Last week, the appearance of Chris Brown on ABC’s Black-ish led to lots of discussion and outrage. For those unfamiliar, Brown is a singer, songwriter, dancer and sometimes actor, who has been very successful, with multiple Billboard hits. However, Brown’s fame is tainted by the fact he also has a long record of being an abusive asshole, most notably a brutal felony assault against then-girlfriend Rihanna. And some recent reports seem to indicate Brown still has a problem with controlling his temper with significant others.
Created by Kenya Barris, Black-ish has been notable as a television show by being meta by portraying the perceptions of what it means to be black, or arguably anything other than white, in popular culture and society at large, along with the expectations that come with it. There’s an inherent bias, in society and on television, which values white and male as being the default, and any deviation from the default is considered special and noteworthy to the point of reclassifying it if someone has a high enough melanin count or lacking a penis. It’s no longer just a “good movie,” it’s a “good black movie,” or a “good feminist movie” with all of the stigmas and marketing biases which exist within those stereotypes.
But when Black-ish attempted to use Brown to make a point about the disparities in popular culture where men are oblivious to how they mistreat women, it struck some as a galling misstep for a TV show that should know better. And I guess, in an ironic way, Black-ish kinda proved its own point unintentionally. The debate over Brown’s appearance on the show opened interesting discussions as to race, both inside the black community (where the defense of Brown depends on rationalizations similar to “Bill Cosby has done so much for this community”) and double standards in comparison to it, as well as how wealth fits into the calculus of the whole thing.
Because the truth is that if you’re white and wealthy the rationalizations come fast and furious too. Allegations of sexual harassment did not hurt Casey Affleck’s chances of winning a Best Actor Oscar, nor did abuse allegations and a history of anti-Semitic remarks dissuade or put people off from recognizing Mel Gibson’s talent as a director.
And, on even larger stages, there are rationalizations for a news network personality and the president of the United States, who has already told us how he likes to grab things. And we’re all supposed to pretend we don’t know it when they play “Hail to the Chief.” And somehow it becomes okay because some other asshole did something too and may have gotten away with it. But deflections and rationalizations can only go so far sometimes.
Right at this second, there is probably at least one couple somewhere on this planet (and maybe even Mongo) where the bride is walking down the aisle to the "Bridal Chorus" (aka Treulich geführt, “The Wedding March,” or “Here Comes the Bride”). The origin of the "Bridal Chorus" is German composer Wilhem Richard Wagner's 1850 opera Lohengrin, where the piece opens Act III.
The fact the "Bridal Chorus" is a favorite among couples getting married is a bit ironic given its context within Lohengrin, where ... well, let's just say things don't end well and people don't live happily ever after.
There are few who dispute that Wagner was an influential, musical genius. His list of works include Die Walküre (which contains the "Ride of the Valkyries"), Der Ring des Nibelungen, and Tristan und Isolde. However, even with all of his musical talent, it's also pretty clear from the historical record that Wagner was an egotistical, anti-Semitic prick both in his comments and arguably in some of his compositions, with there being much debate over the content of Parsifal. So for some people, Wagner the person shades their judgment of Wagner the composer and they can't enjoy the music because of who wrote the music.
And sometimes one can’t take serious people when they have a history with women.
From Jim Rutenberg at The New York Times:
In an interview with The New York Times, Mr. Trump praised Fox News and Mr. O’Reilly, just days after The Times reported that the host had been involved in five settlements with women who said he had harassed them. The deals resulted in payouts totaling about $13 million.
“Personally, I think he shouldn’t have settled,” Mr. Trump said in an interview in the Oval Office with Times reporters. “Because you should have taken it all the way; I don’t think Bill did anything wrong.”
“I think he’s a person I know well — he is a good person,” Mr. Trump said.
President Trump spoke as Mr. O’Reilly continued to face a severe advertising backlash over The Times’s article, with more than 20 sponsors pulling out of his show over the last few days.