The Fire This Time
Essays
Black English
African-American characters are central to The Fire This Time. Some are first generation immigrants to the United States; others the children of these immigrants. Many belong to an urban street gang which, unfortunately, may conjure up prejudicial stereotypes in certain readers. Before crafting the dialogue spoken by these characters, I researched Black English or African-American Vernacular English as linguists call it. (See bibliography below.) Based on this research, I am persuaded that Black English is a distinct language related to but independent of American English. Some commentators use phrases like ‘Standard English’ to refer to American English, but that phrase is arguably disparaging of Black English as a language.
What makes a language a language? There are several markers. One is a unique grammatical structure. A second is a unique syntax. A third is a unique vocabulary including idioms and slang derived from the underlying culture. Some argue that a distinct manner of pronunciation is also a marker. In addition, to be a unique language, a language has to have a set of rules consistently applied that govern the operation of the various markers. Black English qualifies as a distinct language under all these criteria.
Because these criteria differ from those found in American English, Black English is often dismissed as a pidgin or a “broken” version of American English that is spoken by people who lack education or are less intelligent or not well read. Yet, Black English shares many grammatical and syntactical structures found in other languages. While those structures are valued in those other languages, they are a source of derision in Black English by certain educators.
There are too many examples that prove these educators wrong to include in this short essay, but one will illustrates this point: the double negative. In American English, the double negative is a sign of ignorance that is forbidden on the premise that the two negatives cancel each other out, leaving a positive. While this may be true in mathematics, it is not true in linguistics. Double negatives are common in modern French and Italian and were common in classical Greek and Latin. While double negatives are and were exalted in those language, they are often disparaged in Black English by those who do not consider Black English to be a unique language.
In crafting the dialogue spoken by the African-American characters in The Fire This Time, my objective and intent was to respect and be faithful to the uniqueness of Black English as a language as explicated in the books listed below. One observation, however. Language evolves over time especially as the underlying culture changes over time. The Fire This Time is set primarily in 1981 with some scenes flashing back to the 1970’s and mid-1960’s. Black English today is not the same as Black English during the time frame of my novel.
My gratitude to Ms. Smitherman and Mr. Dillard is so great I named a minor character after them. For those interested in linguistics as well as the interrelation of language and culture and Black English as an independent language, I urge you to ready the books listed below. I did and they were real eye-openers.
Geneva Smitherman, Talkin and Testifyn: the Language of Black America, Wayne State University Press, 1986, originally published by Houghton Mifflin, 1977.
Geneva Smitherman, Black Talk: Words and Phrases from the Hood to the Amen Corner, Revised Edition, Houghton Mifflin, 1994 and 2000.
Dillard, J. L., Black English: Its History and Usage in the United States, Random House, 1972, Vintage Books, 1973.
John McWhorter, Talking Back, Talking Black: Truths about America’s Lingua Franca, Bellevue Literary Press, 2018.
If you wish to delve even more deeply, read the writings of John R. Rickford, the J. E. Wallace Sterling Professor of Linguistics and the Humanities at Stanford University's Department of Linguistics and the Stanford Graduate School of Education, where he has taught since 1980.
One observation about language usage: it is customary today to capitalize ‘Black’ when, as a noun or adjective, it refers to African-Americans. My novel is set in 1981. In 1981 that usage did not exist. Therefore, I have not capitalized ‘Black’ in my novel. To do so would be an anachronism just as having Attorney Maddie Devlin do her legal research online by computer rather than in the law library behind a stack of law books would be an anachronism. Legal research was not done online in 1981; 'Black' was not capitalized in 1981. Please note, however, that 'Black' is capitalized on my website in accordance with modern usage as this website was created in 2020.
Blood Libel
The Blood Libel is the accusation that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood for the ritual of making unleavened bread (matzoh) to be eaten during Passover.
In the Middle Ages, the first recorded Blood Libel accusation occurred in England in 1144. The first recorded case outside of England was in France in 1171. The accusation spread throughout Europe in subsequent centuries and continued well into the 20th century. In the United States, a Blood Libel accusation occurred in Massena, NY in 1928.
Throughout the 20th century and into the 21st, Blood Libel accusations were a regular feature of Anti-Semitic screeds published by fascists, Nazis, Russians, Islamicists, and Arabs. Throughout the 21st century, Blood Libel accusations or references to previous Blood Libel accusations featured prominently in speeches, broadcasts, and writings of Saudi clerics, of organizations such as Hamas, and in state sponsored media of Arab or Muslim nations. As recently as early 2020, a painting by a noted Italian artist glorified a Blood Libel accusation.
