be a Dyson-versus- Cosby affair, where either one or the other has clearly lost his mind and everyone is required to choose up sides and put up her dukes? Is it possible that both sides possess some sliver of the truth?
   Is a website for lawyers a bad place to wonder if the adversarial system ethos has not run amok?
   African-Americans are no monolithic people, of course; we come in all sizes, shapes, shades, economic and political stripes and that’s all for the good, but can we afford to get stuck in the red state/blue state, conservative/liberal, fingers-in-our-ears-and-keep-on-yelling, either/or-and-the-middle-be-damned brainlock that now cleaves America? The old folks say our problem is not that we are cut out of the American Dream, but that we’ve bought into it; that we used to stand aside from the sickness (involuntarily for the most part) and observe but that we don’t anymore. Perhaps. For sure, as with everything, what wounds the larger society – rampant materialism, anti-intellectualism, the glorification of violence and the celebration of mediocrity – destroys us. Cuts us down straight.
   Ramble on.

The Real World

Thu, 05 Jul 2007 10:23:09 -0500

   The writer Martha Southgate has an interesting (and sobering) essay in last Sunday’s New York Times Book Review. In it she begins by describing herself – a middle-aged, mid-list, middlingly-successful black writer of literary fiction – and goes on to wonder why she seems to have so few contemporaries on the publishing scene.
   Though I think her premise is misstated – she may rarely encounter other middle-aged African-American literary writers as she makes the designated literary rounds but that doesn’t mean we don’t exist – the questions she raises and the answers she suggests are worth pondering:
     – Where are all the contemporary African-American literary novelists, the literary descendants of James Baldwin and Zora Neale Hurston and Ralph Ellison and Alice Walker and Gayl Jones and Toni Morrison? And if they exist ( and they do, here’s but a few: Marita Golden, Alice Randall, Jeffery Renard Allen, Dianne McKinney Whetstone, David Haynes) why are they not being heard?
   – If there is a shortage, is part of the problem a lack of what Southgate calls cultural permission? Did those of us who were Brown Babies not feel, a racial right to become artists? Did the post-Civil Rights generation carry an obligation to do something “worthwhile” with the educations and opportunities our parents fought so hard to obtain for us? (I know my mother wanted me to go to law school and was very disappointed when I declined. But now I’m blogging on blackprof.com so maybe that makes up for it. This is for you, Ma!)
    – Why do white novelists of cultural prominence tend to be writers in their 40s and 50s with long, solid, well-established careers, while the few black writers on the receiving end of mainstream hype tend to be one-book or two-book young ‘uns – ZZ Packer, Colson Whitehead, The Beautiful Zadie Smith? (Okay, okay, I know Smith is English, not American, and that she has, in fact, written three lovely books; I just like saying The Beautiful Zadie Smith because that’s how she’s referred to in every review and every interview I’ve ever read or heard: She’s so Beautiful, an attribute absolutely essential to crafting fine prose! And also young! And not angry or hostile like these American blacks! We like her! We like her a lot!)
   – Why do so many black literary writers struggle to find an audience? Who is to blame for this – the readership that stays away in droves or the publishers who fail to find fresh, creative and sustainable ways to promote their writers and grow their careers? (And no, I am NOT getting into the old street-lit-versus-literary-fiction debate. Been there, done that.)
      One topic Southgate does not address is the issue of so-called universal appeal. Once, in a blue moment, I wrote an essay on this topic so rather than belabor the point here I’ll just point interested readers that way.
       http://www.beatrice.com/archives/001938.html
      And then there’s the issue of the declining importance, not to mention popularity, of literary fiction of any stripe in American society. Writers have been bemoaning the death of the serious novel for at least fifty years and to join in the lamentation is to risk being labeled a Cassandra, wandering around with predictions of gloom and doom. Still, I have to say that from where I sit, things look bleak. The body may be lingering, but only because it’s on a ventilator. And a feeding tube.
   There was a time (i.e. The Good Old Days) when serious people viewed serious novels as seriously important. When people considered fiction a means of expanding our consciousness, of widening our boundaries and stripping away our prejudices, of illuminating what it means to be human and alive in the world. Today many folks seem to view fiction primarily as a diversion, as entertainment, as fluff. Who has time to waste on fluff when the world is burning down around our ears?
   I can’t tell you how many times, after giving a reading to a handful of polite-but-not-buying folks at some bookstore somewhere, I’ve had someone wander up to me to declare, with all sincerity: “You know, that was really interesting, what you just read! If I read novels I’d buy your book. But I only read nonfiction. I only read things that are real.”
   I used to smile at these folks before launching into a long, involved discussion about the critical distinction between Reality and Truth. I’d mention that as a journalist I’d spent a decade mining the mountains of Reality and coming home with buckets upon buckets of slippery Facts, but rarely unearthing anything approaching Truth. I’d point out that we are living in a world of the Real – blathering pundits, souped-up memoirs, reality television – and yet we slowly suffocate for the lack of breathable Truth.
How much real is there in a Toni Morrison or Alice Walker novel? None at all. How much truth? Well, here’s one tiny example, from Morrison’s Sula:

