Mounica Putrevu
Matthew Gonzales (Fri 11-12)
Comparative Literature 60AC
14 October 2016
The Preservation of Racial Identities in the 20th Century
Following the end of the Civil War, during the period of Reconstruction, three pivotal amendments were passed in an effort to reverse the injustices Africans were hitherto subjected to. Unfortunately less than a decade later, parochial whites attempted to countervail the positive developments concerning African American freedom and liberties, constituting laws and acts that once again plagued the colored people by exploiting loopholes they found in the Constitution.
The catalyst for some such laws was the eugenic ideology, which championed the preservation of an untarnished human race, by suppressing all those who were considered to be incapable of carrying on desirable traits to future generations. Eugenic philosophies concerning race led whites to believe that the increasing unhindered interaction of the colored people as equals to caucasians in society threatened the much prized white supremacy. Consequently, a set of legislations popularly known as the Racial Integrity Acts of the 1920s, were enacted in the state of Virginia, in a continued attempt to safeguard the purity of the white race.
The Racial Integrity Act of 1924
On March 20th, 1924, the Racial Integrity Act was sanctioned in the hope of safeguarding the purity of the white race. Of all the kinds of interracial interactions, the interbreeding of people from different racial backgrounds was considered to be the most detrimental to the development of a pristine society. Miscegenation was considered both a social and racial offense because racial amalgamation was feared to plague the white race with the inferior traits and characteristics of the less desirable colored races. To discourage miscegenation, this law sought to prohibit interracial marriages by requiring the citizens to register their race with state of Virginia, as either white or colored, and declaring marital unions among whites and nonwhites illegal.
Only after about half a century of the enforcement of this law, was the issue of its inherent injustice brought to the attention of the Supreme Court. In 1967, the Supreme Court oversaw the case of Loving v. Virginia, when an interracial couple, who had initially been sentenced to a year in prison but were later banished from Virginia for twenty-five years for violating the Racial Integrity Act, chose to protest this encroachment of their rights. The Supreme Court subsequently ruled in favor of the Lovings, declaring the prohibition on marriages between whites and nonwhites as a violation of the equal protection that the 14th amendment guarantees to all the citizens of America. While this Supreme Court's ruling immediately declared the Racial Integrity Act unconstitutional, the collective set of laws were not effectively repealed for another decade.
Colored Persons and Indians Defined 1930
With the heavy emphasis on racial identities, the problem of racially classifying ethnically mixed people became prevalent seeing as how previous attempts at defining racial qualifications to acquire the status of a white american were vague and inexplicit. Due to the ambiguity of the racial definitions, some racially mixed people were able to claim and enjoy the benefits of a white lineage, directly provoking staunch advocates of negative eugenics. To resolve this issue, Virginia officials legalized the concept of a social principle known as the ‘One-drop Rule’ through the Colored Persons and Indians Defined law. The ‘One-drop Rule’ proposed a particularly harsh racial classification, stating that a person with any discernible amount of African American blood must be labelled as a colored person.
The enforcement of this severe standards of racial identifications actively denied mixed people of the white privileges they were entitled to as their birthright. As a result, racially mixed people who had prominent caucasian physical features were forced to compensate for the unjust dismissal of their rights themselves, by secretively attempt transcending the socially instituted ethnic boundaries and pass as white americans. The fear and anxiety that accompanied the practice of passing, and the social consequences it bore are exemplified in Nella Larsen’s text, Passing, drawing public attention to the injustices posed by the Racial Integrity Acts.
Works Cited
"EugenicsArchive." EugenicsArchive. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2016.
Wolfe, Contributed By Brendan. "Racial Integrity Laws (1924–1930)." Racial Integrity Laws (1924–1930). N.p., 17 Feb. 2009. Web. 12 Oct. 2016.
"The "One-Drop" Rule and Racial Identification By Whites, Blacks, and Native Americans." The "One-Drop" Rule and Racial Identification By Whites, Blacks, and Native Americans. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2016.
Discussion Questions:
- Considering the intensity with which racial classifications were made, what social consequences might the open discussion, and exposure in a sense, of ‘passing’ in Modernist literature have caused?
- How has the negative stigma instigated by eugenics surrounding interracial interaction and marriages changed since the 20th century?
The background on the "One Drop Rule" really helps to emphasize what is at stake for Clare if her husband were to find out she is African American. Interracial marriage was seen as taboo and John especially rejects the idea of being around African Americans. The way he treats Clare is horrible when he think she is white, image what will happen if he finds out. One can better understand the anxiety that Irene feels about Clare's situation. Plus, if Clare gets discovered, they might question her background and she won't be able to pass off as white anymore (such as at the Dayton).
