Is this offensive?

DJ Yuca

DJ Yuca

Son Montuno
61xRC54eDIL._SL500_AA300_.jpg


You might not be able to see the details on this image, it portrays the Cal Tjader Quintet as being all white when in reality 2 were white, 2 were Afro Hispanic/Latino, 1 was Afro American. That's definitely offensive to me, what I'm interested in is the portrayal of the audience. They're all wearing wide sombreros, I think this is supposed to illustrate that Cal Tjader was white but his music was accepted by the Latinos. To me it's offensive because the Latinos producing and consuming Latin music such as mambo and Latin jazz were mostly Puerto Rican or Cuban, so to portray them as Mexicans is inaccurate.

However I could be mistaken: perhaps the majority of Latinos listening to Cal on the W coast were Mexican? And/or perhaps sombreros were worn by/associated with all sorts of Latinos not just Mexicans?

Is it offensive or am I overreacting?
 
DJ Yuca said:
However I could be mistaken: perhaps the majority of Latinos listening to Cal on the W coast were Mexican? And/or perhaps sombreros were worn by/associated with all sorts of Latinos not just Mexicans?
Click to expand...

David, I can assure you, having seen/heard him live in LA on several occasions,I dont recall any predominant Mexican attendees. As to Sombreros.. thats a Hollywood movie thing.

Having lived and worked in Dallas, Houston, Fort Worth and Atlanta which has a huge Mex. population, never recall seeing anyone out and about walking around wearing one . The one time one does see them, is in Mexican clubs . Also when Mariachi bands perform .
 
wonderwoman said:
I doubt the artist had any of this in mind and you're probably reading too much in to it :)
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but

1. The artist has portrayed the band as being all white - to me that's offensive, for reasons stated in the op

2. The artist has confused the Puerto Rican/Cuban/S American community that supported and created mambo and Latin jazz with the Mexican community, who had a different musical culture.

Whether the artist was conscious of either or both of the above is not really relevant, to me both are offensive.
 
I think it's just art; in the real life Europeans are not white. And people in yellow probably are very sick.

Also are there arenas for bull fights in Mexico and do they play jazz? Do they release a bull when they get bored?
 
This album is from 1958, or thereabouts. I'd attribute ignorance and just plain bad artwork to this album cover. Good music inside, however.
 
There was a huge prevailing ignorance toward Latinos and racism towards Mexicans for decades and decades, which I doubt has ever really passed. As a result of this, popular images of Latin music are often cheesy stereotypes that confuse all the Latin nations up together into cartoon stereotypes.
 
It's interesting being over here in the UK, with hardly any cultural exposure to real Latinos, the general conception of Latin music is strongly towards the lounge music end, and you will get images of people wearing sombreros, stamping like flamenco and shouting "ole!" with a bossa nova playing in the background. In the '70s there was, to all intents and purposes, no difference at all between the Spanish and the Italians. They were all those spaghetti-eating, bullfighting, sombrero-wearing types from "the continent". This was good enough to add a sense of the exotic to the easy-listening hits of the day.

Often when we get new horn players to try for the band, they are bowled over by how hardcore the proper music is.
 
groovetpt said:
I'd attribute ignorance and just plain bad artwork to this album cover. Good music inside, however.
Click to expand...

+1 on both counts.

sweavo said:
There was a huge prevailing ignorance toward Latinos and racism towards Mexicans for decades and decades, which I doubt has ever really passed. As a result of this, popular images of Latin music are often cheesy stereotypes that confuse all the Latin nations up together into cartoon stereotypes.
Click to expand...

+1, hence my dislike of the cover.

Believe it or not, I saw someone on another forum I visit (where I'm the sole Latin music fanatic) praising both the music and cover of this album. The music is superb, but the cover has long been annoying me, so I appreciate the perspective on it from other Latin music fans.
 
is every error that relates to portrayal of non-white cultures (by a person of a different ethnicity/culture- typically someone white) in the a usa automatically offense-giving?

is there a common expectation that such portrayal's be more or less perfect? are there way too many sensitive souls around looking for every error to nitpick?

my 2c - it may be inaccurate, but it's not offensive - not unless there are strong reasons to suspect that there might have been some kind of a racially discriminating motivation behind this portrayal - absent which the artist and the art get the benefit of doubt. it may be annoying at best, which is a valid sentiment.

also, learning to laugh at ourselves isn't necessarily a bad thing. from where i stand, I'm seeing a caricature - that's all.
 
