"Kumbaya"--the adjective, non-complimentary.

[Pure]

What think you?

Black Artists Association Co-Founder Slams Michelle Obama's "Kumbaya" Designer Picks

BAA's founder Amnau Eele, a former model, told WWD:
"It's fine and good if you want to be all 'Kumbaya' and 'We Are the World' by representing all different countries. But if you are going to have Isabel Toledo do the inauguration dress, and Jason Wu do the evening gown, why not have Kevan Hall, B Michael, Stephen Burrows or any of the other black designers do something too?" Eele said.

===

See also,

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...umbaya_11rel.ART0.State.Edition1.3e6da2d.html

=============

There is also the verb!



http://www.theroot.com/id/48398

Oh, Lord, Kumbaya

How an innocent campfire song got warped by the cynicism of our times.

By: Michael E. Ross | Posted: October 13, 2008 at 12:00 AM

In the summer of 2004, Townhall columnist and radio talk show host Doug Giles made some comments about radical Islam. "They want us exterminated. … That said, what do we, Christians in particular, do when faced with an implacable radical enemy? Just sit around, sing 'Kum Ba Yah' and hope these bad guys will leave us alone?" In 2006, condemning the impotence of the church preceding the rise of Nazism in pre-WWII Germany, Giles commented: "The German Church, which should have been a major player in defying Nazism, instead kum-ba-yah'd their way into Stupidville…" In July of this year, in a condemnation of Sen. Barack Obama's courting of the evangelical right, Charmaine Yoest of the Family Research Council, another conservative evangelical group, told CNN that "talking about faith issues is not about singing 'Kumbaya' … It's about the public policies the person is going to put in place."

 

[cloudy]

I think it's a really weak excuse to gripe. *shrug*

Toledo and Wu are Americans, not from other countries. Toledo is Cuban-born, but is an American citizen. She and Wu both live in New York.

Not only weak, but ignorant as all get out.

 

[3113]

It is interesting but not surprising how Kumbaya got transformed. Whatever the original song or word was about, the song became identified as a ubiquitous campfire song--white kids singing an African song as if the song alone will create identification and racial harmony. A pretty patronizing idea. No real work is needed, just sing the song and we're all brothers and sisters.

So the word implies a false and superficial attempt at such harmony and unity, a token/bogus gesture that does nothing to heal real riffs.

As for the complaint, I think it's dead wrong. Eele is mistaken in thinking that (1) Michelle was going for some superficial attempt at racial harmony, and (2) that Michelle and Obama are there to promote black artists, designers, etc. They are the President and the First Lady, and it is their job work for the nation. The important focus was to make sure the designers were American. Hence, I think it wasn't "Kumbaya" so much as a conscious attempt to say "America has it's own international designers. Buy American." Which is exactly what Michelle's job is. To be America's "hostess" and sales lady. She has to be "superficial" to a certain extent, because to be otherwise is to step in quagmires that might trip up her very important husband.

 

[Vermilion]

Also, and here's a wild idea I'm throwing into the mix, perhaps she actually likes the clothes those designers make...?

x
V

 

[Lee Chambers]

Also, and here's a wild idea I'm throwing into the mix, perhaps she actually likes the clothes those designers make...?

x
V

Shut your mouth! That's crazy talk! No one buys clothes that they like, the only buy clothes that other people will approve of them in.

Or is that just me?

 

[3113]

Also, and here's a wild idea I'm throwing into the mix, perhaps she actually likes the clothes those designers make...?

Not surprisingly, she had a lot of designers to choose from. I'm sure she wasn't totally unaware of any symbolic significance of her choice, but I'm sure, also, that she did pick what worked for her and what she liked. It's all well and good to say, "Why not these other designers--" but did their styles really suit her? Designers are often notoriously tyrannical in their vision and don't always consider either what really is going to work on the client or their particular tastes/needs. In this case they may have been all about what the dress would say about them, not about her. She's not, after all, a model or a mannequin, wearing clothes for their benefit.

Putting it another way, I agree with you, and I think it's presumptive to assume that symbolism was all that motivated her choice; the look of the clothes probably had something to do with it.

 

[gauchecritic]

By: Michael E. Ross | Posted: October 13, 2008 at 12:00 AM

In the summer of 2004, Townhall columnist and radio talk show host Doug Giles made some comments about radical Islam. "They want us exterminated. … That said, what do we, Christians in particular, do when faced with an implacable radical enemy? Just sit around, sing 'Kum Ba Yah' and hope these bad guys will leave us alone?" In 2006, condemning the impotence of the church preceding the rise of Nazism in pre-WWII Germany, Giles commented: "The German Church, which should have been a major player in defying Nazism, instead kum-ba-yah'd their way into Stupidville…" In July of this year, in a condemnation of Sen. Barack Obama's courting of the evangelical right, Charmaine Yoest of the Family Research Council, another conservative evangelical group, told CNN that "talking about faith issues is not about singing 'Kumbaya' … It's about the public policies the person is going to put in place."