ReplyDeleteThe rule is absolutely absurd because all humans migrated from Africa, so we are all Africans. And generics just does not work the way the picture makes it out to be.
These preemptive laws to discourage interracial marriage are perfect examples of how, since the beginning of time, the political foundation has reflected social constructs. Thus, it is hard to distinguish the legal from the discriminatory simply because they converged. Laws that inhibit such basic human rights and clearly hoist one race over the other make us question what is really "right" and "real" in this situation. In fact, in modernism, the "right" and "real" is constantly being tested and doubted, like how Doc Bingham in 'The 42nd Parallel' represented both the wrong and the fake. These concepts will be called into question again and again, both indicative of actual historical events and in literature as well.
ReplyDeleteI like your post a lot not only because it gives such great background into the social climate around Passing, but also because this is an important part of American history that is not discussed enough. These laws were only declared unconstitutional 49 years ago. In another framing, these laws were only declared unconstitutional 3 years after the Beatles first preformed in the U.S. and as you say in some places this was constituted for a decade. I remember reading somewhere that one southern state still has a similar law in the state constitution and a large portion of voters don't want it removed. This helps give insight into what is going on today with racial inequality and why it is still so relevant and still needs focus.
ReplyDeleteI like your post a lot not only because it gives such great background into the social climate around Passing, but also because this is an important part of American history that is not discussed enough. These laws were only declared unconstitutional 49 years ago. In another framing, these laws were only declared unconstitutional 3 years after the Beatles first preformed in the U.S. and as you say in some places this was constituted for a decade. I remember reading somewhere that one southern state still has a similar law in the state constitution and a large portion of voters don't want it removed. This helps give insight into what is going on today with racial inequality and why it is still so relevant and still needs focus.
ReplyDeleteThe Laws that you wrote about in your blog post truly give us insight into the severity of Clare's actions when she attempts to 'pass' for a white woman. Even if the Law itself is lifted, the way many people feel about it remains the same for an extended period of time and is especially difficult to eradicate within society. These sort of feelings in society, like Bellew's intense hatred for Negroes, remains therefore a difficult part of society to eradicate because people have a deep rooted hatred for change that alters the picture they themselves have of an ideal society. It is therefore, an excellent post for us to consider the severity of Clare's actions in passing because the society that she lives in still remembers these laws and many still have these strong attitudes toward the way they think race should separate people in a community.
ReplyDeleteThis post provides an interesting perspective into yet another facet of racial inequality in the United States. Typically, I associate post-Civil War racial conflicts with segregation and Jim Crow laws, and this post emphasizes another means of racial oppression that was prevalent during the time period. The anti-miscegenation laws underscore how pervasive racist sentiments were; racism was not restricted to the public sphere but rather continued into individuals' private lives through laws restricting interracial marriage and relationships. The concept of the "one-drop rule" conveys the racist mentality of the time that perceived even a single drop of African American blood as a "contaminant" to the purity of the white race. Clearly, this notion of excluding individuals based on the presence of any African American blood was flawed; as Clare Kendry demonstrates, phenotypical appearance is not a reliable indication of an individual's racial ancestry. Nevertheless, the principles behind the anti-miscegenation laws illustrate how sinister and widespread racism continued to be, even after the passage of the 13th and 14th amendments.
ReplyDeleteI thought that your discussion on miscegenation was very interesting and insightful. Although this is a bit off topic from the context of this class, your post really reminded me of a discussion I had in my English class from last semester. In class we analyzed Beyonce's music video for her song "Formation" and discussed the overwhelming presence of colorism not only in the video, but also in the lyrics of the song. We found that in this song, Beyonce makes the distinction between "Creole" and "Negro", which results in a hierarchical categorization of Black people, where the lightest-skinned Black people are viewed as superior to the darker-skinned. So while I believe we have made progress in our attitudes towards interracial relationships, there is still a stigma heavily surrounding this issue.
