Sisko's racial rant in Badda-Bing Badda-Bang

[DevilEyes]

It's crazy, sir, because, like SO MANY "civil rights" activists of today, Sisko FAILED to acknowledge that, REGARDLESS of how the '60s "really" were like...the world of Vic's lounge was NOT racist. And when Kassidy pointed it out, Sisko just brushed it aside, and CONTINUED.

Ben, I hate to break it to ya, buddy, but VIC FONTAINE IS NOT A RACIST!!! And acting like he is...because of the time period he's supposed to be "set" in...frankly, it's almost as if Ben's become racist himself.

Again, as Kassidy points out.

Who said anything about VIC being a racist?! As already pointed out, Sisko might not have even thought that Vic was a person! And even if he thought of Vic as a person, the issue was not how Vic felt, but what the program was like. Sisko just didn't like the program because he thought it misrepresented history.

 

[TheGodBen]

But yeah, I always hated those episodes. Folksy Irish blarney. (Item: Nobody actually says blarney.)

Oh, Blarney, my nemesis. There was an offshoot of the Civilization games called Call to Power where Ireland was included as a playable civilization. The first city you built was Dublin. Makes sense. The second city was called Blarney. Yes, some American programmers think that a town with a population of 2,400 is Ireland's second city.

Gods, I hate Activision.


Yes, I realise that this has nothing to do with Sisko's rant, just be thankful that I'm not singing Journey this time.

 

[Withers]

Ben, I hate to break it to ya, buddy, but VIC FONTAINE IS NOT A RACIST!!! And acting like he is...because of the time period he's supposed to be "set" in...frankly, it's almost as if Ben's become racist himself.

What a straight up republican interpretation of that scene. Nobody said Vic was a racist. Certainly Sisko said no such thing. Now, because he didn't want to participate in a misrepresentation of his own personal history and said so, Benjamin Sisko is a murderous racist? You people have a lot of nerve.

-Withers-​

 

[Rush Limborg]

Ben, I hate to break it to ya, buddy, but VIC FONTAINE IS NOT A RACIST!!! And acting like he is...because of the time period he's supposed to be "set" in...frankly, it's almost as if Ben's become racist himself.

What a straight up republican interpretation of that scene. Nobody said Vic was a racist. Certainly Sisko said no such thing. Now, because he didn't want to participate in a misrepresentation of his own personal history and said so, Benjamin Sisko is a murderous racist?

*sigh*

Withers...he may not have said it...but that's darn well how he was acting.

Let's look at the exchange in the ep:

Sisko: Look, this is not about Vic Fontaine.

Kassidy: Than what is your problem?

Sisko: You want to know? You really want to know what my problem is? I'll tell you: Las Vegas, 1962--that's my problem. In 1962, black people weren't very welcome there. Oh, sure, they could be performers, or janitors, but customers, never!

Kassidy: Maybe that's the way it was in the real Vegas--but that's not the way it was at Vic's! I have never felt uncomfortable there--and neither has Jake.

Sisko: But don't you see? That's the lie! In 1962, the Civil Rights movement was still in its infancy. It wasn't an easy time for our people--and I'm not going to pretend that it was!

NOW do you see why I took it to mean that Sisko seemed to think that Vic was racist?

He used the problems African-Americans faced in the '60s as an excuse to effectively boycott Vic--as if Vic was somehow part of the problem--I.e., as if Vic, by virtue of being an entertainer in Vegas--who, BTW, happened to be white--was somehow just as guilty as those who were openly hostile to African-Americans!

This is like boycotting all businesses in a certain market, becase some of those businesses are racially biased against you.

This is, purely and simply, treating all in a certain catergory--in this case, 1960's Vegas Lounges--as if they were inherently all the same, that all in said catergory were equally guilty, and must therefore be treated equally, regardless of whether they actually are guily or not!

Thus, Sisko is guilty of the very thing he is condemning: discrimination.

Continuing:

Kassidy: Baby...I know that Vic's isn't a totally accurate representation of the way things were. But--it isn't meant to be. It shows us the way things could have been...the way they should have been.

Sisko: We cannot ignore the truth about the past...

Kassidy: Going to Vic's isn't going to make us forget who we are, or where we came from! What it does is remind us that we are no longer bound by any limitations...except the ones we impose on ourselves....

See, the limitations Sisko is imposing on himself is the idea that somehow, Vic must be boycotted as if he were racist!

