Coleen Herbert, Blog 2, Where are you from?

   I'm from the ham capital of the world, Smithfield, Virginia. My parents are Yankees. My mother is from Boston and my father is from Brooklyn. My family has strong Irish and German roots, but the focus of my ethnic education has always been centered around the Irish side of my family.
  To be honest, however, I've never felt that connected to my roots. My extended family still lives in New England. Growing up in southern culture made me feel as if it really didn't matter anyway. None of my friends were concerned with their ancestry. Being from the South was always their primary cultural identifier. You either were or were not a southerner. I identify as more of a reserved observer of southern belles, cotillions, and buck season than a participant. The Hampton Roads region showcases several different modes of southern culture. I know people who grew up in Isle of Wight and Suffolk who proudly identify as "country" or "southern" (I prefer "Kuntry," and I use the term appreciatively). Yet, I also know people who live in Newport News and Williamsburg who would never identify as Southerners. I think the High Art/Low Art dichotomy can be used to analyze why people resist being labeled as a Southerner or as someone who belongs to a rural community. The culture that I grew up with will always be foreign to my parents and lampooned by my northern relatives.  The area in which I grew up constructed my sense of community. Although almost all of my friends throughout my childhood belonged to families that had lived in the South for decades or even centuries, I never felt purposefully excluded. What I lacked was a sense of history, but I've learned that history is something that each of us can build in our own lives. It's not necessary for a sense of belonging.
  Twilight: Los Angeles 1992 is a historical document. To reference Tony Kushner, I think that the L.A. rebellion cracked history open. In fact, I think that our class viewing of the film ripped the history of our community open as well. Two decades is not a long period of time. I think that part of the reason people had  trouble accepting the artistic interpretation of the film is that we had to first accept that the events leading up to the rebellion happened. The Rodney King beating happened. The Latasha Harling shooting happened. The acquittal of the policemen who beat Rodney King happened.These are facts. Regardless as to how they are artistically portrayed, we have to first accept that our national problems and obsessions with race and class helped lead to this violence. These were also preventable losses. The racial tension in Los Angeles before the rebellion happened could have been addressed with more community discussion, much like the discussions we have in class. Fear can be restrictive, however. I was afraid to share my own viewpoints even though I know that they will always accepted by our community. I was afraid of simply saying the wrong thing, even though my fear presumes that there is a "right" thing to say instead.
   The history of the rebellion has been documented several different ways, much like the history of the South.   Some sources called the rebellion "riots". The President called the rebels a mob. N.W.A. said that 90% of the police were bad. The police offer a different story. What's troubling about the mainstream media representation of almost all rebellions is that they analyze the rebellion through a hegemonic lens. Oppression is not considered. The intersectionality of race, class, sexuality, and gender are not considered. Pieces like Twilight present the histories that we do not hear.