“I know what every colored woman in this country is doing. . . . Dying. Just like me. But the difference is they dying like a stump. Me, I'm going down like one of those redwoods. I sure did live in this world.”

How much truth? Too much to measure.

I believe, folks. I believe that a great novel can show me something and teach me something the best nonfiction never can. Something critical and meaningful and consciousness-altering. I believe that deeply. I also believe that having fewer and fewer people believe the same diminishes our society.

But read or not read, seen or not heard, there remain, I know, legions of serious, talented, dedicated African-American writers who believe that writing, as the great essayist and NOVELIST John Oliver Killens said, is a revolutionary act. And writing fiction even more so.

Killens said, “ ... every time I sit down at the typewriter, every line I put to paper, I’m out to change the world.”

Books on Condie

Sun, 03 Jun 2007 12:46:52 -0500

For those seeking more insight into the personality and impact of US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, there are two new options. Newsweek editor Marcus Mabry has produced Twice as Good: Condoleeza Rice and Her Path to Power (Rodale Press). For an excellent interview with Mabry about the book and Condie see

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18369623/site/newsweek/.

Amy Scholder has edited a collection entitled Dr. Rice in the House (Seven Stories Press). The latter includes pieces by Amiri Baraka and Jill Nelson.

Do you believe Condie accomplishments have been a “credit” to the race or to the gender or to the race/gender? Will history treat her kindly? See if these books affect your views. Perhaps one of you will be involved in a more long term assessment after her term is finished. Do you think she will write her own candid book as some others formerly affiliated with the Bush administration have done? What’s a potential next job for someone with her credentials/expertise?

Thoughts on 'Supreme Discomfort'

Fri, 11 May 2007 04:29:37 -0500

Last week I finished Supreme Discomfort: The Divided Soul of Clarence Thomas , Michael Fletcher and Kevin Merida’s new book about you know who. But I found myself picking it up again this week, just to re-read certain sections. Some of the stories about Thomas’ life (I’m especially interested in his time as Chair of the EEOC and his life post-Supreme Court confirmation) are just fascinating. The book is compelling in large part because Fletcher and Merida are meticulously fair to Thomas, chronicling his generosity to friends, willingness to mentor young people, and his loyalty, as well as his crushing insecurity, his childish resentment of light-skinned blacks, and his pathologically thin-skin (this guy never forgets a slight). This is no hatchet job. But it’s also no tribute. It’s a thoroughly researched book that bears the mark of damned good journalism. And yet you feel the authors’ (both black) genuine effort to understand how Thomas came to be . . . Thomas. What emerges is a picture of a highly intelligent black man who has in almost every phase of his public life either been compelled or who has chosen to confront some of the thorniest, most complex questions about race. As the authors reveal, Thomas to his credit, is unafraid to address the conundrum of race. But what we see is a man so deeply damaged --both emotional and psychologically – that his answers to these difficult questions are almost always warped by his often very painful, personal racial experiences. And this damage was in place long before the infamous confirmation hearings.