On the other hand a chap named Mohandas (sp) freed his entire sub-continental country by just that method. By not fighting and therefore not partaking of the enemy. I suppose the difference was that he actually got everybody to do it together.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pure
By: Michael E. Ross | Posted: October 13, 2008 at 12:00 AM

In the summer of 2004, Townhall columnist and radio talk show host Doug Giles made some comments about radical Islam. "They want us exterminated. … That said, what do we, Christians in particular, do when faced with an implacable radical enemy? Just sit around, sing 'Kum Ba Yah' and hope these bad guys will leave us alone?" In 2006, condemning the impotence of the church preceding the rise of Nazism in pre-WWII Germany, Giles commented: "The German Church, which should have been a major player in defying Nazism, instead kum-ba-yah'd their way into Stupidville…" In July of this year, in a condemnation of Sen. Barack Obama's courting of the evangelical right, Charmaine Yoest of the Family Research Council, another conservative evangelical group, told CNN that "talking about faith issues is not about singing 'Kumbaya' … It's about the public policies the person is going to put in place."

On the other hand a chap named Mohandas (sp) freed his entire sub-continental country by just that method. By not fighting and therefore not partaking of the enemy. I suppose the difference was that he actually got everybody to do it together.

You can't really compare the Nazis and the British in India. The former were evil, and wanted to conquer Europe and commit genocide. The British, in the 20th Century at least, just wanted to maintain the status quo.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

It is very important when eulogizing Ghandi to remember that it he had tried his technique on any other colonial power, he'd have disappeared, never to be seen again. My guess is that he knew his opponents and that he could be non-violent and actually survive. Anyone else? Fuggedaboudit!

 

[oggbashan]

...
You can't really compare the Nazis and the British in India. The former were evil, and wanted to conquer Europe and commit genocide. The British, in the 20th Century at least, just wanted to maintain the status quo.

The British in India in the 1930s wanted to hand over power eventually to the Indians - but not yet.

After World War II, the British wanted to get out of all their possessions as fast as they could because they couldn't afford them.

Getting out of India and Pakistan so fast without giving the new governments time to establish themselves properly caused real problems and many deaths. Taking a little longer might have made partition less bloody but no one in the then UK government had any stomach for trying to solve the sub-continent's problems.

Gandhi proved Bulwer-Lytton's statement "The pen is mighter than the sword" but most people forget the first part: "Beneath the rule of men entirely great..."

His methods wouldn't have worked unless the authorities were a democratic government.

Og

 

[Pure]

proof?

[On Gandhi] His methods wouldn't have worked unless the authorities were a democratic government.

I'm not sure at all that this is true. Any evidence? It might be remembered that the Brit's rule *of India* was NOT democratic. See below: Methods used on resisters, esp. those in a foreign land, are NOT in any simple relationship to 'democracy'. Brits did not avoid calling out the soldiers to shoot resisters, and this happened to Gandhi's followers.

VM It is very important when eulogizing Ghandi to remember that it he had tried his technique on any other colonial power, he'd have disappeared, never to be seen again. My guess is that he knew his opponents and that he could be non-violent and actually survive. Anyone else? Fuggedaboudit!

Again, I'm not sure this is true. Certainly non violence was NOT proposed as 'here's a way you can deal with evils *from a democratic government*."

Further 'democratic' is rather misleading and irrelevant. If you look at Mississippi's efforts against civil rights workers, its being 'democratic' [elections and all] did not affect its method, e.g. arbitrary imprisonment, murder etc.

To take a more recent case, the 'democratic' US has disappeared several people in the war on terror, HENCE maybe MLK's methods would not work. Clearly then, what 'works' is NOT a function of 'democracy' unless that's supposed to be synonomous with, "kindly, humane, human-rights-observing" [government].

The best case i know raising the question of non violence is the efforts of Norwegians against the Nazis. They were brutally suppressed. HENCE there is something to the point that non violence may not always 'work' [change gov't policies]. OTOH, as you well know, violent methods may not 'work' either, as witness the Valkyrie plot against Hitler.

IOW, against some regimes, *nothing* may work, short term, esp. anything overt. Subtle ways to encourage corruption and rot might be considered, or pray like hell that an outisde power will topple your govt, and give that power a hand if it looks like they have a chance. Mao's old dictum also applies: "when the enemy attacks, we retreat; when the enemy is stationary, we harrass; when the enemy withdraws, we attack." You do not deal with Nazis by attempting to carry a placard in front of Gestapo headquarters, even if you know the incident of your demise will be recorded by cameras.

