Apology Not Acceptable
As a follow –up on the Swedish cake debacle (April 15, 2012), I would like to inform you of the sequence of events that have taken place thus far.
A group of enraged women of African descent, led by Dr.
Claudette Carr, founder and executive director of the Jethro institute for Good
Governance, wrote an open letter to the Minister of Culture, demanding an
apology for her participation and therefore public endorsement of the highly
offensive and racist cake (known as the Venus- Hottentot cake). The full story
can be read here .
The open letter was then used to create a petition to which
people were asked to append their signatures in protest to this piece of
“performance art”. The petition was run for about 4 weeks, and during that
time, a representative from our core group, along with a representative from
the Afro- Swedish community was asked to participate in an interview on The Stream, a program on Al Jezeera Televison.
One of our partners, the Black
women’s Blueprint also provided a platform in the United States on their blog
radio show, to discuss the various ways in which the artist Makode Linde, the
minister of culture and the people who participated in the performance art
exhibit had acted inappropriately. That interview can be accessed here.
. After four weeks the petition was closed and mailed to the
Minister of Culture in Sweden. In the meantime, Dr. Claudette Carr and Mina Salami
took part in an email conversation entitled Racism is no Joke: A Swedish
minister and a Venus Hottentot Cake, to be published in a forthcoming anthology
called Afro-Nordic landscapes: Equality and Race in Northern Europe
(Routeledge, 2012), edited by Professor Paul Gilroy.
We are waiting to hear from the Minister of Culture with
regards to our petition/ open letter and the points we put forward as a way to
make amends for the gross error in judgment that she displayed by part taking
of a culturally insensitive and inappropriate spectacle, which has brought into
question her publicly stated commitment as an “anti- racist”.
In the meantime, Mashua Against FGM, an organization we
partnered with for this campaign ran their own petition where they simply asked
for an apology. They received the apology on June 27, 2012 and you can read it
here.
After the initial happiness that an apology had been
rendered, I read the apology and to my utter disbelief the apology was exactly
the same as the pro- forma apology that Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth had delivered
to the press. It was the same non-apology that I blogged about here.
While I am glad that Mashua for FGM is satisfied with this apology.
However, I would like to make it clear that I find the apology an insult and
therefore do not accept it. The fact that this is exactly the same apology
rendered through the press leads me to believe that no effort has been made to
grasp the scope of the problem with her involvement in the art project.
I believe I speak on behalf of the original cosignatories to
the open letter, when I state that the apology is nullified by the fact that
the minister places the problem with her actions squarely on the shoulders of those
who were offended by saying that they misinterpreted her actions. In other
words, she did not err in any way and the only thing she regrets is that people
took it the wrong way. This is insulting on many levels as I have stated before
in a previous blog.
We therefore disassociate ourselves from the minister’s
second non- apology and look forward to a genuine apology, where it is clear
that she has understood why this so called art is a mockery and a dehumanizing
act that has sent waves of anger throughout the world. We look forward to an
admission of error on the minister’s part,and not this defensive verbiage that
insinuates that those who are offended do not understand art.
We also look forward
to a solid response to the other requests presented in the open letter. I would
also like to make it clear that we will not accept to being condescended to; neither
will we go away quietly. This issue is huge and it will remain an issue to be
discussed and resolved for as long as it takes for the minister of culture to
do the right thing and render a genuine apology. To relent now is to have
failed ourselves and those for whom we speak. This would also set a bad
precedent, whereby African women can be objectified and belittled with no real
consequences. Now is the time to stand up and refuse to be the portrayed through
negative stereotypes and oppressive, racist images which only serve to
marginalize us further from mainstream discourse about our issues vis-à-vis
development and empowerment. It is time that we are front- and- center of such
discourse and it is imperative that we lead and direct this discourse. This
issue of Swedish racism has provided us a conduit to the fore front of
discussions about who we are in relation to the other women in the world and
history will not look favorably on us if we “drop the ball” at this juncture.
It is very
disappointing that the minister chooses to play politics in an issue where vulnerable
women are further victimized, and Black people in general have been affronted. As I have stated before, this non-apology is
reflective of and consistent with the Swedish government’s own reticence to
address the pressing racial issues and race-based disparities that negatively
affect the Afro-Swedish community. We stand in solidarity with the Afro-
Swedish community and we stand together with all the African women and all
women affected by FGM, whose dignity we seek to restore by passionately seeking
redress in this degrading, racist spectacle, which got the seal of approval
from a government minister, a woman for that matter. What a shame.
You failed to admit in your outraged article the artist, who is of African descent Makode Aj Linde who created the cake, and whose work deals with the issue the cake raises. Constant outrage is boring and achieves nothing, particularly when you are selective in your target.
ReplyDeleteYou may not be familiar with my work but we have a dialogue scheduled with Makode Linde, that is why we do not mention him in this. If you read previous articles you will see that he is adequately adressed. Get the context right before you jump to conclusions please.
ReplyDelete