Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2006 > February > 05 > Entry
Why Freeman hates Black History Month
None other than Morgan Freeman, the distinguished African American actor, told 60 Minutes he opposes Black History Month because he believes setting black history aside in one month marginalizes the history of a people that is deeply intertwined with all American history.
I found Freeman’s comments in an interesting Houston Chronicle story that looks at the debate over the usefulness of Black History Month.
From the story:
Black History Month has its origins in Negro History Week, started in 1926 by historian Carter Woodson, who wanted to bring attention to the contributions of blacks.
Woodson had hoped the week eventually would be eliminated after black history was fully integrated into American History.
But many say that day appears to be a long way off.
The story describes how some black history experts are inundated with requests to speak at school in February but almost never get any such calls the rest of the year.
I have to admit, some Black History Month programming makes me squirm. It’s unnerving, for instance, to see Martin Luther King Jr reduced to a cuddly, non-threatening cartoonish character who simply “helped black people,” rather than the fiery, establishment-bashing radical that led a nation-changing revolution. The story describes some school Black History Month celebrations that are little more than soul food lunches and MLK posters.
Yet, Black History Month does pressure those schools that might otherwise ignore black history to at least address it. And black history programming done right can certainly benefit kids.
What do you think of Black History Month?
Permalink | Comments (2) | Categories: Schools and Politics
Comments
By JennyD
February 7, 2006 8:39 AM | Link to this
I’m not a big fan of history as “holidays and heros.” On the other hand, if this the only time kids learn about the role of blacks in American History, then so be it. I think Freeman has a point though; it makes black history seem separate from the rest of history, which is not the intent I think.By Mary
February 6, 2006 8:16 AM | Link to this
I could see why some would think relying on Black History Month is somewhat gimmicky, seasonal and trivalizes the substantive contributions of blacks and their victimization in our history. The flashy approach to learning and gimmicks about history fits in with our dumbed down culture. We are a nation and world of hype, marketing, and excess. So what’s new? Things probably got superficial and flashy during the Fall of the Roman Empire, too. Supposedly, the masses were entertained (not educated) with “bread and circus” to keep their minds off failing foreign and domestic policies. Now we have Super Bowls and Olympics to take our minds off things going on in our world. History including Black History should not be just gimmicks. People need to connect how we are living our history today. “People who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Once people are less educated about history, the downward cycle of a society is more likely to repeat.