A common result of a Blood Libel accusation was the arrest and execution of Jews and the confiscation of their property. In this way it resembled a tax levied on a segment of the population whenever the community at large needed to raise revenue. The accusation was also used to justify numerous pogroms. One scholar, Walter Laqueur, determined that there have been about 150 recorded Blood Libel accusations and thousands of rumors of Blood Libels. See, Walter Laqueur (2006): The Changing Face of Antisemitism: From Ancient Times to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-530429-2. p. 56.
One thing that all Blood Libel accusations have in common is that none of them are true. Not a single one. These accusations are “false allegations” as the Anti-Defamation League concluded after extensive research. What is especially disturbing, and ironic, is that under Jewish dietary laws, according to Leviticus, it is forbidden to consume blood. For an animal to be considered kosher, its blood must be drained and discarded before it is consumed. Matzoh baked using blood, any blood, would not be kosher.
In The Fire This Time, a Blood Libel accusation in late 20th century Boston almost destroys Boston’s Jewish community as well as the city itself. Both survive. How? You’ll have to read the novel to find out.
The Golem
A golem is a creature fashioned from clay or earth that is magically brought to life by incantations invoking God’s name as God is the ultimate creator of life. Instructions on how to make a golem are found in the Sefer Yezirah ("Book of Creation" or “Book of Formation”), the oldest surviving manuscript of Jewish mysticism, a foundation text for the Kabbalah tradition of Jewish mysticism. As is often the case with ancient Jewish texts, different rabbis have different interpretations of these instructions. Shaping the golem out of clay or earth into a figure resembling a human being, then invoking God's name to bring it to life, is a common thread in these interpretations. There are several versions, however, of how God’s name is used to bring it to life.
There are many legends and much folklore surrounding the golem. One of the most common is that the function of a golem is to defend or protect a Jewish community from the threats and dangers of Anti-Semitism. One of the best-known golem legends, one especially relevant to The Fire This Time, is the golem created out of clay by Rabbi Judah Loew ben Bezalel of Prague (1513-1609) in or about 1580 to protect the Jewish community from a Blood Libel accusation. According to legend, this golem remains in the attic of the Altneushul in Prague, ready to be reactivated if needed. That the golem did not awaken during the Holocaust illustrates the difference between legend or folklore and reality or the dichotomy between faith and reason or science.
In The Fire This Time, a golem does arise, fashioned not by a learned rabbi but by an innocent child.
The Boston of The Fire This Time
When it comes to issues of race and racism, Boston has two contradictory personalities that often are at war with each other. This is true historically and it is true today. Boston’s contradictory personalities are an important element of The Fire This Time.
Prior to the Civil War, for example, Boston was a hotbed of the abolitionist movement and was at the forefront of the campaign to abolish slavery. It sent an all-Black regiment to fight for the Union in the Civil War. Yet, prior to the Civil War, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court legalized school segregation based on race for the Boston public schools, forcing an African-American child to attend a distant school rather than her neighborhood school. Also, prior to the Civil War, Beacon Hill, the neighborhood of Boston’s elite, was developed in such a way that a barrier existed between the white neighborhood where the rich lived and the African-American neighborhood where their servants lived.
Today, Boston’s political, civic, and cultural leaders are in the vanguard opposing systemic racism and supporting Black Lives Matter. Yet, Black baseball players on visiting teams have had the N-word epithet shouted at them from the bleachers and grandstand at Fenway Park, something the Boston Red Sox acknowledge to be true. One well known Black player had a no-trade clause written into his contract excluding Boston as a potential trade destination. Blacks are often the targets of micro aggressions by law enforcement and the public.
If New York is a city of neighborhoods, Boston is, always has been, and always will be, a city of territories or enclaves. The North End is predominately Italian. South Boston, known locally as ‘Southie,’ is predominately Irish. The Brahmins and their ilk make Beacon Hill and Back Bay their home. For African-Americans, Roxbury is the heart of their community. For Chinese-Americans, Chinatown is home base. The one major group that lacks its own territory is the Jews. Urban redevelopment destroyed one former Jewish territory, the West End. Parts of Dorchester died when the Jews migrated to the suburbs, Newton for the wealthier, Randolph and Sharon for the middle class. African-Americans moved in where Jews moved out.
One characteristic of Boston being a city of territories is that the residents of each territory defended their turf from the invasions or incursions of outsiders. The most noteworthy recent example of this is efforts to desegregate Boston’s public schools by court-ordered busing.