DJ Yuca said:
1. The artist has portrayed the band as being all white - to me that's offensive, for reasons stated in the op
Click to expand...
It would be clearly offensive to me if done today, but pretty much "par for the course" in the context of the 1950s. They did what they had to do to get the album sold in the widest geographic range possible. So, it's about as expected as much of the other "white-washing" of ethnic items in the 1950s and before. Would a real-life Ricky Ricardo (from "I Love Lucy") really have a high-level Cuban band in New York City where all the members were fair-skinned? No, but a U.S. television network wouldn't have dared to be ethnically "accurate" in those days and expect the shows to air in Southern states. It's very unfortunate that things operated that way in those days, but I understand how it happened. That's why extra praise should be given to people who did have the guts to go contrary to the mainstream. Along those lines, Cal Tjader probably deserves some personal credit for employing musicians regardless of their heritage, even if the record company wouldn't market the band accurately.

DJ Yuca said:
2. The artist has confused the Puerto Rican/Cuban/S American community that supported and created mambo and Latin jazz with the Mexican community, who had a different musical culture.
Click to expand...
I'm less offended by this aspect of the artwork, since the record company was probably looking to have something on the cover that quickly conveyed "Latin" to a purchaser in the United States in the 1950s. With very little mainstream knowledge about the variations of Latin culture, a Mexican bullfight and people in sombreros did (and still would today) clearly convey the general message of "Latin" even if it doesn't convey the specific message of where the music actually came from. As an analogy, I live in Texas, and I've stopped caring about the number of times a Texan character in a movie/television show/advertisement is wearing a cowboy hat -- despite the tiny percentage of Texans who wear cowboy hats on a regular basis in the 21st century (especially in the large urban areas). Indeed, even major Texas cities will play up the cowboy image in our own tourism ads, because they know that's the image that comes to mind when most people think of "Texas." :cowboy:

If the title of the album had included "Cuban Concert" and people were in sombreros, then I would have more of a problem with it. But, the setting of a bullfighting arena isn't as offensive when the general term "Latin" is used. It's just not possible to capture every aspect of Latin/Hispanic culture within a single piece of artwork, so the choice was made to pick one clearly recognizable element. Plus, it's obvious that a little bit of humor was intended, with the depiction of the bull sitting and listening to the music himself.
 
quixotedlm said:
my 2c - it may be inaccurate, but it's not offensive - not unless there are strong reasons to suspect that there might have been some kind of a racially discriminating motivation behind this portrayal - absent which the artist and the art get the benefit of doubt. it may be annoying at best, which is a valid sentiment.
Click to expand...
As I suggested in my prior post, yes, there is good reason to assume that the record company deliberately did not want to publicize a racially accurate picture of the musicians in the 1950s, especially if the grouping was racially mixed. Race-based segregation was a big deal in those days, and a white musician collaborating with dark-skinned musicians would have been "unacceptable" for a significant segment of the United States. A music group could be all-black or all-white, but a mixture wouldn't fly in many places.
 
quixotedlm said:
is every error that relates to portrayal of non-white cultures (by a person of a different ethnicity/culture- typically someone white) in the a usa automatically offense-giving?

is there a common expectation that such portrayal's be more or less perfect? are there way too many sensitive souls around looking for every error to nitpick?

my 2c - it may be inaccurate, but it's not offensive - not unless there are strong reasons to suspect that there might have been some kind of a racially discriminating motivation behind this portrayal - absent which the artist and the art get the benefit of doubt. it may be annoying at best, which is a valid sentiment.

also, learning to laugh at ourselves isn't necessarily a bad thing. from where i stand, I'm seeing a caricature - that's all.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with caricature in principal, but I dislike the fact that the artist has caricatured the wrong ethnicity.

I may be overreacting, although the cover certainly didn't stop me from buying the album (and listening to it many times).
 
