|
This review has been accessed times since September 27, 2004
Graves, Joseph L. (2002). The Emperor’s New
Clothes: Biological Theories of Race at the Millennium. New
Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
219 pp.
$19 ISBN 0-8135-3302-3
Reviewed by Matthew W. Hughey
University of Virginia
September 25, 2004
At the beginning of professor Joseph
Graves’ work The Emperor’s New Clothes: Biological
Theories of Race at the Millennium (2002) he writes,
“…our society cannot progress toward true justice and
equality until we exorcise racism from our collective
consciousness” (p. 1). Graves steadfastly maintains that
debunking the idea of race as biologically determined is an
essential first step to eliminating racism.
Graves’ introductory remarks include a
description of Hans Christian Andersen’s fable of The
Emperor’s New Clothes as a metaphor for the concept of
the non-existence of biological race and ends with a comparison
to Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring
(1962). Both comparisons are suitable in that the racial scope
through which society peers must be discarded so that, like the
child in the Andersen’s fairy tale, all can see that
race-as-biology is fictitious. Moreover, likethe highlighting of
environmental pollution in Carson’s book, the biological
idea of race conjures up a connotation of unheard or silent
violence, which requires exposure and action to eliminate.
While Graves’ work holds no semblance of
resting on post-modern theory, his agenda is to divorce race and
biology from the mutual symbiotic relationship they have held
sway within the legacy of racism in the United States and
Europe. The unfamiliar reader may ask, “Why is this
relationship the lynchpin to dismantling racism?” The
answer is found in the history of race and biology that Graves
explores.
Since the formation of the
“existence” of race, the concept of race has been a
central organizing factor in collective affairs. Many scholars
make the claim that race is in fact, the, “central axis of
social relations” (Omi & Winant, 1986 [1989]: 61) which
serves to legitimate and even account for intellectual,
emotional, cognitive, and overall social differences and unequal
stratification in society. As a social narrative, race is
central to many of the public and intellectual debates about
human nature that have sporadically sent the United States and
the world into spasm, particularly evidenced by the Kerner
Commission that reported, “…our nation is moving
toward two societies, one black, one white — separate and
unequal” (Kerner, 1968).
Within the realm of public policy, the
implications of race have been significant because of its
“scientific” biological underpinnings, which have
given scholars, and the lay-public alike, a rationale for what is
alleged to be intrinsic and unchanging criteria in human
populations. Thus, Westernized racial typologies can perhaps
best be thought of as attempts to reify ideological arguments on
the performance of race into “real” concepts that can
then exist existentially outside of cultural context or political
intent. These arguments become most visible and vehement in
situations of conflict, as evidenced by the reparations debate
for the United States chattel slavery system, the recent
dismantling of Affirmative Action in California due to
Proposition 209, and the recent University of Michigan lawsuits
that almost destroyed the legal existence of Affirmative Action
if it were not for the narrowly won Supreme Court decision
(5-4).
Therefore, given the explosive history of the United States,
it is to no one’s astonishment that anthropology,
biological determinism, and socio-biology have taken hold of the
cultural logic of both town and gown by supplying tools to
analyze the concept of race as a fixed and unchanging
concept.
Graves’ work was written to dismantle the so-called
scientific basis, for first, of the actual existence of race as a
typology devoid of racist content and conjecture, and second, to
expose the politically motivated ideological underpinnings of
biological descents into the abyss of racism. Thus, Graves
examines the history of biological diversity from a modern
scientific perspective. He writes, “…what we call
‘race’ is the invention not of nature but of our
social institutions and practices. The social nature of racial
categories is significant because social practice can be altered
far more readily than can genetic constitution” (2002:
2).
In light of the importance bestowed upon race within cultural
logic of the West, Graves work fits nicely with other texts like
Montagu’s Man’s Most Dangerous Myth (1997),
Gould’s The Mismeasure of Man (1981),
Smedley’s Race in North America (1999), and stands
as a dialectical counter to works like Levin’s Why Race
Matters (1997), Rushton’s Race, Evolution and
Behavior (1995), and most notably Herrnstein’s and
Murray’s The Bell Curve (1994).
Taking on such an entrenched position such a biological
determinism and socio-biology often results in a neo-con
rebuttal; jumping at the chance to conserve the social pecking
order that the belief in biological races has helped to form.
