The Great "Bright" Way — Page 3

blm2323 said: "Good grief. Is it too much to ask people to research and educate themselves before protesting about something? Cancel culture at its finest.

Don’t get me wrong - I’ll support informed and well thought out protests any day. This issue is not one of them. "

Nobody is protesting or cancelling anything. Educated people know that it’s not a racist term, yet still believe it’s a good idea to rethink it.

The phrase itself is not racist in any way, however if people are truly offended by it, then sure, I see no reason not to change it (especially as it's hardly used anymore anyway).

With that said, though, is this something that a large number of people are actually offended by? The Whoopi interview was the only place that I've personally heard this mentioned and she seemed to say it more as a one-off "well my friend had this one suggestion". I'm not saying there aren't a ton of people offended by it--if there are, then absolutely it should be looked into and probably changed. But I'm just wondering if this is actually something a lot of people are upset about or not.

CT2NYC said: "bawoman said: "CT2NYC said: "It seems to me that some people are missing the point. This isn’t a matter of removing “black” and “white“ from every questionable phrase.On its face, theexpression “The Great White Way” sounds like a slogan for white supremacists. Although I’m assuming most peoplerealize that it doesn’t refer to caucasians, the actual meaning isn’t totally clear.

So, going forward, why would Broadway wantto use a nickname thatsounds extremelyracist, regardless of what it actually means?Not everyone who hears the term will have someone there to tell themthat it refers to the lights of Broadway, most of which aren’t even white anymore. Changing it to “The Great Bright Way” makes more sense, and it doesn’t require an explanation."

But it doesn't sound extremely racist"

You don’t see how “The GreatWhite Way” might sound racist to someone unfamiliar with the term?

Nope, not to someone not overtly obsessed with race

HogansHero said: "Broadway61004 said: "is this something that a large number of people are actually offended by? ... But I'm just wondering if this is actually something a lot of people are upset about or not."

This highlights exactly what's wrong with the reasoning that has come into high relief as a result of the current protests. Everything is not a poll; it's about a system that reinforcesmindsets (white in origin, black in consequence). We don't need to use words that reinforce. We don't need "bright" in lieu of "white." As said above, we don't need the expression in the first place. Becoming mindful of situations where words reinforce meanings (and intention is irrelevant to this) is what we need to be doing. As usual, of course, those who want to diminish these simple acts of awareness prefer to rant about silly consequences that are not necessary. Calling snow white is descriptive, like calling the sky blue. I'm dreaming of a white christmas can, however, convey all sorts of nuance in some circles. Calling a wedding dress (that is white) white is also descriptive. What warrants examination is why our society tells us that it needs to bewhite. I hope this helps a little."

white is the color of purity in most of Western Civilization. If people with infantile brains can't differentiate between the actual color white and the name we give to the caucasian race, then it's up to them to grow a few brain cells, And btw, The Great white Way was a descriptive term too.

WayTooBroadway said: ""white is the color of purity in most of Western Civilization."

As pure as Melania Trump. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA."

Obviously meant it symbolically. In India, it's red. I actually like that better : )

Highland Guy said: "bawoman said: "white is the color of purity in most of Western Civilization."

"

Are we going to continue the circular firing squad up through the November election?

If so, then the Russians and Jill Stein can relax.

Hogan, it did occur to me later that perhaps Goldberg's remark wasn't really about remaking the entire English language, but about making Broadway--and by extension American theater as a whole--seem less like an exclusively white pastime to POC who have not been exposed to it.

I don't know that changing one phrase is going to make much difference, but at least I can see the reason behind the suggestion, if that was the intention.

***

That aside, I tend to agree with the poster who asked if we are going to go through life checking each word to make sure nobody will be offended by its history. There's something condescending, even racist, about the idea that I have to fact-checked the etymology of every syllable I utter to see if maybe someone, somewhere may dislike the word. I really don't believe in treating everyone like children.

I am reminded of the scandal decades ago over a D.C. official who used the word "niggardly" in a speech. An angry group demanded his firing, even though the word (which means "stingy" comes from medieval French, and the French comes from the Latin word meaning "to deny". The Romans were a people who did not classify race in terms of black and white in our terms, so the synonym for "stingy" has nothing to do with the "N-word" except it sounds similar.

What nonsense!

But it's not hyperbole to propose that a century-old expression be changed for fear it might offend somebody, somewhere? Who began the hyperbole here? The "niggardly" example was a real-world one and a case where the unintentional offender lost his job.

For the record, you're not talking about being a "good" person, you're talking about being a "nice" person. You've seen enough Sondheim to know the difference. A good person respects others by allowing them to speak up if they are offended; a nice person walks on eggshells, assuming others are too fragile to survive a controversial word.

But, really, there's no way to defend one's self against the sanctimony here. I can't tell you that I have plenty of friends, POC and otherwise, who will be happy to correct me if I use language they find problematic--because that sounds too much like "some of my best friends are..."

I can't tell you that I taught controversial material to large, diverse groups of students for years, and somehow managed to accrue not one complaint about political correctness in my file--because then I am accused of trying to impress you with my CV.

So basically we have two groups: the pompous and the damned. Given the choice, I have to admit I prefer membership in the latter.

No, Hogan, I was calling YOU pompous, not African Americans who are offended by the Confederate flag. I agree with them.

If it's so important to you to set hyperbole aside, then let's begin by admitting that "The Great White Way" is not analogous to the Confederate Battle flag or a statue of Robert E. Lee.

No, thanks, Hogan. I've had enough "virtue-signaling" (isn't that the current term?) for one thread. I'm not going back to read previous pages.

I will apologize for the sentence, "No, Hogan, I was calling YOU pompous...." I meant in this one thread, not a general characterization of you or your posts, which I enjoy.

This pose from you and others that ya'll are somehow the only ones who ever changed your thinking (myself, I've lived through "colored to Negro to black to Afro-Americans to African Americans to POC to BIPOC, and happily adjusted with each change in convention) is really too much!

What's interesting is how essentially racist are the attitudes of you paragons of virtue! As if white people are the only ones on the planet capable of self-reflection or education! The argument that anything that offends any BIPOC individual must be reconsidered assumes that we white people can learn new terms--and that's fair: we can--but that BIPOC people can't learn that what they found offensive actually has a benign origin. Poor fragile darlings!

As in "The Great White Way".