ReplyDeleteI thought that your discussion on miscegenation was very interesting and insightful. Although this is a bit off topic from the context of this class, your post really reminded me of a discussion I had in my English class from last semester. In class we analyzed Beyonce's music video for her song "Formation" and discussed the overwhelming presence of colorism not only in the video, but also in the lyrics of the song. We found that in this song, Beyonce makes the distinction between "Creole" and "Negro", which results in a hierarchical categorization of Black people, where the lightest-skinned Black people are viewed as superior to the darker-skinned. So while I believe we have made progress in our attitudes towards interracial relationships, there is still a stigma heavily surrounding this issue.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the One-drop rule was really interesting, especially when taking into account the risk that Clare Kendry is taking in Passing with her secretly interracial marriage. I also thought that it was interesting how racism can be 'legitimized' into law in so many ways, like with anti-miscegenation laws and eugenics.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that another act was passed at the same time as the Racial Integrity Act, allowing for the forced sterilization of epileptic and "feeble-minded" people. This was never declared unconstitutional.
ReplyDeleteYour analysis of the "one drop rule" was extremely fascinating as it is not a concept that is discussed a lot in history classes nowadays. Further, this idea also explains that racism and slavery did not die with the civil war amendments, slavery carried on through ideas such as the "one drop rule," in which White people aimed to maintain their supremacy. In relation to the class, this idea is important in relation to passing as many biracial people were trying to pass in society, even though they were partly black. Passing was frequent in this time period, and can be seen with Claire in the Larsen's novel. However, passing brings up the question of what is real and what is not. Your post brings up the background as to why passing was something that many aimed to achieve.
ReplyDeleteThis post gives the class a look at the prominent events happening at the time and how they might influence our reading and perception of Clare’s cultural situation in Larsen’s Passing. The laws on interracial marriages and mixed heritage in twentieth century America induced a negative air in society for years to come after they were ruled unconstitutional. Whether or not these laws defined one’s prejudice towards a group or not, these made it acceptable for one to do so. We see this impact in our reading where Clare’s husband and others have this deep hatred for colored people, especially blacks. When society approves social constructs such as discrimination, it is harder to lift these connotations from the society in which hate crimes were made possible by law. This post also, shows how events at the time might influence likely outcomes that might happen if Clare’s passing was made evident to others. This separation of race, although ruled unconstitutional, still carries due to approval of hate made possible by state law.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis topic is extremely relevant to the novel. Through our reading of modernist texts, we have learned so much about how the boundaries and distinctions between races seem to be blurred a lot of the time. Your post shows how the constant pressure from the government to classify race in artificial ways created enduring racial issues in society.
ReplyDeleteThis topic is extremely relevant to the novel. Through our reading of modernist texts, we have learned so much about how the boundaries and distinctions between races seem to be blurred a lot of the time. Your post shows how the constant pressure from the government to classify race in artificial ways created enduring racial issues in society.
ReplyDeleteI like your topic! The legitimization of racism through the "scientific" field of eugenics is just one of the many ways people try to justify racism. I wish you had delved deeper into how this affects the characters in Passing. If there had not been so much systemic and institutionalized racism, perhaps these characters would not have felt the need to "pass." The one-drop rule shows just how opposed people were to racial mixing. No one should be burdened with the choice of choosing one facet of their culture over another, just how mixed race people should not feel as though they have to smother one part of their culture in order to embrace the other.
ReplyDeleteAs many have said, the one-drop rule is a very interesting subject. It is amazing to think that legislation could be so cut and dry. I am old enough to have seen many attitudes change over the year towards race. For the most part it has been for the better, but, as is the case with many things in life, it has been two steps forward and one step back. Still, slowly but surely (I hope), it is progress.
ReplyDeleteI think the topic of racial purity connects the most to the Passing, because racial purity exposes those trying to pass and makes it impossible to pass, regardless of appearance. This also reflects on a constant theme throughout this semester of "fakes" vs. "reals." I think that the idea of racial purity was trying to convey a false understanding of the difference between fakes and reals, where one can truly only be black or white, and not fluid. This would make it impossible for characters such as Clare to toggle back and forth between two worlds. I think this topic shows how against many people were throughout the modernist period to mix races and explore new identities. People, or more specifically white people, were comfortable with the existing structure and didn't want anyone or any identity to challenge that.
ReplyDeleteThis topic reminded me of the phrenological studies that were happening during Herman Melville's time period. The study of physical traits and racial identity seem to be synonymous. During the 1800's scientists were studying the volumes of different ethnicities skulls. They would drill a hole in the skull and fill it with sand and depending on the volume of sand held by the skull, it would be placed on an hierarchical chart. Those with lower volumes were considered to be inferior to the others. Ironically, or not ironically, the white persons skull held the most volume. This of course is preposterous, however I feel that it is interesting to see how the study of anatomy has evolved, or not, over the years.
ReplyDelete