Comments on: Misreadings: Why I Like “Stuff White People Like”

By: Nav

Nav — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 01:09:25 +0000

Thanks for the comment.

What I was trying to get at is not that the site ‘works’; rather, that its failure to actually ‘make fun of white people’ makes it useful as a social document of white privilege.

And I think I’d disagree about no satire on the internet - it works in relation to context in much the same way that language has. Language has always effaced its author - how does the internet change that? (No, seriously, that wasn’t rhetorical - if you have any thoughts on that, I’d be interested to hear them).

I’d also be wary about talking of anonymity leading to some sort of colour-neutral internet. It seems that for that to work to, the internet, and by extension language, would have to somehow ideologically neutral - that the internet wouldn’t be dominated by liberal-humanist, capitalist, democratic conceptions of self/subject/society etc. I think I’d argue that it’s a sort of pan-colonialism rather than attaching post- to things.

But I’d definitely agree with your assertion that satire often targets a specific, well-defined audience, and on the ‘net that often seems to work in relation to strict hierarchies. I dunno’ if lately I’ve just been reading Fimoculous too much, but it seems like New York media types seem to exist at the very top of chain. So, speaking of colonialism…

Thanks again for the interesting, thoughtful comment.

By: Davey Bergen

Davey Bergen — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:36:28 +0000

You’re right, but you’ve exposed a bit of a problem. If the site works for the reasons you list, then you also have to wonder why it’s not working. As a graduate student, you’re probably thinking about the dialogical apparatus operating on the site. You’re right when you cite the “this is me, h’yuk” knee-slapping of the unseen “white person.” But if white privilege is the real force behind this blog, then can we start talking about the anonymity and pan-postcolonialism of the Web? I’m thinking that white people can’t exist in a medium that, by its nature, hides its user’s colour. I think if we look hard enough we’ll find that the Internet can’t support dialogue, can’t support satire. Everything must be literal; no tonal inflections, no points for form. It’s all about content. And I’m convinced that Internet “satire” like SWPL is absolutely about delivering a message to a well-defined audience. Just looking at the comments, you’ll find that people go there to argue over representations.

By: Nav

Nav — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 16:43:24 +0000

@Macon D: Well, what I think I was getting at was that the humour is a tactic of evasion - that SWPL works so well because it ultimately reinforces white privilege. Can you imagine any other ‘group’ that would feel so completely un-threatened by a site like this? That’s why I was saying that the reason I like the site is because its target audience - the ‘open-minded’ progressive white person - is precisely the person who ‘doesn’t get it’.

By: Macon D

Macon D — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 05:58:58 +0000

What I don’t like about that site is how it’s another example of how the only way whites will ever think about whiteness is if someone makes the topic humorous. Why are whites afraid of a serious conversation about their own racial membership?

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:03:05 +0000

I have a personal interest in SWPL and read lots of reviews of this site. Yours is the best analysis I have read to date. There is a niggle to SWPL that you have identified. The word misread is bang on and I love how you have articulated that very group who “get it” don’t really get that the joke is on them.

By: Lauren

Lauren — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:02:53 +0000

I love SWPL, and I was wondering if you’d ever write about it… I haven’t read all the entries, but what I have read was dead on, at least for me. I think you’re right that it wouldn’t apply to all white people though… but I have to say, I’m glad to see stereotypes for people other than minorities. Some of them actually kind of make me feel embarrassed, but most of them I think are just plain funny. Especially the grad school one.

By: Udayan

Udayan — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:15:46 +0000

Pretty well argued, but still a controversial claim if only because it is unsettling for society, which has fallen into a racism-doesnt-exist-anymore stupor.

However, SWPL may actually be a comforting sign towards fighting the idea that any racial, ethnic, or social group should be on top. By satirising Whites, SWPL brings them down to everyone else’s level. This is a derivative of Landor’s point, which I think is successful because population majority does not necessitate supremacy. You see this everyday because while living in Western city X, many don’t feel aware of difference anymore.