data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7bed1/7bed13112e25501fcd4be296bd607692495f34c3" alt=""
Tonight's show focused on even earlier histories and the points at which family trees broke off, which led Gates to suggest the use of genetic testing to go even further back. One way of looking at genetic testing is to read it as a kind of genetic essentialism--if you can trace your ancestry back, through scientific markers (via the mitochondrial DNA, and for men by the markers on the Y chromosome), you might begin to believe that it confirms that you're one race or another, or one national identity or another, or something of this sort, when the truth is that races, ethnicities, nations, and so on, are historically mediated sociopolitical, socioeconomic and sociocultural constructions. Race historically has not always depended upon the markers we usually attribute to it: skin color, hair texture, familial ties and ancestry, blood quantum, etc.; sometimes it has been profoundly economic, or politically and socially contextual. The concept of "race" changes all the time, depending upon political, social, economic and cultural contexts, with different groups have shifting among racial categories and differently "raced" performativities.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a9dbc/a9dbc6aa1e50a1ad5af736bceafd3d07e39a5cdf" alt=""
Anyways, the first hour dealt primarily with Gates's and his participants' attempts to go even further back in their family trees. There were some fascinating discoveries. One of Quincy Jones's forebears on his mother's side was a member of the Lanier family, which owned five plantations and 180 enslaved people in Mississippi. (This same family, which has branches in Louisiana as well, also produced Thomas Lanier Williams, I believe, also known as Tennessee Williams.) It so turned out that his particular ancestor lived on the estate that was in the line of fire during the Civil War siege of Vicksburg (one of my favorite battles in that war, in which the Union Navy under Admiral David Farragut proved its mettle and broke the Confederacy in two), so the house was shelled, and Union troops arrested his great-great-great White grandfather as a spy, with this man's wife (because Quincy's female forebear with this man was a Black bondswoman) writing down her anguished commentary about the Union soldiers for posterity (and this show).
Several of the participants learned that they were descended from Black Union Army soldiers; there were 200,000 Blacks who served in the Union Army in various capacities (there was no mention of Black Confederate troops or their descendants), and their descendants are spread out across the country. Sarah Lawrence-Lightfoot and Gates both could trace an ancestor to Union service. Gates in fact learned that yet another ancestor, a free Black person, had moved from New Jersey to Hardy County, Virginia (now West Virginia) in the 1810s; he was curious about this, and learned from one of the historians that in fact, Hardy County had a small but thriving Black community, as was the case in pockets throughout the slaveholding South, though a historian made clear that this was freedom up to a certain point; it was precarious and contingent, always subject to the whims of the White majority (or in the case of South Carolina and Mississippi, minority) population, the elites, politics and economics. Watching this history revisited and considering the tenuousness of life for most our history gave me even more appreciation for my ancestors, our ancestors, and the extraordinary fact that they were able to accomplish beyond mere survival. Gates was actually able to go even further back, learning that he had ancestors, the Redmans, living in the early post-colonial (1770s-1790s) period. There his trail broke off. For many of the others, it broke off at various points during the late slavery era (1840s-1863/1866).
The second hour broached something I'd talked about before, which is the tension between folk histories and the "truths" genetic testing appears to offer. All of the participants submitted to genetic testing, which consisted primarily of three procedures:
- Admixture test, which breaks down the percentage of DNA in broad geographic-anthropological categories (African, European, Native American, East Asian)
- Mitochondrial DNA test, which traces chromosomes inherited directly along the matrilineal line
- Y-chromosome test, which traces a chromosomal marker inherited directly along the patrilineal line
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/71881/71881f23352674d9cdf7f327fc8e2779c7416c21" alt="Genome Map"
Unsurprisingly, the admixture test showed that all of the participants had sub-Saharan African ancestry. Yet it showed that all also had other non-sub-Saharan African ancestry. For six of them, the African ancestry breakdown was above 70%. One of the fascinating moments came when Oprah told Gates that she didn't think she had any European ancestry. And she was right. She was the only one of the participants not to. But, she, like all the others, said she thought she had Native American ancestry, which in fact many (most?) African-Americans I've come across in life claim. As it turned out, she was also right--but the only other person who also had Native American DNA markers was Chris Tucker. All the others' vivid and enduring family lore did not match with the scientific results. As it turned out, the profiles that I was able to jot down looked like this:
- Oprah: 89% Sub-Saharan, 8% Native American, 3% East Asian (which basically means than 9 out of 10 ancestors were Africans, about 1 out of ten was Native American, and somewhere East Asian ancestry, which could also be Native American, or Chinese laborers who worked in the South, entered her ancestral family tree)
- Mae Jemison: 79% sub-Saharan African, 13% East Asian, 8% European,
- Chris Tucker: 83% sub-Saharan African, 10% Native American, 7% European
- Whoopi: 92% sub-Saharan African, 8% European
Of course this doesn't mean that Chris Tucker is 83% African, or 83% African American and 27% something else; it only means that his genetic admixture broke down according to these broad categories.