What emerges also is a picture of a man who has almost always lived a dual life, and so the book is aptly named. Thomas is, according to Fletcher and Merida, “a welter of conflicting personas.” From his childhood -- principally spent not in the destitution of PinPoint, Georgia where he lived only until he was six, but in the middle- class home of his grandfather in Savannah -- to his time as the lone black at Catholic schools and one of very few at Holy Cross college, Thomas’ walk has been marked by duality. And while this is true for many middle-class blacks – especially those educated at elite white institutions in the ‘70s and ‘80s – Thomas appears to never have been able to comfortably integrate his disparate experiences into one identity. Instead he continues to advance two very different identities, even now. I see this in Thomas’ posturing as a kind of independent black intellectual freedom fighter – a role he plays out in dissents and concurrences in almost every race case the Court decides -- alongside his almost rabid insistence on colorblindness. Thomas at once demands that we not judge him based on his race, and advances right-wing arguments and constitutional interpretation from an explicitly “black” point of view. For examples of this, check out his concurrence in Holder v. Hall , or his dissent in Grutter v. Bollinger. In fact, Thomas seems to go out of his way to write concurrences and dissents in race cases just to provide a kind of “black” perspective. Yet an obsession of his professional life has been his insistence that he not be defined by his race. And he demands this of others as well. Indeed, according to the authors, Thomas won’t hire blacks as law clerks if they taken “that Afro-American studies stuff” as undergraduates.

In any case, Supreme Discomfort is a fascinating read. I don’t think it’s likely to change anyone’s mind about Thomas. I finished the book even more troubled by him than I was before. I was particularly disturbed by Thomas’ cozyness with some of the most revolting characters of the right -- presiding at the wedding of Rush Limbaugh, fishing with Dick Armey and the like. And it was disconcerting to see how many former law clerks to Justice Thomas have ended up in the Bush Administration as authors of policies supporting virtually unrestrained Presidential power [a position Thomas has forcefully endorsed in several recent Supreme Court decisions]. But read the book yourself. There are enough stories here to give us a window into the life of one of the most powerful and reviled black men in America.

Black Politics Book Reading in DC

Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:38:02 -0500

Sorry about the late notice, but I did want to encourage you all to come by Busboys and Poets Saturday afternoon if you’re available and in DC. Eddie is a provocative and solid scholar--one of our top young minds--and a former blackprof.com guest contributor.

Book Reading - Professor Eddie S. Glaude

IN A SHADE OF BLUE:

PRAGMATISM & THE POLITICS OF BLACK AMERICA

Saturday, April 14, 2:00 pm to 4:00 pm
Busboys and Poets - 14th & V Streets, NW Wash, DC

Professor Eddie S. Glaude will discuss and sign his recently released book, “In a Shade of Blue: Pragmatism & the Politics of Black America.” The book asks Black America to look to the future to address its social problems, rather than being confined by fixed ideas and categories of the past.

Listen to Eddie talk about his book and "Post Soul" scholars on Tavis Smiley’s PBS Show.

Dr. Eddie S. Glaude Jr. is a Professor of Religion and African American Studies at Princeton University and a Senior Fellow at The Jamestown Project. His first book, “Exodus! Religion, Race, and Nation in Early 19th Century Black America” won the Modern Language Association's William Sanders Scarborough Book Prize. He is also the editor of “Is it Nation Time?: Contemporary Essays on Black Power” and “Black Nationalism and of African American Religious Studies: An Anthology” with Cornel West.

If you can’t make the Saturday event, come to the 7:45 am service on Sunday at Shiloh Baptist Church at 9^th & P Streets in DC. Eddie will speak at the morning service, and do a booksigning afterward.

The Case Against Black Leadership

Wed, 28 Mar 2007 16:03:48 -0500

We talk a lot about the need for a great Black leader. Why are there no more leaders like Malcolm X or Martin Luther King? Is Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton the Black “leader” of today? Will the NAACP find a new leader who will revamp the organization and deploy it to lead Black America to freedom?

But a Black "leader" may be the last thing we need.

I just read The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations, by Ori Brafman and Rod A. Beckstrom. The premise of the book is that there are limitations to centralized, coercive, hierarchical organizations headed by a single leader. Decentralized, open groups are often more effective. The title contrasts a spider (chop off its head and it dies) with a starfish (chop it up and it multiplies into several starfish).

Most would think that a lack of hierarchy would bring chaos and disorder. But looks can be deceiving.

For example, the centralized Spanish quickly defeated the centralized Aztecs and Incas, but could not defeat the decentralized Apache for over 200 years. Other examples of significant decentralized groups include Alcoholic Anonymous, Wikipedia, Al Qaeda, Craigslist, and filesharing (when attacked by the record labels, Napster was replaced by the even more decentralized Kazaa, Kazaa Lite, and eMule).

