Harry Connick Jnr Is not Amused
#1
Posted 08 October 2009 - 06:55 AM
Herald Sun Reference
On Wednesday night Hey Hey its Saturday (yes on Wednesday but its a reunion) was on , and A group of Doctors from Sydney(most of whom were immigrants) did a parody of the Jackson 5. Evidently Harry Connick Jnr was not amused. I personally dont see the problem, well I see why It is a problem I just dont think there should be one, and 80% of the country agrees that they have no problem with it. I know it would have gone badly in America if Harry is anything to go by, but Australia =/= America. He should lighten up or realise people have different views to the Americans.
My 2 Cents.
#2
Posted 08 October 2009 - 06:58 AM
Marquis Chris 1, on Oct 8 2009, 07:00 AM, said:
Herald Sun Reference
On Wednesday night Hey Hey its Saturday (yes on Wednesday but its a reunion) was on , and A group of Doctors from Sydney(most of whom were immigrants) did a parody of the Jackson 5. Evidently Harry Connick Jnr was not amused. I personally dont see the problem, well I see why It is a problem I just dont think there should be one, and 80% of the country agrees that they have no problem with it. I know it would have gone badly in America if Harry is anything to go by, but Australia =/= America. He should lighten up or realise people have different views to the Americans.
My 2 Cents.
Took the word right outta my mouth.
#6
Posted 08 October 2009 - 01:43 PM
Marquis Chris 1, on Oct 8 2009, 06:00 AM, said:
Herald Sun Reference
On Wednesday night Hey Hey its Saturday (yes on Wednesday but its a reunion) was on , and A group of Doctors from Sydney(most of whom were immigrants) did a parody of the Jackson 5. Evidently Harry Connick Jnr was not amused. I personally dont see the problem, well I see why It is a problem I just dont think there should be one, and 80% of the country agrees that they have no problem with it. I know it would have gone badly in America if Harry is anything to go by, but Australia =/= America. He should lighten up or realise people have different views to the Americans.
My 2 Cents.
I support Harry on this particular issue. Australia has had some high-profile racial issues lately, and viewed through that context, it's difficult to view this as anything but another symptom of the racism that seems to find mainstream acceptance in that country.
Also, I don't think this has anything to do with a conflict between American and Australian values. Someone performed a vulgar act, and Harry Connick Jr. called them on it. That's all. Using blackface to mock black Americans is a profoundly offensive act with a well-known history. You can't feign cultural ignorance on this one.
-Craig
#7
Posted 08 October 2009 - 07:24 PM
Comrade Craig, on Oct 9 2009, 05:48 AM, said:
Hardly mainstream. Just because events/actions take place doesn't mean most people like or accept them.
That aside I do think there's a cultural difference in this respect between the US and here, and it's a good thing. I would rather it wasn't an issue at all rather than the over the top political correctness on the subject over there, although unfortunately that attitude is growing here.
Quote
-Craig
Except it doesn't have a history here. It comes from American theatre and Vaudeville, doesn't it? Black face I mean.
#8
Posted 09 October 2009 - 11:25 AM
Mack Truck, on Oct 8 2009, 06:29 PM, said:
So your argument is that if something did not occur in Australia, then Australians shouldn't be aware? That's a weak argument. The racial oppression and dehumanization of an entire race of people is in the United States is not exactly a secret. Six million Jews weren't slaughtered in Los Angeles, but I know better than to put on a fake nose, draw serial number on my arm, then dance around like a clown. Common sense should prevail.
I do not doubt that the performers in question were naive. I'm sure they didn't mean any offense. There's something extra offensive in that ignorance. The fact that someone could paint themselves up to represent an exaggerated black man, then perform a routine that clearly mocked their identity as black humans -- all without understanding how profoundly disrespectful it was -- is the most offensive part.
And even worse, it wasn't even funny!
-Craig
#9
Posted 09 October 2009 - 12:35 PM
Marquis Chris 1, on Oct 8 2009, 06:00 AM, said:
Not sure how scientific that is, the only Australians I know don't understand what the hell the producers were thinking either.
#10
Posted 09 October 2009 - 12:46 PM
Flatlander, on Oct 10 2009, 02:40 AM, said:
What an Australian thinks about this will largely depend on what channel they like better; Channel 9, on which Hey Hey aired, or Channel 10, which has come out swinging on several of their shows, taking shots at Hey Hey and Channel 9 in general whenever they can.
