Color theory reveals error of identity politics
Peter Hamilton
WARNING: Do not read this column if you take life seriously.
I had to preface this column with a warning label because I am
amazed at how seriously everyone is taking themselves over identity
politics. I’m a this, you’re a that. Me, me, me, you, you, you.
Someone has to set you self-indulgent, name-calling identity freaks
straight, and who better for that job than me?
So, listen up  Peter-the-Pink-Boy just rode into town with
his tin star on and he’s pissed. As the new sheriff, I’m not
interested in writing down the names of trouble makers. Instead, I
want to eliminate ’em. The first name that’s going to be run out of
town is "white." Take my word as sheriff (and as an MFA candidate
who understands color theory): no one’s skin color is white. Pink,
yes; white, no. Wait, scratch that, there is someone who is white
 Michael Jackson.
But I have strayed. Why do I want to eliminate the word white
from identity politics? Simple. White has nothing to do with the
color of someone’s skin, but it does have everything to do with the
perpetuation of the dominant racial episteme in this here country
and its enormous success.
Who are the bad guys in charge of this mob mentality? It is not
so much a who, but as a what. Actually,it is the metaphor Â
white is pure, white is clean, which is reinforced in our minds
every day. Every wall of every building and every piece of paper
reinforces the power of that metaphor. Hell, even Jesus liked to
wear the color.
Of course, the essentialist notion that whiteness implies
pureness is laughable. And Herman Melville effectively dealt with
that specious notion in "Moby Dick", but that doesn’t lessen the
import of the word when it comes to race relations. It is not very
difficult to understand why people with pink-colored skin want to
exploit the a priori connotations that go along with their skin
color being referred to as white. They thank their white God above
for being born with a pale enough complexion so they can assert
their propriety over all people born with a "less fortunate" skin
color, (i.e. black, red, brown and yellow).
Where am I going with this? Just hold your horses, pardner. The
elimination of the term white is only half the gun battle. Next, we
eliminate the term "black."
No one is black, trust me, burnt umber or mahogany maybe, but
not black. Why would one group want to label another group black
when the latter group isn’t? If the former group represents
themselves as the "good" white race, then the logical indices when
labeling members of a darker skin-toned race is to label them your
opposite. That way the whiteness of the "good guys" is all the more
refined and pure when contrasted against the blackness of those
"bad guys."
Why am I telling you all this? Because as sheriff of this
one-horse town, I wish to eliminate two more equally misguided
terms.
The first of those two terms is Caucasian.When I looked up this
term in my dictionary it read, "of or relating to the white race."
That silly definition assumes there is a group of white-skinned
people running around on this planet. Now, my dictionary may be
referring to Michael Jackson, but it did not say so. Therefore, of
its absurd assumption that there is such a race of people as white
people, I am throwing out the term Caucasian.
Next, we must run an equally goofy term out of town Â
African American. Now, the elimination of this term will be more
controversial, but if you follow my special logic you will be
fine.
Here’s how it goes.How many of you reading this are American?
And how many of you have ancestors that originally (way, way, way
back) came from Africa (if you want to argue that Eden existed in
the jungles of Africa) or Mesopotamia (if you want to take the
Darwinian position)?
Regardless, I will make the assumption that everyone reading
this column is an American and that everyone’s original ancestors
either came from Africa or Mesopotamia (Asia). Therefore, we are
all African Americans or Asian Americans and it doesn’t matter how
long ago our ancestors came from those locations. All that matters
is that they did come from those areas.
But I sense your boredom with this trivial line of thinking. You
want excitement, you want humor. That is why I have made a
pointless top 10 list of songs that blatantly exploit the use of
these outlawed terms for their own gain. Here is
Peter-the-Pink-Boy’s top 10 list of lyrics from songs that must be
censored if we are to properly cleanse this town.
1. "Back in black, I hit the sack …" (AC/DC)
2. "White lines, blow away …" (Grandmaster Flash and Mellie
Mel)
3. "Black is back, all in we’re gonna win …" (Public
Enemy)
4. "May all your Christmases be white …" (Bing Crosby)
5. "Black hole sun, won’t you come …" (Soundgarden)
6. "Play that funky music, white boy …" (Wild Cherry)
7. "I see a red door and I want it painted black …" (Rolling
Stones)
8. "White wedding, silk shedding …" (Billy Idol)
9. "I wish I could eat your cancer when you turn black …"
(Nirvana)
10. "If your world was all black and if your world was all
white, then you would  get much color out of life now right
…" (Beastie Boys)
Remember, the sheriff knows what is good for you. The sheriff is
pure, the sheriff is clean. I am the sheriff because I was the most
qualified pink male in town.
But then again, I guess I could be wrong in dismissing all those
terms. Because by calling myself pink, I don’t really change much.
I am still the same arrogant white/pink boy I was before. Of
course, the only way to prove me wrong is to bring me a gray baby,
you know, one made by a black person and a white person.
Hamilton, a graduate art student, thinks he is the sheriff of
UCLA. If you want to see his marshmallow pieces, they are hanging
at Il Pastaio, a restaurant located at 400 N. Canon Drive.