The Study of Racialism

I just read Louisiana Creoles: Cultural Recovery and Mixed-Race Native American Identity by Andrew J. Jolivette, a Creole and Assistant Professor in the American Indian Studies department of San Francisco State University. It is an excellent study of modern Creoles and their attempts to recover their mixed-race Creole ethnic identity. This is also the first work I've found to deal extensively with the American Indian ancestry of Creoles.

http://www.nativewiki.org/Andrew_Jolivette

http://hometown.aol.com/joliandres/myhomepage/index.html

is actively working with the Louisiana Creole Heritage Center on a Creole Heritage Recognition Bill to add a Louisiana Creole ethnicity category to the 2010 U.S. Census

Louisiana Creole Heritage Center
http://www.nsula.edu/creole/

Call for Papers
http://www.nsula.edu/creole/chicago/call_for_papers.htm

Andrew Jolivétte, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor

Email: ajoli@sfsu.edu


http://ipride.org/

Wow! A Louisiana Creole category on the census would be a REALLY BIG DEAL. I wonder, though, if it wouldn't be best to just encourage Creoles to "check all that apply" since their particular admixture, like most of us mixies, can vary.

We know what happens with "check all that apply." The feds simply list people as "blacks" who "check more than one race."

Powell did that happen to you last time you checked all that apply ?

I never check "All that apply." I check "white" and "other." I know what happens because there are many articles stating the census policies of the federal government.

But box-checking is not about verifying admixture...most native-born Americans have admixture, officially acknowledged or not, so the government, IMO, is very much uninterested in collecting that data. It is interested in maintaining the validity of race and the ODR for certain people. I personally believe that ethnic categories like this one do much more to supplant racialist notions than the "races" and pseudo-ethnicities that we have now.

If a certain group wants official recognition for their ethnic culture then I think the government should honor it. That way, when there are 10,856 different categories perhaps we will start to understand how silly it all is at the end of the day.

I've always maintained that the government needs to decide what it wants to track: Appearance or ancestry? Country of origin or admixture?

And I hope he fails. A "Louisiana Creole" category is simply another "Hispanic/Latino" category - what about the rest of us multiracials? The Louisiana Creoles are going to get their escape hatch, while the rest of us are left out to dry?

One reason he's probably going to fail anyway... the Lousiana Creole culture has been hijacked by the African American culture for a few decades now. How many black folks do you know with French (or pseudo-French) names? Ever notice how Creole dishes, such as Jambalaya and Gumbo, are now considered to be "soul food"? Another thing I notice, is that about 85% of the people I've met who claim to be Creole, look like they're from straight out of Africa and don't have French surnames - in other words, a good number of them are LYING... and will do so on the census as well.

I'm trying to figure out what you think they or you for that matter are trying to escape from. But in any event you seem to have adopted a crabs-in-the-barrel attitude.




Quite a few. I went to school with a girl whose family was from New Orleans and her last name was Gilbeaux - we jokingly called her Gill-becks.




I thought that food originated in Louisiana and as a result is cooked by people from that region. And I didn't think that New Orleans cooking was same as Southern cooking aka "soul food".




So are you saying that the Creole identity is about one's appearance? And are you also saying you can tell a person's total racial and ethnic background by casual observation alone? I bet you could run all those dna testing facilities out of business in no time.

It was an allusion to "mulatto escape hatch," a phrase coined by Carl N. Degler in Neither Black nor White: Slavery and Race Relations in Brazil and the United States (New York: Macmillan, 1971) to describe the Latin American practice of labeling someone by their phenotype, rather than by their ancestry. Hence, the child of a "black" Brazilian is "brown" if the other parent is "white." And if that child marries a "white" Brazilian then the next generation is "white" again.

Degler called it "escape hatch" to contrast with the U.S., where children of Black/White intermarriages are usually seen as Black. The lack of a U.S. "escape hatch" means that for any USAmerican with known Black ancestry to see themselves as White is considered reprehensible deception ("passing"). The "escape" is from an involuntary externally imposed label that the individual personally rejects.


I agree. Where is the harm in anyone embracing any ethnicity, including Creole?

You've been around since October of 07. That's fully enough time see what everyone else here is talking about when they say "escape hatch" - A. D. Powell has been talking about this for nearly fifteen years - I'm sure you've seen it.

Either way, to put it in more simple terms... escape hatch refers to how Latinos and Arabs are able to escape one-drop by being considered a separate ethnicity. No one tries to impose one-drop on them - yet the rest of us are victims of it. Now, someone is trying to give Louisiana Creoles that same escape hatch. What about the rest of us? In reality, Louisiana Creoles make up such a small insignificant part of the US population, and someone wants to give THEM a block to check off before they give ALL mulattoes one? This is stupid.

