Writer: Alan Moore
Artist: Kevin O'Neill
Design: Todd Klein
I'm not going to do a normal review of this book because the only sensible way to view this particular installment in the league is as a side trip--very dependent on the previous volumes. In the next couple weeks I'll be doing a post on the league series in general, but for now I wanted to deal with a seriously problematic portion of the Black Dossier: the "Galley-wag."
I guess it's best to note here that spoilers will follow, but most likely anyone who will be interested in this post will have already read Black Dossier.
Black Dossier is a very British book. More specifically, Black Dossier is a very British book about children's fiction from a certain period. At the heart of the big mystery of the book is a series about British schoolboys. In this context it makes sense that the Golliwogg would make an appearance--it is an important part of childhood for a segment of the British population. And also now an understandably controversial part of the past. From what I've read of the initial Golliwogg book, there's nothing particularly racist in his portrayal--the story is about toys having adventures and the Golliwogg is representative of one type of toy from the period. But, that type of toy is inexorably wrapped up in racist practices--it has a history (For an excellent in depth look at that history go here).
To a certain point, I can conceptually follow Moore's use of the Golliwogg's in the league--I can see where it makes sense in terms of Black Dossier because of the theme of British childhood. I can also see why Moore disassociated the Golliwogg from the racist origins: as a character he simply had no background at all, so Moore gave him one. Alright, but . . . . Once Moore has one of the Dutch Dolls make a comment about the Golliwogg's large manhood, well, we're right into racial stereotypes and the whole racist history of the Golliwogg comes bubbling up--Moore did it to himself.
Frankly the decision to use the Golliwogg seems hardheaded. The league has not been much of a place for reform. Sure, Moore has changed characters and played around with some biases of the era, but ultimately the league is about playing with toys from other people's works. It can deal with big themes, it can be complex, it can handle nuance . . . but don't fuck around with racism if you aren't going to deal with it.
As I said before, I could have let this pass in what I take to be Moore's intention of associating this with British childhood if he hadn't fallen into what I politely call racial stereotyping. But he did, so it can't pass. Defending the Golliwogg as a symbol of British culture has always been like the American South defending the Confederate flag. Yes, it's a symbol of your culture--it's also a symbol of a history of racism. You can't simply whitewash racism out of a cultural artifact.
Even worse, Moore makes a point of lecturing about the role stories have in shaping who we are, but seems oblivious to the negative impact oppressive narratives can have. It's impossible not to see the conclusion of Black Dossier from the approach to the Blazing World on as a blundering mistake--there is a lack of self-awareness operating here that is astonishing.
A good part of me really hopes that this whole thing will be addressed by Moore and O'Neill in the future (perhaps in Jess Nevins' forthcoming annotations), but I'm having a difficult time seeing this as anything but willful ignorance. I expected better from these creators.
Yes, Black Dossier is still on my bookshelf . . . I . . . I liked it overall . . . but the return of the Golliwogg may be the last straw for this series.
Status: Bookshelf
The Gally-wag is, quite clearly, a deconstruction of the Golligwog. instead of refusing to acknowledge the existence of the original racism, Moore pushes it so far that it becomes not only obvious but even absurd (the Gally-wag as some kind of inhuman, metaphysical entity of darkness). this is called "pastiche" and it's what the League excels at (compare Bond's misoginy).
ReplyDeleteAlso, it is DISGRACEFUL that the Dutch Girls are portrayed as libidinous and hyper-sexualized! I am sure my sisters in Holland grow very bored of being of being stereotyped as loose women, but it happens again and again. Not all Dutch girls end up in the whore houses of Amsterdam, but literature like this seems to suggest it at every turn.....
ReplyDeleteou say you liked it "overall"; what would that be? 80%? 90%? 65%?
ReplyDeleteWhat it is "overall" that make you stick with it
above your perceived excuse to repeat the word "racism" all over the place,
as if it could somehow water down the (questionable, to say the least)
quality of the work in question?
Wouldn't it be easier to say "I frankly do not understand why
and I feel like an idiot for that, but no doubt the man has done his work", which sounds more honest and feasible than looking out for an excuse to feel entitled to dismiss a work which has PLENTY of other reasons to shout out for rather than a single, already clouded in controversy character, on an already clouded in controversy work?
Also, for further fine-tuning: how come you speak the words "willful ignorance" and "oblivious" when referring to a piece of (questionable, to say the least) work that it's clearly HEAVILY documented and researched?
I still have personal mixed opinions about the way Moore chose to present his work with an increasingly fixation on sex, a thing I personally find quite shocking (to say the least), considering the gigantic, personally more fascinating literary resources the author has exhibited throughout his career and the almost infinite potential this very series have.
And then (after several days reading and re-reading Moore's interviews and different opinions about the work) I conclude that maybe it's not a work intended for me as a target audience.
Maybe, in fact, was like you said, a British book for British audiences.
After the brutal death of Invisible "Aheheh" man,
after the purpotedly graphic depiction of decadence in streets,
after the whole beatnik novel segment without a single punctuation sign,
after the constant, repeated, almost pivotal plot power of rape...
after all the personally perceived gratuitous promiscuity all over the place,
is it REALLY the Gally-Wag character something to be THAT put off?