"Non credo" songs and context

[Gary McGath]

A song presented by students in carrying out an assignment has generated
some local controversy. An 11th-grade class at Dover High School in New
Hampshire was assigned to "pick a Reconstruction-era event and make a
song of it." The rise of the KKK was one of the biggest events, and some
of the students created a song to the tune of "Jingle Bells." The news
story quotes a short part of the lyrics: "White masks on our heads,
blood beneath our feet, laughing till they're dead -- ha, ha, ha."

The superintendent of schools appears to assume that the students
actually support that position. The article says:

Superintendent William Harbron called it "an incident of extreme
racial insensitivity" in a letter sent to parents and posted
on Facebook.

"We are deeply concerned that an event such as this could occur
and understand the emotion and concern this event will create for
our students, families and staff," the letter read.

https://patch.com/new-hampshire/exeter/s/gke9p/nh-students-racist-jingle-bells-hits-flat-note

I see problems on both sides. Dover is about 90% white. I don't think
the students wrote the song to endorse the KKK, but it's very likely
they didn't think carefully about the impact the song would have. It's
possible to present such a song, but it's wise to include a lot of
context, explaining that it was an attempt to capture the mindset of a
very nasty group of people, but not to endorse it. It could have been a
good teaching moment.

Instead, the superintendent made assumptions which don't seem warranted
about the motivation behind the song. While I think the students could
have been dumb enough to present the song without adequate context, I
don't think they could have been dumb enough to endorse the KKK as part
of a school assignment.

The clickbait headline, "NH Students' Racist 'Jingle Bells' Hits Sour
Note," certainly didn't help.

I've written a number of songs expressing views I don't hold, including
ones from the PoV of a mad scientist, a grave robber, a pirate, and a
would-be world ruler. Those don't require as much context, since few
people would think I actually want to do what those people do. Also,
most people don't think they're likely to be the personal targets of
those kinds of people, so the songs don't hit them hard personally.

I might be tempted to write a song from the PoV of a sadistic cop or a
violent Antifa, but then I'd find it necessary to do a lot of
explaining, which would drag the song down.

Doing "non credo" songs is tricky. Assuming the worst of people who sing
them is dumb.

[Mike Van Pelt]

Post by Gary McGath
Doing "non credo" songs is tricky. Assuming the worst of people who sing
them is dumb.

"Assuming the worst" is, unfortunately, what "everybody does" these
days. Like that class photo a few weeks ago: The photographer said
"Wave to your parents", and took a bunch of photos.

One photo was picked out from the rest, and spread all around on
social media with the lying caption "Sudents give Nazi salute".
Kids, their parents, the school, all getting death threats, in
spite of the photographer on the evening news explaining what
that photo really was.

[Arthur T.]

In Message-ID:<pu4iuc$f87$***@dont-email.me>,
Gary McGath <***@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:

Note: much unmarked snippage in the following.

Post by Gary McGath
A song presented by students in carrying out an assignment has generated
some local controversy. An 11th-grade class at Dover High School in New
Hampshire was assigned to "pick a Reconstruction-era event and make a
song of it."

My knowledge of history is not the best. But wasn't
Reconstruction pretty much horrible from beginning to end?

Post by Gary McGath
The superintendent of schools appears to assume that the students
actually support that position.

Are there any parts of Reconstruction that modern non-racists
should support?

Post by Gary McGath
I've written a number of songs expressing views I don't hold

In at least one such that I wrote, I specifically mentioned the
sig I use when posting lyrics, "Guessing a lyricist's opinions from
his songs is as futile as guessing an author's opinions from his
novels."

In the story linked from the one Gary linked to
<http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/20181203/kkk-jingle-in-dover-classroom-upsets-community>,
it says that, "The students did not know they were being recorded".
However, "In New Hampshire, it is a criminal offense to use any
device to record communications, whether they're wire, oral or
electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the
conversation."

Among the questions they are asking is whether the assignment
was appropriate. Yet they're starting with the assumption that this
song was not appropriate. Regardless of whether it's in song, how can
you teach about the Reconstruction without explaining the views of
all too many Americans at that time?

[Jeff Urs]

Your understanding of Reconstruction comes with Spock in a goatee.

[Jeff Urs]

Most will tell you I'm oblivious, and none that I am woke;
Reconstruction, so they taught us all, was just an awful joke.
But I read in news a story with a line like from a song;
And still every day, more voices join, that line to sing along,
Till in me a choir answers every time that era's cursed:
"Since the days of Reconstruction, for a black man, that's a first."

[Gary McGath]

Post by Arthur T.
Are there any parts of Reconstruction that modern non-racists
should support?

Well, black people got the vote, and some of them got elected to office.

Reconstruction was a case of "nation building," which hardly ever works,
whether it's in Iraq or Alabama. It resulted in problems that were huge
a century after the war and still haven't been fully resolved. The
alternative, though, was to let Southern white politicians effectively
turn blacks into non-citizens. Sometimes all answers have serious downsides.

[Lee Gold XP]

Post by Gary McGath

      Are there any parts of Reconstruction that modern non-racists
should support?

Well, black people got the vote, and some of them got elected to office.
Reconstruction was a case of "nation building," which hardly ever works,
whether it's in Iraq or Alabama. It resulted in problems that were huge
a century after the war and still haven't been fully resolved. The
alternative, though, was to let Southern white politicians effectively
turn blacks into non-citizens. Sometimes all answers have serious downsides.

You might want to read
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstruction_era

Reconstruction got taken down by Rutherford B. Hayes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compromise_of_1877
which you also might want to read.

You can then decide whether this Compromise let Souhern Whites
effectively turn Southern Blacks into non-citizens.

--Lee Gold

[Gary McGath]

Post by Lee Gold XP
You might want to read
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstruction_era
Reconstruction got taken down by Rutherford B. Hayes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compromise_of_1877
which you also might want to read.
You can then decide whether this Compromise let Souhern Whites
effectively turn Southern Blacks into non-citizens.
--Lee Gold

The post-Reconstruction period in the South is one I know rather little
about. I'd prefer to look at some more in-depth articles or books before
forming any strong conclusions about it.

[Gary McGath]

The latest is that the teacher was suspended for assigning students to
create songs about Reconstruction.

There's too much insanity in the world.