Fortunately, though, Sisko see's Kassidy's point...and joins the others in their efforts.

 

[Myasishchev]

Fwiw, I think it's possible to believe that Sisko was both a douchebag wet blanket and right. The two aren't mutually exclusive propositions.

Anyway, if it's such a terrible sin for Sisko to identify at all with a particular population group that isn't "all humanity," I think we should all go hunt down Pavel Chekov, with his stupid misspelled name, and beat him to death with heavy tools. DID RUSSIA INVENT THE PIPE WRENCH, PAVEL?

Then again, ridiculous Russian nationalism is flamboyant and hokey. Angry black men are mean, and strike a nerve with American conservatives and liberals alike.

 

[garamet]

Ben, I hate to break it to ya, buddy, but VIC FONTAINE IS NOT A RACIST!!! And acting like he is...because of the time period he's supposed to be "set" in...frankly, it's almost as if Ben's become racist himself.

What a straight up republican interpretation of that scene. Nobody said Vic was a racist. Certainly Sisko said no such thing. Now, because he didn't want to participate in a misrepresentation of his own personal history and said so, Benjamin Sisko is a murderous racist?

*sigh*

Withers...he may not have said it...but that's darn well how he was acting.

Let's look at the exchange in the ep:

Sisko: Look, this is not about Vic Fontaine.

Kassidy: Than what is your problem?

Sisko: You want to know? You really want to know what my problem is? I'll tell you: Las Vegas, 1962--that's my problem. In 1962, black people weren't very welcome there. Oh, sure, they could be performers, or janitors, but customers, never!

Kassidy: Maybe that's the way it was in the real Vegas--but that's not the way it was at Vic's! I have never felt uncomfortable there--and neither has Jake.

Sisko: But don't you see? That's the lie! In 1962, the Civil Rights movement was still in its infancy. It wasn't an easy time for our people--and I'm not going to pretend that it was!

NOW do you see why I took it to mean that Sisko seemed to think that Vic was racist?

Not at all.

He thought Vic was misinformed.

His reaction is no more racist than Picard straightening Data out when he makes a mistake out of a lack of information and/or experience.

 

[Withers]

Let's look at the exchange in the ep:

Sisko: Look, this is not about Vic Fontaine.

NOW do you see why I took it to mean that Sisko seemed to think that Vic was racist?

No. I don't.

-Withers-​

 

[Rush Limborg]

Withers...please read the whole thing, and my entire line of reasoning.

He claimed it wasn't about Vic. But Kassidy pointed out that that just was not the case. Ben didn't mean to be discriminating...but like it or not, he was.

Again, read the entire line of reasoning, and see what I mean.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Not at all.

He thought Vic was misinformed.

His reaction is no more racist than Picard straightening Data out when he makes a mistake out of a lack of information and/or experience.

Picard didn't make it a point to not go near Data. He went to Data, and discussed the problem with him.

Sisko, on the other hand, did not do the same with Vic.

And, as viewers of the episode know, it was Sisko who was "straightened out"--and Sisko who learned the lesson.

 

[Withers]

I did. For the record I've actually seen the episode a bunch of times too. In case you somehow don't get it I'll explain; He says it's not about Vic. She asks what it is about then. He explains that going to Vic's is participating in a misrepresentation of a part of his personal history. He said it wasn't about Vic himself. He said it was about historical misrepresentation that participation, at first, seemed like condoning it. He as good as explained in words so simple a child (or a Sarah Palin) could understand that it wasn't about Vic. He literally said so.

He brought up race therefore he must be a racist! I only know of one group of people who think like that.

-Wither-​

 

[Bacl]

I think you missed the point of the "rant." Sisko was drawing attention to the fact that Las Vegas of the 1960's was a very white place and that to pretend otherwise is disrespectful. The writers purposefully incorporated that into the script so as to let the audience know they were aware that what they were portraying was not at all true to the way the 1960's were.

From Memory Alpha...

Behr explains, "We didn't want the audience, especially the younger audience, to think that 1962 Las Vegas was a place where you had a lot of black people sitting in the audience as nightclubs, or enjoying themselves at hotels and casinos. That just didn't happen. So by having someone of Sisko's historical understanding questioning that fact, we could clarify before we got him to Vic's that he's well aware that Vegas was very, very, very white." (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion)

I don't see whats so wrong with that... if you understand what you're watching.