For three of the participants, however, the European percentage was a lot higher. In Jones's case, it was 34%, in Lawrence-Lightfoot's 45%, and Gates himself learned that his admixture came out 50% African and 50% European, which not only shocked him, but basically meant that about half his ancestors could trace their ancestry to Europe, the other 50 to sub-Saharan Africa. This occasioned some quips from him ("Do I still qualify for affirmative action?" was one of them) but it also was provocative in that it undermined any strict biologistic correlation to racial identity or racial essentialism, at least in his case. In fact, it sort of proved that race as we live it cannot be pinned to genetic markers and ancestral histories. Gates is a Black person (as is Lawrence-Lightfoot, or Jones, or any of the others) and lives as one, and would be one in Europe (especially these days), despite what his admixture test says. So ultimately what sort of meanings can be ascribed to the findings?
In the cases of the participants, the results sometimes showed multiple nodes in different areas of West and South-Central and Southern Africa, with greater concentrations in some areas than others. Oprah was convinced that she had Zulu ancestors, but it turned out not to be. What was traceable, with the help of two Boston University historians of the slave trade and era who were able to explain the routes of importation, came out to:
- Oprah: matrineally--Kpelle of the interior of what's now Liberia (but also Guinea, Ivory Coast, as well as Bantus in Cameroon and Zambia)--I kept waiting for her to say she was heading there--Dr. Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, you may want to drop Cousin Winfrey a line about this!
- T. D. Jakes: patrilineally--Ibo-Nigeria (and he mentioned that his Nigerian friends had already told him this just by looking at him)
- Ben Carson: matrilineally--Lunda-Congo/Angola
- Whoopi: matrilineally--Papel-Bayot-Guinea-Bissau
- Sarah Lawrence-Lightfoot: matrilineally--Mandingo & another group-Guinea-Bissau
- Quincy Jones--patrilineally--Tikar-Cameroon (who're known for their musical and artistic gifts, no less)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dcd8e/dcd8e6d2ca4dd2c89c98d5c9912c1a5744feb927" alt="Angola"
All in all it was fascinating, and I'm glad I caught it. Some may argue about Gates's tics (like the constant use of the world "Negro") and self-interest, and yes, it might have been interesting had he focused not only on our richest and brightest but on a parallel sample of Black Americans from Boston to Seattle, Charleston to Los Angeles, but I find the man charming and he hosted and produced one of the more compelling programs I've watched on TV in a while (that wasn't on HBO). He made sure to turn the camera on the others, and to question easy assumptions about race, ethnicity and ancestry, even if some of the participants adhered to them. It also made me wonder about taking one of the genetic tests; I'd considered it before when Howard University was seeking participants, but then I resisted, in part out of worry that the government might get ahold of it (as if they wouldn't anyways). But now I've thought about considering it again, just to see how certain family stories bear out, as well as observations by others. One thing I wonder is, how would I respond if the admixture test came back at any less than 60-70% African? It wouldn't make me feel any less Black, which to me is a primary and lifelong identification, but I think it would still make me feel...strange. Because what does it really say? These are your ancestors, but they're not who you thought they were? They don't fit the stories you've always been told, or that you've created for yourself? And while I'm pretty sure that the mitochondrial link would go back to Africa, I'm not so sure about the patrilineal one. How would that color things?
Keguro,
ReplyDeleteI actually was surprised at how engaging the show was, but history is one of my great interests, and the fact that Gates was constantly contextualizing his discussions drew me in.
