themediamademecrazy.com

i’ve put a lot of thought into this one and i find it terribly frustrating that the term “urban” is equated with “black.” i understand the desperate need for political correctness in the white male dominated field of advertising, but this connection has since drifted into the black community and is used in self definitions. i keep getting invitations from the LA Urban League Young Professionals, where ‘urban’ is synonymous with black. unfortunately, i do not generally identify as black and i definitely do not need to put myself in a situation where i have to describe my ethnic background in order to achieve some level of acceptance. furthermore, i cannot bring friends of mine who i would define as ‘urban young professionals’ who are not black for fear of their discomfort.

it seems that ‘urban’ should be synonymous with a multiracial community as the most amazing component of city life (as i see it) is people from different backgrounds, cultures, and classes, living in such close proximity. this leads to knowledge, tolerance, and above all, diversity; but i suppose this perspective is inherently NY, while LA stands in direct opposition: people from different backgrounds, cultures, and classes, living distally and without any interaction, leading to ignorance, racism, and even greater disengagement from the larger community.

i was recently asked by a professor to answer the following questions: (1) what is the nature of human nature? (2) what is the proper social order? (3) is equality possible?
here are my answers, might you have a response?

1. What is the nature of human nature?

Humans are animals and therefore human nature is inherently animalistic. However, humans pride themselves on their ability to distinguish themselves from the animal kingdom thus creating civilization (and clothing), therefore, their legacy is much more than simply genetic. Human nature understands how posterity (i.e. other humans) will judge their actions and temper their behavior accordingly, be it positive or negative) to ensure some level of immortality. The concept of the Selfish Gene (Dawkins) extends to the selfish meme; we will kill for our ideology, be it an economic system or religion. The nature of human nature is to perpetuate oneself both genetically and ideologically.
NOTE: Strangely, we feel no need to leave our mark on the world outside of our species, a task that requires much more than simply ideas as the written word is exclusive to humans.

2. What is the proper social order?

Social order is an essential part of a community, regardless of species. We are social animals and demand some level of sociality to survive and flourish. However, I am uncertain as to what the proper order is. One might argue that the strongest and most capable should be at the top, making general decisions for the betterment of the group. However, this becomes difficult and cumbersome when groups expand to countries. Therefore, I assume that the proper social order occurs within small communities with common goals and aspirations, at which point, the hierarchy becomes tangible and each individual does not feel like simply a cog in the machine, but rather and active part of the community.

3. Is equality possible?

Equality on paper (and even in practice) is very possible, however to achieve equality in the mind is a futile task. Each individual and community of individuals must isolate themselves from the group in order to develop a sense of self. And this separation breeds feelings of superiority (ego enhancement). I think that an excellent example is the transition of racist ideology in America. In reality, there has been very little change within the minds of individuals around the country, but their actions are tempered based on the expectation of equality, thus giving the illusion of equality. This does not equal actual equality. For me, this was the most shocking part of reading Invisible Man (1952) by Ralph Ellison; so many of his statements are still so pertinent to today’s race relations, 55 years later.

’saved by the bell’ (1989-1993) was one of the best integrations of race, class and gender that i’ve seen on television and decades ahead of its time. granted, children’s programs tend to integrate race effortlessly, because children will be children. however, after living in LA, i realize that it is not as simple as SBTB would lead one to believe. allow me to elaborate…

the main cast is multi ethnic: of the 6 main characters, half are white (zach, kelly, screech) while the other half are ‘of color’ (slater, jesse, lisa). although this may seem evident to the viewer, the narratives never highlighted their races or made that part of the discussion (despite living in southern california in the late 80s). the text tended to focus more on class and the trials and tribulations that come from teens dealing with these all-too-real differences: lisa is a shop-aholic, which clashes with her best friend kelly’s large family and spendthrift demands. for the other characters, class is less of an issue, although zach never sees his father because he is working and it takes a car accident to bring them together.

the characters are intended to be a slice of the american high school system (a classic tool of TV and film): the cool guy, the geek, the jock, the american sweetheart, the spoiled daddy’s girl, and the nerd/smart chick. this last category is also what draws me to the program. the smart chick, jesse spano, is both of questionable ethnicity (which is also never mentioned in the program) and remarkably attractive. she even lands the jock! it gives hope to all of us sexy smart chicks who question our own attractiveness. as for the gender reading, jesse was clearly a feminist, a label that many place on women who are too smart, too strong, or too driven. however, jesse was all of these things AND feminine. she was a feminine feminist, an elusive moniker that i try to advocate.

in short, i think that i am better off for watching ’saved by the bell’ at a key point in my development, as compared to other programs that were popular at the time, like baywatch, or melrose place.