-Withers-​

It is also worthy to point out that Avery Brooks is an ACTOR, not a WRITER. People often get so wrapped up in a show that they begin to think that the actors are writing their own lines, setting their own destiny. Behr wrote the diatribe, Behr felt it should be inserted; Brooks just read the lines.

And if we're going to talk about racism, I think "Take Me Out To The Holosuite" is far more disturbing. Just rewatched that with the wife and we both were appalled at how racist Sisko and the rest of the crew were towards Vulcans.

 

[Rush Limborg]

I did. For the record I've actually seen the episode a bunch of times too. In case you somehow don't get it I'll explain; He says it's not about Vic. She asks what it is about then. He explains that going to Vic's is participating in a misrepresentation of a part of his personal history. He said it wasn't about Vic himself. He said it was about historical misrepresentation that participation, at first, seemed like condoning it. He as good as explained in words so simple a child (or a Sarah Palin) could understand that it wasn't about Vic. He literally said so.

He brought up race therefore he must be a racist! I only know of one group of people who think like that.

-Wither-​

(Shakes head slowly)

Sir, if you can refute what I actually said, I shall hear it gratefully. You know, as well as I do, that that was not what I said. Please refute what I did say, not an absurd satire of what I said.

And please...kindly refrain from personal attacks against Sarah Palin...or implications that people of my affiliaton somehow think as you describe.

 

[Rush Limborg]

And if we're going to talk about racism, I think "Take Me Out To The Holosuite" is far more disturbing. Just rewatched that with the wife and we both were appalled at how racist Sisko and the rest of the crew were towards Vulcans.

Actually...it wan's racism, it was needling the Vulcan captain who had prided himself on racism against non-Vulcans.

They were, effectively, demonstrating absurdity by being absurd.

And it's worth noting that the Solok was trying to rub it in their faces once again that they lost to Superior Vulcans.

BTW...if you look carefully, you can see that Solok's crew were taking part in the party, too. It was just he who was being needled, not the entire crew.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

I'm sorry, but this thread is fuckin' hilarious....

 

[Withers]

(Shakes head slowly)

Sir, if you can refute what I actually said, I shall hear it gratefully. You know, as well as I do, that that was not what I said. Please refute what I did say, not an absurd satire of what I said.

And please...kindly refrain from personal attacks against Sarah Palin...or implications that people of my affiliaton somehow think as you describe.

You're calling Benjamin Sisko's actions racist in this episode. His actions were an unwillingness to participate in a whitewashing of his own personal history. What you're saying is a farce and I treated it as such. If you speak for your affiliation I think I just gave all the respect that is due to that particular line of thinking by boiling it down to essentially what it is. If you don't like the worms don't open the can.

-Withers-​

 

[DarKush]

I don't think it was a 'rant', and to be blunt, I get tired of this issue being brought up every now and then, usually by white guys, IMO, who really don't like the fact that Avery Brooks/Sisko was too 'uppity' (my word, not any that I've seen from an poster who had problems with this scene, but that's what I think is the problem some people really have with Brooks/Sisko's 'attitude' on this matter or others).

One thing that I applaud Brooks for having was an understanding that Trek might be based in the future, but is written by people today and was really about today, which is something that many Trek fans seem to not comprehend, particularly when it comes to issues of Trek's representation of race. I think Ira S. Behr's comments on the matter explained it pretty well. And I remember watching that episode and being happy that Sisko did point out the racism of that time period, which some people want to minimize or dismiss entirely. I had no problem with Sisko acknowledging that history and not necessarily feeling comfortable going into that environment. He was showing respect to the travails of his ancestors.

Of course some posters might feel better to have Sisko being 'straightened' out or taken to task (got to put him in his place after all), but I wonder would they characterize Data as doing the same to Picard during the Klingon Civil War when he first looked over giving Data command of a ship and Data called him out on it. Now that was a better example of insensitivity, not malicious IMO, but still insenstivity and perhaps bias, than this attempt to try to infer that Sisko discriminated against Vic. Which is just a dodge to not acknowledge or accept the real past discrimination Brooks and the DS9 writers were talking about.