The problems with a centralized organization include: a) rigidity; b) it dies if you cut off its head; c) the whole organization is harmed if you take out a specialized unit; d) units are funded by the organization; and e) working groups communicate through intermediaries.

The advantages of a decentralized group include: a) flexibility; b) the organization survives if you take out a unit (in fact, when attacked the decentralized organization becomes even more open and decentralized); c) knowledge and power are distributed; d) units are self funding; and e) units close to the action have immediate information and communicate with each other directly.

Certainly, a loose group of individual “leaders” play a role in decentralized organizations. But they have little power themselves—there is no command-and-control. Instead, they are catalysts who inspire others to act through their example. Geronimo is an example of a famous Apache catalyst.

The “catalysts” are different than a traditional CEO. As Brafman and Beckstrom explain:

A CEO is The Boss. He's in charge, and he occupies the top of the hierarchy. A catalyst interacts with people as a peer. He comes across as your friend. Because CEOs are at the top of the pyramid, they lead by command-and-control. Catalysts, on the other hand, depend on trust. CEOs must be rational; their job is to create shareholder value. Catalysts depend on emotional intelligence; their job is to create personal relationships. CEOs are powerful and directive; they're at the helm. Catalysts are inspirational and collaborative; they talk about ideology and urge people to work together to make the ideology a reality. Having power puts CEOs in the limelight. Catalysts avoid attention and tend to work behind the scenes. CEOs create order and structure; catalysts thrive on ambiguity and apparent chaos (because decentralized organizations are so fluid). A CEOs job is to maximize profit. A catalyst is usually mission oriented.

While no one person enforces conventional “rules” in the decentralized group, power is instead distributed among various people, and shared norms bind the group together (which are often flexible and evolving).

The authors offer several ways of defeating a decentralized group, including: 1) shifting or changing the decentralized group’s ideology (the decentralized group is fueled by its ideology); and 2) centralizing the decentralized group by giving the “catalysts” property or political authority to allocate among their group so that they no longer lead by example but by command-and-control, which breeds infighting, hierarchy, resentment (according to the authors, the U.S. government giving cattle to the Apache eventually led to the conquering of the group).

In earlier times, people generally built decentralized movements on top of the rare pre-existing decentralized platforms that were open to the ideology—platforms like the Quakers to fight slavery, or the Black church to fight Jim Crow. The Internet has significant implications because it makes communication easier and allows individuals to build their own platform for a decentralized movement.

Perhaps we don’t need a great Black leader who professes to have all or most of the answers. Perhaps we don’t need self proclaimed “Black police” to ascertain Black authenticity based on cadence or percentage of slave lineage.

Instead, maybe we need several catalysts--acting on their own accord without the need to climb atop a pyramid--to lead by example. Rather than a centralized NAACP with a leader, perhaps we should follow the lead of Wikipedia or Craigslist and create an online community that connects people to one another, and allows volunteers to focus on the special niche that interests them.

Perhaps we need to celebrate our leaderlessness, and figure out how to make the most of it.

Who are the Best Literary Agents for Scholars?

Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:54:54 -0500

It is difficult for scholars who want to write nonfiction for a general audience to compare literary agents. It is largely word of mouth.

A literary agent generally gives an author feedback on his or her book proposal, distributes the book proposal to various trade publishers, and negotiates a good deal with the publisher.

If you’ve had an experience with a literary agent, please provide feedback in the comments section to this post. Feel free to do so anonymously. If you’re a literary agent, don’t hesitate to tell us why you stack up well under the following criteria. While I generally refrain from editing comments, please note that on this post I may delete comments that do not provide information on literary agents.

Please feel free to comment on one or more of the following factors:

What is your agent's name, and where is she/he located?

Does the agent invest time into and responsive to young authors, or favor more established authors?

Which other scholars does the agent represent?

Does the agent focus on serious non-fiction, or do a variety of genres?

How is the agent on issues of race, history, and new ideas?

Do you feel like your agent "gets" your work?

Does the agent give good substantive feedback on the book proposal?

To what extent does the agent shift the focus of the book proposal away from the author's interests?

What's the agent's track record in negotiating good book promotion deals?

Does the agent seem more interested in being an advocate for the author, or maintaining relationships with his/her friends at publishing companies?

Did the agent make any major mistakes, or go beyond the call of duty?