Of course, when 10 does something worth picking up on, 9 bashes them for it.
It's all channel politics.
In my opinion, it was a well-meaning but ultimately poorly-recieved joke. I don't think they honestly meant anything racist by it.
People need to buck up and learn to have a sense of humor. Political correctness sucks.
This post has been edited by Arrnea: 09 October 2009 - 12:47 PM
#12
Posted 09 October 2009 - 06:07 PM
Then the guy came out with powder on his face... I think that took it too far. Although I find the fault is with Channel 9, their producers shouldn't have allowed that through.
Interesting to note that on Hey Hey twenty years ago, they had a similar skit put on - but with the lead singer with the blackface.
#13
Posted 09 October 2009 - 08:47 PM
Arcadian Empire, on Oct 10 2009, 11:13 AM, said:
yeah 20 years ago the same people did the exact same skit and won. They were medicalninterns at the time and are now all full doctors. The reason they were on in the first place is because they did it before
This post has been edited by Marquis Chris 1: 09 October 2009 - 08:49 PM
#14
Posted 09 October 2009 - 09:54 PM
Comrade Craig, on Oct 10 2009, 03:31 AM, said:
I do not doubt that the performers in question were naive. I'm sure they didn't mean any offense. There's something extra offensive in that ignorance. The fact that someone could paint themselves up to represent an exaggerated black man, then perform a routine that clearly mocked their identity as black humans -- all without understanding how profoundly disrespectful it was -- is the most offensive part.
How did they make fun of black people? They just danced around like a boy-band, which the Jackson Five (practically) was. If they had actually based their routine around <insert-negative-thing-about-black-people> then it would be really offensive. The Jackson Five were black and did have afros, and imitating that shouldn't be seen as racist.
Quote
-Craig
Aye. Although it's a bit funny that in their performance 20 years ago their Michael didn't have a white face.
#15
Posted 10 October 2009 - 02:23 AM
Comrade Craig, on Oct 9 2009, 06:31 PM, said:
I do not doubt that the performers in question were naive. I'm sure they didn't mean any offense. There's something extra offensive in that ignorance. The fact that someone could paint themselves up to represent an exaggerated black man, then perform a routine that clearly mocked their identity as black humans -- all without understanding how profoundly disrespectful it was -- is the most offensive part.
And even worse, it wasn't even funny!
-Craig
im sorry i missed the part where they stripped to loincloths put on chains and then danced around like the Jackson 5. If they had done that then you would have a point.
Tell me, when Michael Chappelle wears white make up on his face is that racist?
#16
Posted 11 October 2009 - 07:45 AM
Craig is right, as usual. Australia is an incredibly racist country which deserves to be publicly embarrassed more for it. When the government of both Howard and then Rudd can send an army of white cops into Aboriginal communities to enforce alcohol and pornography bans on them, seizing half of their welfare cheques in order to force them to line up in aboriginal only queues for food, while at the same time denying Aboriginal communities access to government funding in order to blackmail them into handing over their land to mining companies, you know you live in a country afflicted with inveterate racism.
And let's not forget the hysteria the media and government creates over an imagined refugee crisis. 1600 refugees in a year? What a threat to (racist white) society. And anti-muslim racism!
I wouldn't mind knowing from Craig or other non-Australian residents what sort of racism Australia is portrayed to possess? I would find that interesting. What sort of events have appeared in the international press and media?
#17
Posted 11 October 2009 - 08:21 AM
That's what we like to call double standards and being hypocritical.
Also, you call Australia a racist country, take a step back and look at yours, buddy.
This post has been edited by Ursarkar E Creed: 11 October 2009 - 08:22 AM
#18
Posted 11 October 2009 - 08:23 AM
Ursarkar E Creed, on Oct 12 2009, 12:26 AM, said:
That's what we like to call double standards and being hypocritical.
Also, you call Australia a racist country, take a step back and look at yours, buddy.
What country do I reside in, patriotic Australian?
#19
Posted 11 October 2009 - 08:26 AM
Also, you take things far too seriously. I've seen American skit shows where all Australians are shown as beer drinking, jean wearing country hicks who live with Kangaroos, and the dingo ate my baby line. Do we find this offensive? No.
Lighten up.
This post has been edited by Ursarkar E Creed: 11 October 2009 - 08:29 AM
#20
Posted 11 October 2009 - 08:36 AM

Sign In
Register
Help



Top
MultiQuote