===

The issue of methods of resistance is seriously distorted in the original quote: Non violent resistance, by any of its proponents, is NOT the same as sitting around singing Kumbaya.

 

[3113]

The issue of methods of resistance is seriously distorted in the original quote: Non violent resistance, by any of its proponents, is NOT the same as sitting around singing Kumbaya.

I dunno. If I were a repressive invader and the people of a foreign nation that I was oppressing opposed me by sitting around non-violently singing Kumbaya all the time, I'd probably surrender control and get out of that country quick.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I dunno. If I were a repressive invader and the people of a foreign nation that I was oppressing opposed me by sitting around non-violently singing Kumbaya all the time, I'd probably surrender control and get out of that country quick.

Maybe. Or just possibly order a collection of larynx-ectomies without anesthesia and send them back to the salt mines.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I think kumbaya's a perfectly fine word. In the 70's Tom Wolfe coined the word mau-mau to describe the opposite, the tactic of using extreme racial radicalism to achieve political results, in his book Mau-mauing the Flack-Catchers.

The word comes from the 1950's Mau-mau revolt in Kenya that led to independence from Britain.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Imperialism is your friend. Imperialists dont worry about appeasement and pacifying the Gomers. Its much easier to amputate their trigger fingers.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I dunno. If I were a repressive invader and the people of a foreign nation that I was oppressing opposed me by sitting around non-violently singing Kumbaya all the time, I'd probably surrender control and get out of that country quick.

"Where haaave all the flowers gooooone...

Loooong time paaassing..."

 

[cantdog]

It is interesting but not surprising how Kumbaya got transformed. Whatever the original song or word was about, the song became identified as a ubiquitous campfire song--white kids singing an African song as if the song alone will create identification and racial harmony. A pretty patronizing idea. No real work is needed, just sing the song and we're all brothers and sisters. ...

I learned and taught a Mau-Mau song around a couple of campfires, myself. To me "Kumbaya" is a pretty thin and meaningless musical object, certainly not worth championing. I never understood why anyone ever wanted to sing it for any reason. Your cynical description is as good as any other reason, consequently, for me, but it's a bit insulting, so I don't suppose anyone will ever tell you, "Oh, yes! That's exactly why we sung that!"

More to the point, up here, might have been "Mon Ami Pierrot" or something. "Auprès de ma Blonde." This was perhaps the whitest state in the Union in 1968. The town I grew up in, which I'll call Waterford, the only non-whites would have been native Americans working at the plant. Our KKK spent all their time hating the French and Irish.

Whatever the reason for this bizarre development, the word now denigrates the thing that most people think 'pacifism' means. People who hold grudges can't get real pacifism anyway; so, 'kumbaya' in the current pop-culture sense puts down a straw man. I can't spend much time championing a straw man tonight, either. Have a fine, cynic's evening.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

"Where haaave all the flowers gooooone...

Loooong time paaassing..."

I really miss the folk music of the early '60's.

 

[3113]

'kumbaya' in the current pop-culture sense puts down a straw man.

Absolutely. My point was simply that I understood how it came to be that. If the song is sung around every campfire, and that's how most people know it, as the song they sung at camp-whatever, and not as something sung by, say protest marchers getting beaten up by police, then it's easy to turn it into a straw man, even if that isn't what it was originally.

 

[cantdog]

Absolutely. My point was simply that I understood how it came to be that. If the song is sung around every campfire, and that's how most people know it, as the song they sung at camp-whatever, and not as something sung by, say protest marchers getting beaten up by police, then it's easy to turn it into a straw man, even if that isn't what it was originally.

Oh. Well, my point was opposite in two ways.

First, I assumed you meant, and also I assume the pop-culture references also meant, the protest singings of the song. I think the path is: hippie to protester to liberal, and I think the politicos use it to sneer at liberals and this fellow is reaching back to hippie for his put-down, but the sneer applies, as the word is used now, anywhere along the cline, with reference to fifty years ago.

So I am undistracted by campfires. As I say, I knew a man from Kenya and he taught me an actual Mau-Mau song, in Agikuyu. That's the one I sang and taught at campfires, because it is about a popular solidarity and because it is an interesting artifact.

The straw man I mean is the idea of brotherhood and pacifism generally, which is always straw from the point of view of those who hold grudges, those who appoint enemies for themselves, those who can't forgive. Such people don't have an idea in the world what pacifism means, or brotherhood either. So they make something up in their heads.

Jesus generally forces them to think about it, in this country. His stuff about forgiving seventy and seven times, turning the other cheek, giving him your cloak also-- you know, generally loving those who hate and revile you-- is utterly incomprehensible to such people. But, hey, it's Jesus! It has to be important somehow. Makes them squirm and invent this straw man, the Pacifist-through-the-prism. Brotherhood is ludicrous if you still have enemies, so they sneer at it, but it isn't worth defending, because it isn't real.