I wish I could have gotten a shot of Chris Tucker's face as he sat with Gates and the village elder in that small clearing in the Angolan interior--it was truly worth a thousand words.
I hear you on the aestheticization tip--can you point out some examples, though? (The romanticization of an "Indian" past, especially Whites, long precedes genetic testing, though.) I keep coming across pieces in the mainstream media in which hold fast to very fixed, essentialist notions of race, and then there's the fetishization of "biracialism," which presupposes racial purity from both sides, when the truth is that someone like Mae Jemison, who considers herself unambiguously "Black," is closer to Tiger Woods than his "Cablinasian" self-identification suggests. (She even noted that when in Southeast Asia, people noted how close she looked to some women there.)
I also found this idea of being able to "read" faces, which you mentioned on your Blog last month (was it?) very interesting. What does it mean to still possess the capacity to see the "Sudanese" and not something else in Gates's face, when it turns out that his genetic correlation is strongest, in the African sense, with the Mende, whose ancestors came from what's now Sudan? I know Black Americans who say they can look at people and tell that they're from a certain part of the country, or people who say that they can tell people who're from where they themselves are from--people whose families are from Virginia, or North Carolina, or Mississippi, etc. That's fascinated me--but then this transnational ability to read--or to see deeply--is it real? Can one really see the Ibo in Jakes, after 8 generations? Or Tucker, whose ancestry could be dated almost exactly back 8 generations to Angola (and that was amazing, that precision).
What to say also about citizenship and belonging? In America, let alone someone else. In Israel, the son of a Jewish mother can always come home; Japanese who've lived five generations in Brazil or Peru are still Japanese (at least theoretically). The same is true for Koreans, etc. So is or can Tucker be an Angolan, and then is Ghana's pitch to recruit African-Americans and other African diasporic people so farfetched? Also, if Tucker's historical rootedness in the US goes back 8 generations, what does that say about his citizenship vis-a-vis Whites of far more recent immigrant vintage? Early Black free people often used the term "African" to describe themselves, and this persisted throughout the 19th century; the sense of connection wasn't broken, or heavily degraded, until the era of cinematic depictions, I'd suggest, but at the same, they held this connection in tension with a sense of being part of the US too. Hell, they'd/we'd built the damn country up. New Orleans, New York, Boston, Washington, Charleston, Providence, St. Louis, Richmond....
Oh, finally, yes, your point about the conservative attacks is important. Gates joked about this, but the issue of ontological Blackness remains. It also throws out the critiques (by Whites and Blacks) that Barack Obama is insufficiently "Black"--I'd suggest that the admixture test might show he had less European ancestry than Gates, given that his mother was a White woman from Kansas, and who knows what her family tree in the US looks like. That would make jaws drop--before people's eyes glazed over and returned to their fantasies of "biracialism," which in any case means "Black" and "White." And then there's the newly created "Hispanic" race....
Keguro, I wasn't sure what you meant by "aesthetics" in this context, but I've got you. Yes, the biology not only allows the appending of roots and routes to identity, but creates new identities, it seems, out of whole cloth ("I'm Mende"! What does that *mean*?), or should I say, whole (DNA) strands. But then the pan-Africanist movement went beyond aesthetics, or rather was more complexly situated, wasn't it? It was about color, ancestry, and real historical and mythic connections, and in DuBois's formulation, eventually came to include a much broader understanding of third world peoples. Right? I also think of the Negritude poets and their formulation of diasporic links--aesthetics as you frame them played a role for them too. But DuBois never fully gave it all up--remember he went in exile to and died in Ghana. Praxis. Of a sort.
ReplyDeleteFeatures do tell histories, but sometimes they tell us nothing we don't want to see. I'm thinking of Adrian Piper's conceptual and visual work to start off with. Just think of how she's been (mis-)read, and how she's read right back.
I agree with you about Obama, and in part with your concurrence with Rushing. I'm not sure if one has to cancel out the other--again, you see I'm not an either/or type--but racism profoundly inflects and informs politics and culture; they don't exist outside of it or white supremacy, do they? Very good points though, which I want to think about a lot more.
You should go for that conference, after you've explained hagriography to the rest of us!
Hey
ReplyDelete