Is there anything else that you think is important?

Reading during Black History Month and Every Month

Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:26:43 -0500

Yesterday, I recommended supporting the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture. If you are looking for reading suggestions for your students, friends, family or yourself, the Center has devised a list entitled African-American Voices: Recent Titles by and About African Americans. Here it is.

Kuwana Hansley, Angel of Harlem: A Novel Based on the Life of Dr Mary Chin

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Brothers in Arms: The Epic Story of the 761^st Tank Battalion, WWII’s Forgotten Heroes

Maya Angelou, Hallelujah! Welcome Table: A Lifetime of Memories with Recipes

Barbara Chase-Riboud, Hottentot Venus

Walter Rodney, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa

Wil Haygood, In Black and White: The Life of Sammy Davis Jr.

Howard Dodson, In Motion: The African American Migration Experience

Gwendolyn Brooks, In Montgomery and Other Poems

Howard Dodson, Jubilee: The Emergence of African American Culture

Edward Jones, Known World

Robin Stone, No Secrets, No Lies: How Black Families Can Heal from Sexual Abuse

Leslie Harris et al., eds. Slavery in New York

J. Cooper, Some People, Some other Place

John Head, Standing in the Shadows: Understanding and Overcoming Depression in Black Men

Schomburg Center, The Black New Yorkers: The Schomburg Illustrated Chronology

James McBride, The Color of Water: A Black Man’s Tribute to his White Mother

Geoffrey Ward, Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson

Alexis Deveaux, Warrior Poet: A Biography of Audre Lorde

Facing Lynching

Sun, 18 Feb 2007 00:22:15 -0500

On Feb. 3rd. Beacon Press released my book On the Courthouse Lawn: Confronting the Legacy of Lynching in the 21st Century. I hope you’ll take a look at it. Using as a case study the last two lynchings that took place in the Eastern Shore region of Maryland, I trace the ongoing effect of these acts of racial terrorism on blacks and whites in that region, and explore the possibility of using techniques modeled on South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission to address the legacy of lynching. I learned about these lynchings while representing a small black community on the Eastern Shore in a civil rights case in the 1990s. I was amazed at the vivid “memories” that blacks – even those who weren’t born when the lynchings occurred in the early 1930s – had of these events. Their descriptions of the lynchings were startlingly accurate. I was likewise struck by the insistence of most whites living in these small towns, that they didn’t know of anyone who’d seen the lynchings. Later in my research it became clear that many whites – including prominent leaders in the community who were the fathers, uncles, mothers and aunts of the whites I spoke with – witnessed the 1931 lynching of Matthew Williams. Nearly 2000 witnessed the lynching of George Armwood 2 years later.

Recently community activists, clergy, educators and local elected leaders served on the first-ever truth and reconciliation commission in the U.S. The Greensboro, North Carolina Truth & Reconciliation Commission undertook, over 18 months, a searching, public examination of the 1979 murders of several labor activists by Klansmen, a defining event for many Greensboro residents. Despite several trials, no one was ever convicted of the murders. To learn about the process undertaken in Greensboro and to read the final report of the Commission, go to www.greensborotruth.org. Southern Truth and Reconciliation (STAR) has brought together community activists from throughout the South who support local efforts to confront the legacy of lynchings and civil rights-era racial murder, including the 1946 lynching of 2 black men and their wives at the Moore’s Ford Bridge in Walton County, Georgia (go to www.mooresford.org). The FBI has recently agreed to re-open an investigation into the murders. .

My book attempts to look closely at the long-term corrosive effect of the shame, fear and silence that routinely followed lynchings, and encourages communities to engage not only in truth-telling, but in collective efforts to identify meaningful forms of reparation that can address the particular and unique legacy of these events in the communities where they occurred.

Stealing Democracy in Ohio

Thu, 02 Nov 2006 05:24:17 -0500

I apologize for the late notice. I’m doing a book talk and signing for “Stealing Democracy: The New Politics of Voter Suppression” today (Thursday) at noon in Cleveland. It would be great to see friends and colleagues from both the real and virtual worlds.

