Dear Editor,
Historically the word ‘black’ according to Frantz Fanon denotes evil, since white symbolizes justice, truth and virginity. Speaking through a third person Fanon noted: “his body is black; his tongue is black; his soul must be black too.”
Fanon wondered aloud “In Europe, evil is symbolized by the black man… the perpetuator is the black man, Satan is a black, one talks of darkness, when you are filthy, you are dirty – and this goes for physical dirt as well as moral dirt. The black man is equated with sin… in Europe, the black man, whether physically or symbolically, represents the dark side of the personality”. Recorded history has black being used to refer to Africans from the late 14th century, showing a strong correlation with the use of this derogatory term for enslaved Africans.
I urge all our politicians and the media houses to use African Guyanese in place of black when referring to Guyanese of African ancestry. In using the term black when referring to a person, one is uncertain of the context and intent of the user, especially knowing that black has been frequently used over centuries as a scornful term.
Life unfolds before us, based on our experiences and knowledge of the past. In his book Black Skin, White Masks, Fanon viewed the term black as an aberration that came into being on contact with non-Africans, along with its interminable negative associations, such as a bastion for racism, degradation, slavery and colonialism, with colonialism still expanding in this century. All things considered, the term black is offensive when referring to humans in this epoch, it is offensive and ought not to be used. Leave it in the past with the “N” word.
Even from a global perspective, especially outside of sub-Saharan Africa, we have been conditioned to view Africans of a certain hue, with extreme negativity. Unfortunately, the etymology of the English language and the meanings given to words, trap us into propagating despicable terminology that undermines our own image and value system. The Africans have lost contact with their languages that speak to their achievements, self-confidence and self-esteem.
We must constantly find ways within the English, French, German, Spanish and Dutch languages, among others, to describe ourselves in positive ways, without the denigrating word labels that have been tarnished through racism, slavery and colonization, in their origins and meanings as defined directly, indirectly and loosely, by the language we use to communicate.
It is past time for our Government, media, and other organizations to promote a culture using African Guyanese as the default description for Guyanese of African descent. The etymology of black as defined in dictionaries, history books and movies, extensively makes categorizing a group of people, with such a label as invariably retrogressive, very insulting and extremely degrading.
I recall back in 1994-95 being part of a group of University of Guyana students that sent a letter to Stabroek News, asking them to discontinue using the slur term negro when referring to African Guyanese; our efforts were successful, albeit not immediately.
Living in the 21st century, during the reign of the American Empire, where the term black is an integral part of the categorization of African Americans, it will be an uphill endeavour to change the paradigm.
We Guyanese, within the sphere of what we control, be it the media, government or non-governmental organizations, should lift the yoke of this label from the backs of African Guyanese. Hiding behind moral relativism and situational ethics is also not acceptable and must be discouraged, be it the use of the term Afro-Guyanese, slurs at political meetings, slurs at social gatherings or the use of racist code words.
How nonsensical is it for two persons of the same skin colour in Guyana to refer to one as Indian Guyanese and the other as black – with all the derogatory, condescending, discriminating and racist implications that have been woven into the meaning of black over the centuries. The problem is applicable to both the African and Indian Guyanese by varying degrees, especially as it relates to discrimination by skin colour.
Using the term black is directly or indirectly demeaning; one never really knows which meaning is being attributed to the African man or woman so defined. Let’s make the change: culturally, politically, socially, economically and spiritually.
In my view redemption of the word black is not a viable option in the current North American and European superstructure. Walter Rodney noted in Groundings with my Brothers: “The adult black in our West Indian society is fully conditioned to thinking white, because that is the training we are given from childhood…The few changes which have taken place have barely scratched the surface of the problem. West Indians of every colour still aspire to European standards of dress and beauty. The language which is used by black people in describing ourselves shows how we despise our African appearance… and that black is the incarnation of ugliness. When Africans adopt the European concept that purity and goodness must be painted white and all that is evil and dammed is to be painted black, then we are flagrantly self-insulting.”
Yours faithfully,
Nigel Hinds
Editor’s note
We think it unlikely that we used the word ‘Negro’ in 1994 other than in a historical context in features like ‘History Today’, etc, although we did use the word ‘black’.