Pupil assignments to Boston public schools on all levels had traditionally been based on proximity. Students were assigned to their local school. As a result, schools outside Roxbury had few if any African-American students. In 1974, the Federal Court determined that the Boston School Committee had manipulated school assignments to maintain segregated public schools. The remedy: court-ordered busing to integrate the public schools so that no school was predominately African-American. African-Americans were to be bused into white territories and whites were to be bused into African-American territories. The court order also mandated the hiring of African-American teachers.
As might be expected, all Hell broke loose. Massive demonstrations and marches ensued. The Klu Klux Klan invaded Boston to provide aid and comfort to their northern brethren. School buses, including those serving elementary schools, were stoned, injuring the students within. School buses were vandalized as were the cars of African-American teachers assigned to schools in white territories. African-American teachers were routinely threatened, at least one with a shotgun pointed at his head. Other forms of violence routinely erupted including, for example, firing shots into African-American housing projects. Absenteeism soared. Many African-American parents, rightfully concerned about the safety of their children, kept them home. White parents who didn’t want their children bused into African-American territories or who didn’t want their children going to school with ‘them’ in white territories boycotted the public schools. Those who had the financial resources, ‘white-flighted’ out of Boston.
Although African-Americans were victims of much of the violence, there was also violence by Blacks against whites. When a Black high school student bused to a high school in a white territory stabbed a white high school student, riots exploded. Two years later, an African-American architect on his way to Boston City Hall, was attacked on City Hall Plaza by flag-bearing anti-busing demonstrators who used the American flag as their weapon.
Although the violence had subsided as the 70’s became the 80’s, the memories lasted. Animosities and tensions were held in check by the thinnest veneer of civilization. One spark, once incident, was all that would be needed to relight the conflagration and destroy the thin veneer of civilization. That was Boston as The Fire This Time opens in April, 1981.
Cultural Appropriation/Cultural Appreciation
Cultural appropriation, sometimes called cultural misappropriation, occurs when members of one culture, often writers, artists or other creative types, utilize tropes or elements from another culture to which they do not belong. Like any creative endeavor, this can be done well or done poorly. When the borrower interacts with the other culture in an effort to understand it and connect with it, it is not cultural appropriation. It is cultural appreciation.
Unfortunately, cultural appropriation both as a concept and as a phrase has become weaponized by “the cultural-appropriation police, who jealously track who “owns” what and instantly jump on transgressors.” Jenny Avins, “The Dos and Don’ts of Cultural Appropriation,” The Atlantic, October 20, 2015. For the cultural-appropriation police, cultural appreciation does not exist. Every borrowing is an act of appropriation or misappropriation. Ibid.
Unfortunately, the voices of the many who disagree with this point of view are often muted by the shouts of the cultural-appropriation police. Ms. Avins laments the negative consequences of this when she argues that “We have to stop guarding cultures and subcultures in efforts to preserve them. It’s naïve, paternalistic, and counterproductive. Plus, it’s just not how culture or creativity work. The exchange of ideas, styles, and traditions is one of the tenets and joys of a modern, multicultural society.” Ibid.
One of the most articulate counter arguments against the cultural-appropriation police is offered by the novelist Zadie Smith. Zadie Smith, “Fascinated to Presume: In Defense of Fiction,” The New York Review of Books, October 24, 2019, p. 4. Ms. Smith endeavors to de-weaponize the phrase cultural appropriation by suggesting unweaponized alternatives such as “profound-other-fascination” or “interpersonal voyeurism.” Ibid. In writing her own fiction, she boasts, she has “been both adult and child, male and female, black, brown, and white, gay and straight, funny and tragic, liberal and conservative, religious and godless, not to mention alive and dead.” Ms. Smith carries her argument one step further when she denounces the notion that a novelist “can and should write only about people who are fundamentally ‘like’ [him or her]: racially, sexually, genetically, nationally, politically, personally.” Ibid, p. 6, This notion, she says, “insults [her] soul.” Ibid.
In “The Americans: Writers Show Us Who We Are,” The New York Times Book Review, June 7, 2020, p. 1, the editors of the NYTBR address the issue of cultural appropriation indirectly when they praise books that “don’t avoid the perennial hot buttons of race, gender, sex, region and religion, but . . . offer perspectives on the question of American identity that challenge our pieties as well as our cynicism.” Ibid. If the cultural-appropriation police had their way, these books would not exist.
In The Fire This Time, I borrowed elements from several cultures to which I do not belong. I did so with the objective that I, the writer, and you, the reader, could interact with these cultures and come to understand them and connect with them. In writing this novel, I did. In reading it, I hope you do as well. If you don’t, I have failed you, not because I engaged in cultural appropriation but rather because I failed to adequately articulate my cultural appreciation. If the cultural-appropriation police come after me, I shall resist arrest.