I don't know if all Vegas lounges of the 60's were discriminatory or not, but I got a good feeling that enough were to back up Sisko's misgivings. It wasn't reverse discrimination, and his distaste in no way is equivalent to the very real discrimination that might permit blacks to perform on stage at places but not eat, live, or gamble in those establishments. He didn't order Vic's program shut down or even altered. He just didn't feel comfortable going in there, but he didn't order anyone else not to go. He didn't abuse his authority to deny anyone from going in there. He made a personal decision that had no impact on anyone but himself, and he changed that decision after talking to Kasidy. I think for too long in this country there has been a concerted effort to first deny or minimize racism and then try to create this kind of moral equivalency based on this lack of knowledge about the terrible toll of racism on non-white peoples.

Regarding that awful Vulcan DS9 episode, Solok was just as dismissive toward Sisko and humans as he was to them. So its not a clear cut example of Sisko beating up on the Vulcans. I didn't care for that episode because I think it slammed the Vulcans and set the stage for ENT to do more of the same, but their behavior was just as antagonistic or more so than was the DS9's crew.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^No, he did not order anyone not to go. However, he actively mocked the idea of Kassidy helping out.

Also, DarKush, Data, in the analogy you mentioned, was behaving as Kassidy, not Sisko--pointing out the discrimination Picard didn't realize he was demonstrating.


Now, Withers, let me repeat myself--and please, if this is wrong, refute it point by point. If my reasoning is illogical, demonstrate it using logic--not emotional satire.

*sigh*

Withers...he may not have said it...but that's darn well how he was acting.

...[Sisko] used the problems African-Americans faced in the '60s as an excuse to effectively boycott Vic--as if Vic was somehow part of the problem--I.e., as if Vic, by virtue of being an entertainer in Vegas--who, BTW, happened to be white--was somehow just as guilty as those who were openly hostile to African-Americans!

This is like boycotting all businesses in a certain market, becase some of those businesses are racially biased against you.

This is, purely and simply, treating all in a certain catergory--in this case, 1960's Vegas Lounges--as if they were inherently all the same, that all in said catergory were equally guilty, and must therefore be treated equally, regardless of whether they actually are guily or not!

Thus, Sisko is guilty of the very thing he is condemning: discrimination.

...See, the limitations Sisko is imposing on himself is the idea that somehow, Vic must be boycotted as if he were racist!

Fortunately, though, Sisko see's Kassidy's point...and joins the others in their efforts.

 

[Withers]

Let's look at the exchange in the ep:

Sisko: Look, this is not about Vic Fontaine.

NOW do you see why I took it to mean that Sisko seemed to think that Vic was racist?

No. I don't.

-Withers-​

There it is. You want it to be more complex than that and it isn't. You want it to be an example of racism (or...discrimination) on Sisko's part and it isn't. The explanation is a simple one and you as good as provided it to yourself.

-Withers-​

 

[Rush Limborg]

Fwiw, I think it's possible to believe that Sisko was both a douchebag wet blanket and right. The two aren't mutually exclusive propositions.

...Angry black men are mean, and strike a nerve with American conservatives and liberals alike.

This.

Now, let's set the record straight. I think Sisko's attitude was wrong--BUT...I understand why he felt that way. However, regardless of history, it it illogical to hold as guilty those who are not responsible for the sins of history. Vic, and his lounge, is an example.

Anyway, if it's such a terrible sin for Sisko to identify at all with a particular population group that isn't "all humanity," I think we should all go hunt down Pavel Chekov, with his stupid misspelled name, and beat him to death with heavy tools. DID RUSSIA INVENT THE PIPE WRENCH, PAVEL?

Then again, ridiculous Russian nationalism is flamboyant and hokey.

Frankly, Chekov was engaging in an absurd sense of humor--and everyone took it to be such. Still, I kinda see your point.


Now...as a side note: Someone brought up Uhura. Again, Lincoln unintentionally slipped and said the N-word. He apologized quickly, but Uhura was not offended. She understood what he meant...and didn't get all worked up over something irrational.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Let's look at the exchange in the ep:

NOW do you see why I took it to mean that Sisko seemed to think that Vic was racist?

No. I don't.

-Withers-​

There it is. You want it to be more complex than that and it isn't. You want it to be an example of racism (or...discrimination) on Sisko's part and it isn't. The explanation is a simple one and you as good as provided it to yourself.

-Withers-​

Withers...as you seem unwilling to actually debate--as you seem unwilling to see that Sisko was, without realizing it, deluding himself--I thus no longer see any opportunity to convice you of my point.

Think what you like...but the bottom line is: if you refuse to listen to what I am saying, and choose only to hear what you want to hear, no words on my part will have any effect.