Graves writes, “Race is part of the American legacy, and
racial exploitation gave the United States license to
exist” (2002: 3). Further, he writes, “Modern racist
ideology wishes to appear as a part of normal intellectual
discourse. Even worse, it attempts to portray its critics as the
racists” (2002: 8) Accordingly, Robert Locke of
Frontpage Magazine (a journal published in
collaboration with David Horowitz’s “Center for the
Study of Popular Culture”) writes of Graves’
scholarship,
. . . [the] dumbest idea has to be that race is just a social
construct.. . . . social constructivism is one of the
Left’s favorite current ideas. Its application to race
resurfaces from time to time, most recently in an article by
Joseph L. Graves, Jr. in an issue of American Outlook, magazine
of the nominally conservative Hudson Institute, whose cover theme
is “the illusion of race.” Dr. Graves, a geneticist
at the University of Arizona, is also the author of The
Emperor’s New Clothes: Biological Theories of Race at the
Millenium, [sic] which has a similar message (Locke, 2002).
Taking on these often poorly formulated and articulated
arguments, Graves speaks from his expertise as an evolutionary
biologist, providing evidence that only about 6 genes in the
human body partially determine the color of a person’s
skin, and that further, what genome researches have been
uncovering over several years as the “mapping
project” have concluded: as far as biology is concerned,
race doesn’t exist. Others collaborate Graves’ work,
notably, Dr. J. Craig Venter, president of Celera Genomics, the
company that mapped the human genome, who recently said of race
and biology; “It is disturbing to see reputable scientists
and physicians . . . categorizing things in terms of race”
(Balki, 2002).
Thus, the basic plan of The Emperor’s New Clothes
is a step-by-step inspection of the expansion and progress of the
race concept; from its genesis in classical philosophy to modern
times. Graves moves in historical uni-linear fashion, involving
the scientific processes of Europe and the United States. What
is missed (and is all too common in United States-based race
literature) is what other non-Westernized ideologies and
scientific processes may have said about the role of race as (or
as not) biological determined. However, Graves does do a
beautiful job of deconstructing Darwin’s and
Spencer’s approach to human variability and their
ethnocentrism which caused Whiteness to mysteriously become the
standard in the weights and measures that judged race and
civilization.
Other chapters focus on the eugenics movement and Francis
Galton’s attempts to provide a quantitative ranking of
human intelligence. Other topics include the 20th-century
American eugenicist Charles Davenport, who is portrayed as a
fraudulent and genocidal scientist as evidenced by his work with
the Eugenics Record Office and the National Pellagra Commission.
Additionally, Graves provides numerous descriptions of links
between American and Nazi eugenicists that inform the reader as
to the profound ideological connection between racism and White
supremacy; thereby supporting the claim that many scholars like
bell hooks have made that equated both concepts (racism and White
supremacy) as cultural, if not linguistic, synonyms.
In his latter chapters, Graves’ examines racist
ideologies’ links between race, intelligence, and disease
in which he contrasts growth in the fields of population genetics
with the political initiatives that grew in the post-WWII era,
specifically; the UNESCO statements on race, the rejection of
racism as a valid scientific stance by the scientific community
as a whole and the narrative of the civil rights movement in the
United States.
Overall, The Emperor’s New Clothes is a laudable
appraisal of the history within racial science. However, like
many social theorists of racism, he seems to apply a
Marxist/materialist approach to race and racism. He writes,
“The rise of racial ideology coincided with the development
of social institutions that exploited human biological
differences for profit” (2002: 3). This very statement
paints the picture that the branch of racism grew somehow out of
the trunk of classism. Yet, while providing that connotation, he
only provides a correlation between race and class, and not
causation. The downfall of his tone is that without sufficient
articulation of the correlation, the argument reads like a causal
sequence of events.
However, the most troubling point in his thesis is his
somewhat amateurish disposal of ideology as the indispensable
core of racism. He writes,
In the absence of a biological basis for race, racism simply
becomes ideology. As ideology it is rightly subject to moral
judgment. For this reason, people wedded to racist ideology will
object to this work and its approach, because it denies them the
scientific high ground. Racist ideologues have been accustomed
to the luxury of hiding behind so-called reasoned objective
argument while characterizing their critics as emotional or
‘politically correct’ (2002: 2).
