Hacker News Reader

Comment by Blikkentrekker | Hacker News Reader

Well, I was born in the Caribbean and much of my family is actually culturally Caribbean, and I much disagree with that.

The African-American does not eat Caribbean food; he does not listen to Caribbean music; he does not practice Caribbean traditional festivals, does not dress in Caribbean clothes.

I definitely feel that you draw this association purely because you think of Caribbeans as dark-skinned; it is a very different culture.

The African-American in general eats Anglo-Saxon food; he listens to Anglo-Saxon music; he celebrates Christmas and Easter; and he dresses in Anglo-Saxon clothing.

View on HN

I know expat Jamaican and Dominican communities in New York that celebrate festivals yearly. I ate jerk chicken with red beans and rice last week, I don’t think that was an Anglo-Saxon invention, nor was chitlins, collard greens or other dishes. And we don’t listen to Anglo-Saxon music, as African American music isn’t descended from anglo-Saxon music at all. The fact that it’s been widely adopted in Anglo-Saxon culture doesn’t mean that they claim it’s origins at all. Gospel music and hymns do not come from Anglo-Saxon culture at all, nor does jazz, rap or blues. Gullah culture isn’t Anglo-Saxon, nor is the creole language and culture practiced around New Orleans and Louisiana. Trying to label African-American culture as Anglo-Saxon erases most of the actual history, which again comes from the African diaspora. Mexican-American culture doesn’t become ‘Anglo-saxon’ just because they now live in America and can speak English.

> I know expat Jamaican and Dominican communities in New York that celebrate festivals yearly.

And I would not call those Anglo-Saxon as they are actual expats of a different ethnicity and recent-generation immigrants?

That you even consider those comparable to Anglo-Saxon African-Americans that are not recent immigrants but have lived in the U.S.A.. from six generations back is baffling to me.

> nor is the creole language and culture practiced around New Orleans and Louisiana.

Nor would I call those Anglo-Saxon.

You seem to cast very different populations, that speak very different languages and have very different cultural practices, in the same bucket, simply because of a shared skin color.

There are indeed populations of any color in the U.S.A. that are decidedly not Anglo-Saxon. I would no more call recent black Jamaican immigrants Anglo-Saxon than I would recent white Italian immigrants, but the vast majority of population of any color in the U.S.A. is decidedly Anglo-Saxon and has been nurtured within an Anglo-Saxon milieu for generations.

I’m telling you that black people in America have a culture that is descended from a lot of sources, and you cannot just simplify it as Anglo-Saxon, again because such a wide swath comes from the African diaspora that ignoring that means ignoring its most noticeable aspects. Gospel, jazz, blues, and rap are not descended from any Anglo-Saxon musical tradition, nor are our dances, or many of our foods.

American culture is largely descended from Anglo-Saxon culture, but that doesn’t transitively mean that all American culture is now Anglo-Saxon. The pockets of non Anglo-Saxon culture are not recent additions to black culture, they’ve been intact and distinct throughout their history. The Gullah people are American, not an expat community.

> I’m telling you that black people in America have a culture that is descended from a lot of sources, and you cannot just simplify it as Anglo-Saxon, again because such a wide swath comes from the African diaspora that ignoring that means ignoring its most noticeable aspects. Gospel, jazz, blues, and rap are not descended from any Anglo-Saxon musical tradition, nor are our dances, or many of our foods.

I looked up the origin of Gospel on Wikipedia; it seems to stem from Gaelic sources and the first composers thereof were white.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_music#History

As for Jazz: “Jazz originated in the late-19th to early-20th century as interpretations of American and European classical music entwined with African and slave folk songs and the influences of West African culture.[32] Its composition and style have changed many times throughout the years with each performer's personal interpretation and improvisation, which is also one of the greatest appeals of the genre.”

Perhaps there are some West-African elements to it, but I find the music to sound very European in terms of structure, also using mostly European instruments.

Jazz at the end of the day is played with the piano, the European drum kit characterized by the cymbal, the guitar, the cello, and the tuba. — whatever West-African elements it has seem to be played up, again for racial reasons.

Tge reason for the common instruments is that early jazz musicians used instruments discardes by marching bands.

I detest this attempt to deny historical people of their creative capacity. You are acting as if the cultures of modern times are simple antecedents of cultures from the fall of the Roman Empire.

To back up your claim of jazz being "European", please source a European that composed with blues scale, jazz chords, and swing before African Americans.

>To back up your claim of jazz being "European", please source a European that composed with blues scale, jazz chords, and swing before African Americans.

Those jazz chords are descended and altered from traditional european harmony though, themselves, not sole descendants some African musical tradition (which didn't use such harmonies).

As were the instruments themselves (trumpets, trombones, saxophones, pianos, etc.)

Jazz was a mix of African-American vocal music and musical idioms (with a US-localized trhough over African origin) with european harmony, marching band music, and other forms.

This is one of the make disappointing comments I’ve read on HN in awhile. You are literally admitting to being ignorant on the issues being discussed (“I looked up”) and justifying incorrect conclusions based on the results of immature, inaccurate research.

Do you realize the depth of the topics you’re making these claims about?

>This is one of the make disappointing comments I’ve read on HN in awhile. You are literally admitting to being ignorant on the issues being discussed (“I looked up”) and justifying incorrect conclusions based on the results of immature, inaccurate research.

Do you have better sources? Because I'm quite well informed in those areas, and I mostly agree with the parent, as do all scholars.

>I ate jerk chicken with red beans and rice last week, I don’t think that was an Anglo-Saxon invention, nor was chitlins, collard greens or other dishes.

No, but those latter aren't carribean or african either. They are african-american, created in the US (and for specific historical circumstances, including food price concerns, and local food availability).

As for "jerk chicken" that's just an imported popular dish. Carribeans do eat it, but you aren't carribean for eating it any more than you're Mexican for eating mexican..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com