- The Atlantic: It sounds like you're saying that literary "talent" doesn't inoculate a writer—especially a male writer—from making gross, false misjudgments about gender. You'd think being a great writer would give you empathy and the ability to understand people who are unlike you—whether we're talking about gender or another category. But that doesn't seem to be the case.
- Junot Diaz: I think that unless you are actively, consciously working against the gravitational pull of the culture, you will predictably, thematically, create these sort of fucked-up representations. Without fail. The only way not to do them is to admit to yourself [that] you're fucked up, admit to yourself that you're not good at this shit, and to be conscious in the way that you create these characters. It's so funny what people call inspiration. I have so many young writers who're like, "Well I was inspired. This was my story." And I'm like, "OK. Sir, your inspiration for your stories is like every other male's inspiration for their stories: that the female is only in there to provide sexual service." There comes a time when this mythical inspiration is exposed for doing exactly what it's truthfully doing: to underscore and reinforce cultural structures, or I'd say, cultural asymmetry.
It’s very important to be able to say we love each other. In fact our all of our emails end with te quiero mucho - I love you a lot. In English it sounds weird but in Spanish it sounds cuter.
Tim: “When Shrek the Third came out, for months everyday you’d get bombarded with like ‘the wait is ogre’ garbage shoveled at you […] and I woke up the week before the premiere came out with the idea that Eric and I would just promote Shrek as an experimental joke […] that’s probably my favourite thing of all time, it was just so dumb.”
Eric: “It was all positive comments and 15 promos, there are still people out there who hate us because they thought we were supporting this film.”
Cool means being able to hang with yourself. All you have to ask yourself is “Is there anybody I’m afraid of? Is there anybody who if I walked into a room and saw, I’d get nervous?” If not, then you’re cool.
Let us be vividly clear about this.
What the New York Times did to Michael Brown today was not merely slander. It wasn’t a case of a lack of journalistic integrity.
Highlighting that a black teenager was “no angel” on the day he is being laid to rest after being hunted and killed by racist vigilante forces is not an unfortunate coincidence.
The New York Times deliberately played into an archaic American tradition in devaluing both the merit of black life and the tragedy of black death.
They chose the day of his funeral, as his family, friends and activists everywhere have to grapple with a human being lost to pontificate about how he was “no angel”. Michael Brown was many things to many people; a son, a brother, a cousin, a nephew and another black causality of murderous police institutions and today, amidst all the racist violence he, his loved ones and community have had to endure, he was going to finally receive the respect and moment of honor he deserved and NYT decided today, of all days, to tune in their audience onto wholly irrelevant facts about his life - that in turn, transform the very injustice surrounding his death and the following police violence that plagued Ferguson into a national panel about whether or not his death is actually worth mourning and their language suggested that to them, it indeed is not.
This was hardly an accident or mistake. This is the perpetual hostility that is met against black life in America. The consensus is that black people deserve no respect and for black life to be legitimized and honored, we must meet a list of prerequisites. Subsequently, if black people aren’t valued, neither are our deaths understood as tragic or murders seen as criminal action.
This has been the atmosphere of America since its inception and much has not improved.
Included in the program of Michael Brown’s funeral service, a message from his parents.
Heart just sinks.
The Times often uses the phrase to describe Nazis, mobsters, and people of color.
Here’s who comes up in Vanity Fair’s search of people the New York Times has called “no angel”:
- Al Capone, white mobster
- James “Whitey” Bulger, white convicted murderer
- Donald Manuel Paradis, white motorcycle gangster on death row
- Erwin Rommel, Nazi field marshal
- Clayton Lockett, white convicted murderer and rapist
- Larry Flint, white pornographer
- Eric Harris, white Columbine serial killer
Who else does the Times label “no angel”?
- Samuel Spencer, Black victim of murder by four white men
- Magic Johnson, Black basketball player
- Michael Jackson, Black musician
Yeah. You do the math.
Reporters confirm that police & advisors concealed the identity of Darren Wilson until he could delete all social media & move out of state.
Wow though. Darren Wilson, Ferguson’s PD and the rest of his and their supporters are an extra special breed of scumbag. What incriminating shit did he have online that needed to be swept under the rug so quickly?
I guarantee you there was some racist shit on his facebook