And I'm not saying the Creole identity is about one's appearence, because I know full well that there will be some with a monoracial black phenotype - all I'm saying is that for every Creole with a monoracial black phenotype, there should be one with a monoracial white phenotype - with the vast majority of them being somewhere in the middle. But 85% percent of those claiming it having a monoracial black phenotype? This should raise a flag. This isn't using my "magical DNA detection" capabilities either; this is applying the law of probability. Besides, isn't there more French ancestry in the Creole gene pool than African? My "probability" is actually based on their being an equal amount... so I was just being nice. All I'm saying is this - the Creole identity has been hijacked in order to keep them from being seen as a separate racial group.

Think of the one-droppist argument, "We're all mixed, you're no different from us," i.e., if they can't make you black, they'll make themselves mixed - either way, the effect is to make them and you indistinguishable. THAT'S what I mean when I say that the Creole culture was hijacked.

In the end, I say that creating a separate Louisiana Creole category while not creating a mulatto category would be a slap in the face to those of us half Germanic/Celtic/Slavic mulattoes.

Either way, you can sit there and be content while others with the same racial make-up as you get out of one-drop, while you're left being the victim... however, I think that you deserve better, even if you don't care whether or not you get it for yourself.

Umm, guys, this thread seems to have drifted away from discussing a book and into advocating of (or opposiing) certain census "racial" categories. Perhaps it should be moved to the "Biracial Americans" forum?

I'll be presenting on "PASSING" at the Creole Conference...

"Historically Créoles in Louisiana have lived in a three tiered society (White--> Créole --> African American) where they enjoyed more rights than African-American persons. However, areas outside of LA there is mainly a two tiered society (White --> Black). Whether you're Créole or African American you're lumped together in the Black category. That's why a lot of Créoles end up marrying Blacks once they leave LA or when they move to areas within LA that aren't heavily Créole. Because there is no advantage of being Créole and society treats you as Black there is no incentive for Créoles to marry each other."
-Mme. Andrea Archie-Beauvais/Paroisse Pointe Coupée

"Race mixture at Pointe Coupée was extensive. A rigid socioracial hierarchy was absent. A close study of the Pointe Coupée post during the eighteenth century supports the claim of Charles Rousseve, an Afro-Créole historian, that the French and Spanish colonists of Louisiana were more considerate of their mixed-blood children than were settlers in other parts of America, "accepted them as members of their families, freed them, and educated them. Eventually, the descendants of many were totally absorbed into the white Créole group." Rousseve's interpretation, indicating widespread passing of mixed-bloods into the white population, not only is accurate but also is pivotal to understanding race relations in colonial Louisiana...Although race mixture and social fluidity were perhaps more pronounced at Pointe Coupée than elsewhere in Louisiana because of the relative remoteness of the settlement and its insecure beginnings, a similar process of acculturation took place throughout lower Louisiana during the eighteenth century."
-Africans in Colonial Louisiana: The Development of Afro-Créole Culture in the Eighteenth Century by Gwendolyn Midlo Hall

on 2nd thought...

That is interesting. Why would someone adopt a culture that they lack roots to? Do they speak colloquial French fluently and comfortably?

When I am first introduced to a group of Puerto Rican strangers, the reception is sometimes a bit chilly (due to my Euro phenotype). But as soon as I begin speaking and joking and reminiscing in the distinctive Spanish dialect of my home town, they immeditately warm up and begin asking if my uncle was ... or my cousin is ... (PR is a small place, and everybody knows everybody else's family).

If the African-phenotype Creoles referred to above enjoy making small-talk in French, and can connect their familes to other Creole families, then the oddity would be why Euro-phenotype Creoles do not show up at such gatherings. On the other hand, if they have lost their Creole cultural roots, then the oddity is that they would make the effort to re-connect in that way.

I would love to hear more about this phenomenon.

And to an even greater extent, your surname I suppose?



I think it's to appear more "exotic." I discussed something similar in another thread.

I've seen far too many names like "Andre Brown," "Antionne Jenkins," "Paulette Washington," or "Monique Wiggins" to believe that the Creole culture is not getting hijacked.

Yes, that is true. Although as soon as I open my mouth they realize that there's something funny about the name. So they ask about my family and I say I am of the Riveros of Juana Diaz and that satisfies most. Everyone knows that there was a U.S. Army base near the town in War II and many local girls married U.S. soldiers. (They assume, incorrectly, that my father was American.)


Hm. Is it possible that some parents want to distance themselves from A-A ethnicity for some reason? I ask because I know a few biracial Americans who tell people that they are Puerto Ricans, when in fact they have no real ancestral connection to the island. This has always mystified me, since my understanding is that Puerto Ricans are also looked down on.