Book talk and signing for

"Stealing Democracy: The New Politics of Voter Suppression"

Thursday, November 2

12:00 noon
Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Moot Court Room A59
11075 East Blvd.
Cleveland, Ohio 44106-7148

Ohio was the center of attention in the 2004 election, and 2006 looks interesting. Ohio has 5 U.S. House seates in play (including Bob Ney's old seat), a gubernatorial race featuring Republican Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, and a U.S. Senate seat in which Democrat Sherrod Brown is currently leading incumbent Mike DeWine.

North Carolina “Stealing Democracy” Book Events

Mon, 16 Oct 2006 08:53:57 -0500

Thanks to the support and work of Common Cause North Carolina, this Tuesday and Wednesday I’m doing talks and book signings about Stealing Democracy: The New Politics of Voter Suppression in North Carolina. All of the events listed below are open to the public. It would be great to see you if you’re in the area.

Tuesday, October 17

7 PM: Talk and signing at Townes Science Center room 1221 on the campus of North Carolina Central University in Durham, NC.

Wednesday, October 18

11:30 AM: Hosted by the Forsyth County Voting Rights Coalition for a speech and book signing for the community at the Winston Mutual Building, (1225 E. Fifth St.) Winston-Salem, NC.

1 PM: Addresses the student body and signs books at the Thompson Student Activity Center on the campus of Winston-Salem State University in Winston-Salem, NC.

3 PM: Addresses the student body and signs books at North Carolina A&T State University in Greensboro, NC. (General Classroom Building Room A202).

7 PM: Hosted by the Mecklenburg County NAACP and the Urban League of Charlotte for a speech and book signing at the Urban League of Charlotte, NC. (740 W. Fifth St.)

The Rise of South Asian Women Writers

Wed, 11 Oct 2006 07:32:14 -0500

Did any other fiction lovers out there notice who won this year's prestigious Booker Prize? The winner is Kiran Desai for her book, "The Inheritance of Loss." I've not read her book yet, but I, along with many others, will be clearing the shelves of our local bookstores and national chains of her offering.

While I'm sure the book is notable - it's a Booker Prize winner after all - I'm more interested in Desai. She's the daughter of Anita Desai, who has been a Booker finalist three times. (She has not yet won.) Moreover, Kiran is not the first South Asian woman to win the Booker. That honor goes to Arundhati Roy for "The God of Small Things." And, there is Monica Ali who was short listed for the Booker for "Brick Lane." What about the incomparable Jhumpa Lahiri's "Interpreter of Maladies," which won a Pulitzer Prize a few years back.

South Asian women are dominating the English language fiction scene with stories of immigration, cross-cultural negotiation and sometimes exile. While the stories are uniquely revelatory about Indian life, they also have great universal appeal.

I applaud and celebrate these women.

Northern California “Stealing Democracy” Book Events

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:57:58 -0500

This Wednesday and Thursday I’m doing talks and book signings about Stealing Democracy: The New Politics of Voter Suppression in Davis and San Francisco.   Both events are open to the public, and it would be great to see friends and colleagues from both the real and virtual worlds.

U.C. DAVIS STEALING DEMOCRACY Book Event Wednesday, October 11, 2006, 12:00 – 1:30
U.C. Davis School of Law, King Hall
Moot Court Room
400 Mrak Hall Drive
Davis, CA 95616-5201
Open to the Public
Directions

BAY AREA STEALING DEMOCRACY Book Event
Thursday, October 12, 2006, 12:00 - 1:30 p.m.
UC Berkeley Extension Downtown Center
425 Market Street, San Francisco 94105
(between Fremont and First Sts.).
Rooms 811/813
Sponsored by The American Constitution Society Bay Area Lawyer Chapter and the Equal Justice Society, and lunch will be provided at this free event. No RSVP necessary.
Email questions to events@equaljusticesociety.net.

If you can't make either event, find out more and/or buy the book by clicking here.

STEALING DEMOCRACY is fun, timely, and important. It starts off by showing how the themes from the movie "The Matrix" are played out in our flawed political system, and builds on that insight by recounting hot controversies like partisan redistricting in Texas, renewal of the Voting Rights Act, felon disenfranchisement, photo ID requirements, English-only ballots, and the 2000 and 2004 elections. The book was published and released by W.W. Norton in June 2006. Click here to listen to interviews with Tavis Smiley and others about the book.

