AZ immigration law

Pages

Remembering Blair's past incidents involving race - the "taco flipper" comment and the Census banner in Spanish - frankly we are seeing a pattern and are regretting endorsing him for City Council.

"We endorsed you, and we regret it" is pretty damning. Wow.

Honestly, it is as if some people heard anchors and journalists say America is post racial after Obama was elected, and wanted to make sure we all know that it sure as sh*t still has the same problems.

As I said over on MeFi, when you look at the big picture of the mural behind the band, the faces are all pretty dark. I think the kid on the right is supposed to be white, and he's looking rather gray. Remember, Arizona sun is BRIGHT, and that picture shows the mural as somewhat muted.

If the principal actually asked for the faces to be replaced with white kids, that's completely indefensible... likewise if he asked for just the non-whites to be adjusted. But if he asked for all the faces to get brightened up, I'm not at all sure that Wonkette's framing is correct.

Brightening and whitening are not the same thing. And a racist on the city council doesn't make the principal into one as well.

Lots of spittle flying on Metafilter, but I still think it's still an open question, and it really boils down to exactly what was asked for. If it was targeted at the non-whites, chalk me up on the "they're racist!" side. But if it was all three kids, I think it may simply be a misconstrued aesthetic request.

Several stories about Prescott on MeFi as well. Sounds like a very unpleasant, very racist place. But that school is very integrated, and those teachers work with non-white kids all day. That principal probably knows the kids on the mural personally.

I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt if there's no more evidence.

Malor wrote:

As I said over on MeFi, when you look at the big picture of the mural behind the band, the faces are all pretty dark. I think the kid on the right is supposed to be white, and he's looking rather gray. Remember, Arizona sun is BRIGHT, and that picture shows the mural as somewhat muted.

It's very hard to tell. It does have a washed out look but that may be the fault of the camera. Also, if you look at the photo with the spectators, the sun is facing away from the artwork. The mural is in the shade which would make it look much darker. Under ideal circumstances, it's probably much brighter.

If the painting is as washed out as it looks, then what it's lacking is contrast. The darks aren't dark enough. If they want to make the highlights really pop, they need to darken the shadows a bit more, probably intensify the midtone colors and adjust the highlights as needed. Between the leaves, underneath the bike tire, behind the jeans of the boy, behind the shoe, in the folds of their clothing, in between the tree branches... It needs darker shadows in my opinion.

If they want to make the children's skin brighter to better represent highlights, well, adding more white won't help. They're just changing the skin tone. It'll still look washed out but with lighter children. The sun is bright, yes, but the highlights needs to match the skin color. A dark person will have darker highlights than a lighter person. If they darken up the shadows a bit, then the highlight adjustments on their faces would be minimal and they'd still have their proper skin tones.

To see what I mean:

Before
-- After

Before -- After

...but with darker shadows in certain places.

If they want to change the darker kids to white kids, well, that's racist.

I'd think an artist on the scene would be very aware of light levels in Arizona.

Oh my, that is satisfying.

For the curious, here's a news report of the incident and the racist as all hell comments made by Steve Blair and his guest.

It is very clear that this wasn't about brightening up the mural or fixing the highlights on the faces of the children. The center hispanic child is getting a color change and his new skin tone is clearly visible on the child's forehead during the interview. Shame on them.

Yay, racists lose. That always makes me happy.

I'm still unclear on exactly what the principal was doing... as I said over on MeFi, I have trouble imagining that anyone who works with kids on a daily basis, and who probably knew the kids on the mural personally, would be particularly racist himself. I certainly think he should get the benefit of the doubt, barring further evidence.

If he was just giving into community racist pressure, then yes, that was a form of racism.... enabling those guys is a form of supporting them. But in my own little world, I'd like to think that he didn't like the idea, and the media furor either gave him a spine or got him some backing at a higher level.

It's probably just wishful thinking on my part, but I'd like to keep a few illusions. I've really liked most of the principals I've known.

Hah, that's awesome, Edwin.

Pages