Big10 said:
It would be clearly offensive to me if done today, but pretty much "par for the course" in the context of the 1950s. They did what they had to do to get the album sold in the widest geographic range possible. So, it's about as expected as much of the other "white-washing" of ethnic items in the 1950s and before. Would a real-life Ricky Ricardo (from "I Love Lucy") really have a high-level Cuban band in New York City where all the members were fair-skinned? No, but a U.S. television network wouldn't have dared to be ethnically "accurate" in those days and expect the shows to air in Southern states. It's very unfortunate that things operated that way in those days, but I understand how it happened. That's why extra praise should be given to people who did have the guts to go contrary to the mainstream. Along those lines, Cal Tjader probably deserves some personal credit for employing musicians regardless of their heritage, even if the record company wouldn't market the band accurately.


I'm less offended by this aspect of the artwork, since the record company was probably looking to have something on the cover that quickly conveyed "Latin" to a purchaser in the United States in the 1950s. With very little mainstream knowledge about the variations of Latin culture, a Mexican bullfight and people in sombreros did (and still would today) clearly convey the general message of "Latin" even if it doesn't convey the specific message of where the music actually came from. As an analogy, I live in Texas, and I've stopped caring about the number of times a Texan character in a movie/television show/advertisement is wearing a cowboy hat -- despite the tiny percentage of Texans who wear cowboy hats on a regular basis in the 21st century (especially in the large urban areas). Indeed, even major Texas cities will play up the cowboy image in our own tourism ads, because they know that's the image that comes to mind when most people think of "Texas." :cowboy:

If the title of the album had included "Cuban Concert" and people were in sombreros, then I would have more of a problem with it. But, the setting of a bullfighting arena isn't as offensive when the general term "Latin" is used. It's just not possible to capture every aspect of Latin/Hispanic culture within a single piece of artwork, so the choice was made to pick one clearly recognizable element. Plus, it's obvious that a little bit of humor was intended, with the depiction of the bull sitting and listening to the music himself.
Click to expand...

Good points.

Things haven't changed that much since those days in many respects.
 
Big10 said:
It would be clearly offensive to me if done today, but pretty much "par for the course" in the context of the 1950s. They did what they had to do to get the album sold in the widest geographic range possible. So, it's about as expected as much of the other "white-washing" of ethnic items in the 1950s and before. Would a real-life Ricky Ricardo (from "I Love Lucy") really have a high-level Cuban band in New York City where all the members were fair-skinned? No, but a U.S. television network wouldn't have dared to be ethnically "accurate" in those days and expect the shows to air in Southern states. It's very unfortunate that things operated that way in those days, but I understand how it happened. That's why extra praise should be given to people who did have the guts to go contrary to the mainstream. Along those lines, Cal Tjader probably deserves some personal credit for employing musicians regardless of their heritage, even if the record company wouldn't market the band accurately.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's odd (or sad rather) coming from the US I always had the idea of Cubans as all looking like Spaniards. I was kind of surprised to see "black Cubans" when I got into salsa. Of course it seems ridiculous now. And I have friends from a Swedish background who think of all Cubans as being black and are surprised to see Hispanic looking Cubans.

EDIT: I should point out that I'm from Colorado where there aren't many Cubans. I had never met a Cuban in the US so I Love Lucy was where I got my ideas.
 
timberamayor said:
And I have friends from a Swedish background who think of all Cubans as being black and are surprised to see Hispanic looking Cubans.

EDIT: I should point out that I'm from Colorado where there aren't many Cubans.



.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the many "latinos " who have english surnames ( one of my last places I taught/Djd in the states was owned by a PR.. last name Thomas ) .


And in Denver.. large mexican pop...
 
timberamayor said:
And I have friends from a Swedish background who think of all Cubans as being black and are surprised to see Hispanic looking Cubans.
Click to expand...
Then you have Cubans of Irish descent, like Chico O'Farrill ( actually, his father was Irish and his mother was German ).

Not to mention the many "latinos " who have english surnames ( one of my last places I taught/Djd in the states was owned by a PR.. last name Thomas ).
Click to expand...
And I know a black singer from Colombia whose first name is Washington.

Go figure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top