Summer Reading

Mon, 24 Jul 2006 22:12:23 -0500

When I testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee two weeks ago in support of re-enacting the temporary provisions of the Voting Rights Act, several conservative commentators claimed that the Voting Rights Act has fostered residential segregation. It was an outrageous and patently false assertion, which I rebuffed (quite ably, I believe). I also suggested to the Commitee that if they wanted to learn more about the real causes of persistent residential segregation in America they should read two books: Sheryll Cashin's The Failures of Integration: How Race and Class are Undermining the American Dream (Perseus Books 2004) and James Loewen's massive and informative book Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism (New Press 2005). I'm sure the Senators ran right out and purchased these books (not!). Mentioning these titles reminded me that I never posted summer reading suggestions to this blog -- something I meant to do back in May. So even though the summer is half over, let me recommend both Cashin and Loewen's excellent books as well as a few others I've read over the past several months.

I strongly recommend Paul Rusesabagina's, An Ordinary Man (Viking 2006). Rusesabagina is the man who is the subject of the movie Hotel Rwanda. I know you figure you saw the movie, so you don't need to read the book -- but you're wrong. Rusesabagina's voice is a compelling one and gives context for the events that unfolded in Rwanda. He also forces us to think about the future of this grief-stricken country, where reconciliation for so many is just unimaginable. Rusesabagina's voice as the narrator of this book is powerful, yet the writing is quite simple. By contrast, Wole Soyinka's memoir, You Must Set Forth at Dawn (Random House 2006) was one of the most challenging and enjoyable reads I've experienced in quite a while. Soyinka's writing style is often quite complex, but always beautiful in its construction and powerful in its message. As a poet, playwright, actor, political activist and proud Nigerian, Soyinka's life is rich in stories about corrupt leaders, madcap theatre directors, great meals, and the high cost of integrity. Tommie Shelby's, We Who Are Dark: The Philosophical Foundations of Black Solidarity (Harvard University Press 2005) is an intellectually-rigorous exploration of the meaning of black identity in the 21st century. Gilda Ochoa's Becoming Neighbors in a Mexican American Community: Power, Conflict, and Solidarity (University of Texas Press 2004) exposes often-ignored conflicts between and among Mexican Americans and recent Mexican immigrants to the U.S. It's a fascinating study of class, assimilation and group solidarity. And I've just started Cynthia Carr's Our Town: A Heartland Lynching, A Haunted Town and the Hidden History of White America (Crown Publishers 2006). Carr's book is an often chilling account of her family's history in Marion, Indiana, the town where two black men were lynched in 1930 and from which James Cameron narrowly escaped being lynched. Carr, a former writer for the Village Voice in New York, learns that her grandfather was a Klan member in Marion during this period, and likely attended the lynching. Our Town takes us on Carr's journey as she examines the legacy of lynching in white America. And I'm still working through From Lynch Mobs to the Killing State: Race and the Death Penalty in the U.S (New York University Press 2006). This is a must-read, edited by Charles Ogletree and Austin Sarat. The title speaks for itself and the book is excellently researched.

In the fiction area, I just re-read Edwidge Danticat's The Dewbreaker (Vintage Books 2004). This novel is really haunting. It tells the story of a young, female Haitian-American artist who discovers that her humble and kind immigrant father whom she believed had once been the victim of torture in Haiti, had in fact been a torturer at an infamous Haitian prison.

Please weigh-in with your summer reading suggestions.

Ain't too proud to beg. . .

Wed, 28 Jun 2006 23:18:14 -0500

The politician Tip O’Neill often told a story about how he campaigned outside of his neighborhood and barely won an election. When he approached a friend and neighbor to ask why she didn’t vote for him, she replied that he didn’t ask her to come out and support him. So, let me ask everyone in the Blackprof community. . . .

Please buy my book, Stealing Democracy: The New Politics of Voter Suppression. You can order it online here (also, register to vote at the site while you're there). You can also buy it at major and independent bookstores.

Chapter 1 of Stealing Democracy, "How to Rig Elections," addresses political gerrymandering. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court largely upheld an unusual mid-decade partisan redistricting plan orchestrated by Tom DeLay in Texas (the Court struck down a district as violating the Voting Rights Act because Republicans removed 100,000 Latinos from the district).

I discussed this issue on the PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer today (Roger Clegg was on the other side of the issue, and the fabulous Gwen Ifill moderated). The transcript and audio of the TV show are here (I think it "listens" much better than it "reads").