This makes the cultural sociologists gasp. Graves does not
take into account the notion that all human behavior and
institutions (whether physical or imaginative) are socially
constructed, including science. By ‘merely’ reducing
racism to an ideology that has no scientific basis, Graves
believes he undoes the validity of it. While Graves does a good
job of divorcing racist ideology from its collaboration with
scientific “proof, ” he fails to realize that
scientific thought and the canon of biology have just as many
moral (and immoral) suppositions as Graves claims only ideology
possesses. By arguing that racism has persisted in our society
because adequate scientific reasoning has not entered into the
equation, Graves ironically raises a question not about the
science of the alleged superiority of Whiteness in the West, but
instead of the alleged supremacy of science in a world that has
been Whitewashed by Westernized epistemology.
Graves undoubtedly champions the scientific method, and
elucidates how one may “properly” ask questions about
the nature of our world in order to gain a “true”
understanding of it. Therefore, his argument begins to be
counterproductive; again putting “science” on a
pedestal that can be summoned up like a genie to either dispel or
collaborate racism’s legitimacy. The further implications
of Graves’ labor can actually work to marginalize fields
that have been historically sidelined as not inclusive enough of
scientific process or legitimate epistemology, like Sociology,
Anthropology, Linguistics, Cultural Studies, English, and the
rest of the so-called “soft” sciences and
“arts.”
Although Graves makes lucid that discrediting the idea that
race is biological necessary (but not sufficient) to eliminate
racism, his book’s very thesis rest upon the very notion.
Graves' book is well suited for those who already know that
race-as-biology is a myth. The book works as a nice companion
piece to that knowledge in that it supplies specific examples of
individuals and organizations that have exasperated or alleviated
the race/biology paradigm.
However, the few shortcomings are not to be the hallmark of
Graves’ brief (only 219 pages) work, as he works diligently
to trace the development of thought about human genetic
diversity. His work could be of excellent help to scholars who
wish to dispel the coupling of racism and science, but not the
hierarchy of the scientific disciplines. He cautions the reader
to think critically about scientific findings that have
historically been misused in controversies over racial
differences in intelligence such as crime, intelligence, disease,
and family traits and trends. The strength of the book is in the
historical analysis it provides, coupled with the Who’s Who
of biology’s past. Using The Emperor's New Clothes
in the classroom of upper high school to beginning college levels
could be a great way to begin to grasp what race is and what
it is not. And in the end, his work is a landscape testament
to the ideology of politics and the power of the political brush
to paint science and still…life.
References
Andersen, H. C. (1997). Naomi Lewis (trans.). The
Emperor’s New Clothes. Cambridge, MA:
Candlewick Press.
Balki, R. August/September 2002. “Biologically
Speaking, Race Doesn't Exist” in Abolitionist
Examiner.
Carson, R. Silent Spring. (1962 [1994]). Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin.
Gould, S. J. (1981[1996]). The Mismeasure of Man. New
York, NY: Norton.
Herrnstein, R.J. & Murray, C. (1994). The Bell
Curve. New York, NY: Free Press.
Kerner, O. Chairman (1968). “Report of the National
Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders.”
New York, NY: Bantam Books.
Levin, M. E. (1997). Why Race Matters. Westport, CN:
Praeger.
Locke, R. June 18, 2002, “Race is Not a Social
Construct” in Frontpage Magazine.
Montagu, A. (1997). (6th ed.). Man’s Most
Dangerous Myth. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.
Omi, M. & Winant, H. (1986 [1989]). Racial Formation in
the United States: From the 1960s to
the 1980s. NY, New York: Routledge.
Rushton, J. P. (1995). Race, Evolution and Behavior.
New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction
Publishers.
Smedley, A. (1999). (2nd ed.). Race in North
America.Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
About the Reviewer
Matthew W. Hughey
University of Virginia, Department of Sociology
Email: mwh5h@virginia.edu
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mwh5h/
Matthew W. Hughey is a Ph.D. candidate in Sociology at the
University of Virginia. His research interests include critical
race theory, Whiteness studies, inequality in education and
critical pedagogy, religion as impediment and catalyst for human
rights, the Black Panther Party and the legacy of Dr. Huey P.
Newton.
~
ER home |
Reseņas Educativas |
Resenhas Educativas
~
~
overview | reviews | editors |
volunteer |
submit | guidelines | announcements
~
| |