Since moving to Canada, race and particularly my race has been emphasized as a key part of my identity. In Canada, where blacks and African are a minority population, being black holds completely different challenges as compared to being back home in a predominantly black peopled country. I am constantly confused on the significance of race. I personally do not hold much significance to race as compared to origin and nationality. When asked to self-identify, mentioning my nationality and heritage holds more value than my skin color. In the class discussions, race was suggested to be an empty signifier which categorizes large groups under one definition and attempts to explain what the group is about. A prime example is the label ‘people of color’. Such a vague term can be manipulated to include any human being but is politically used to cluster various races which happen to by minority races. In doing so, dangerous assumptions are made such as assuming all people of color experience the same social and economical challenges. For example, as a Kenyan and African, I am often confused for an African American and assumed to share the same culture, heritage and socio-economical challenges.

These generalized identification terms are highlighted in the article on Tiger Woods. Henry Wu the author, discusses how Tiger Wood’s race was crafted and commercialized as a n intersection of racial and cultural issues. Born into parents of Chinese, Taiwanese, Native American, African American descent and talented in a sport played predominately by wealthy Caucasian men, Woods was a perfect example of a cross-cultural transition of minority groups into an exclusive sport. Multi-billionaire companies such as Nike, realized the immense profits gained by commercializing Woods as the epitome of a multi-cultural athlete who was able to transcend racial and economical boundaries in sports. Woods would become the role model for minority groups and especially children from minority backgrounds who would first aspire to Wood’s success and secondly (and most importantly to these companies), blindly consume any commodities sold by Woods. The problem is that Tiger Woods is commercialized as a “multi-cultural” man who can reach out to various racialized groups such as ‘people of color’. These institutions such as Nike attempt to cluster Wood’s geographic and cultural heritage under one problematic umbrella of ‘multi-culture’. In doing so, in unique and important differences within the various groups confined under ‘people of color’ or ‘multi-cultural groups’ are overlooked and forgotten. As a result, Tiger Wood’s commercial persona fails to reach their indented wide audience simply because not all ‘people of color’ can identity with Tiger Wood’s life. Just because people share the same skin color does not mean they share the same experiences. This moment of disconnect relates to last week’s discussion of counter-identification where there is a period of detachment between the narrative and the viewer where the viewer does not relate to the narrative. It is through these discussions were we are recognizing and consciously unlearning how the body lacks independence. Bodies and their race as seen through Tiger Woods are used to control commodity desires.

Sources:

Rowe, John Carlos. “Post-Nationalist American Studies”. How Tiger Woods Lost His Stripes. Post National American Studies as a History of Race, Migration and the Commodification of Culture. Ed. Henry Wu. California: University of California Press, 2000. 223-247. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.