McFarlane seems particularly attuned to the needs of the African American students who are the school's majority; she herself is black, of Jamaican and Panamanian descent. She worries that the full story of Celerity is not being told. She points out that the Black History Month assembly included presentations on the murder of Medgar Evers and the beating of Freedom Riders by Ku Klux Klan members — pretty negative stuff. She explains that the seventh-graders studied Till; it's just that when it came to what went on stage, their treatment of the story didn't make the cut.
"I don't see this as contradictory," says McFarlane, who called the treatment too graphic. "One thing doesn't negate the other."
She's right, in theory. But she doesn't quite explain why the Till presentation couldn't have been made suitable for public consumption. I suspect that it's because the slaughter of a boy close to middle-school age was too much of a downer, even for those vested in telling the truth.
Let's face it, for all its heroes, black history in America is mostly a downer. It's ugly. Unlike keepers of the Holocaust, which is taught in all its graphic detail (albeit perhaps not to kindergarteners), keepers of black history are still struggling with its meaning — is it triumphant, tragic, both? What should blacks emphasize, and when? I understand the importance of being positive. But black people excising, or glossing over parts of our history for the sake of uplift, commit the same crime of denial as whites excising those same parts because they'd rather not think about black history at all.
Tell black history's ugly truth
The story of African American struggle isn't always uplifting, but none of it should be denied.
Erin Aubry Kaplan
March 23, 2007
FOR BLACK people obsessed with scrubbing the hated "n-word" clean from the American lexicon, I have another suggestion: the word "positive."
