1. What does Cohen mean when he says the"kikes and niggers" at Chess Records were "rejects from proper society who found each other on a trip through a dark room?"
2. How was the Chess family's migration to Chicago either similar to or different from the migration of Blacks from the rural South (especially Mississippi) to Chicago?
If you scroll down you can see two paintings (Monet and Magritte) in the Art Institute of Chicago mentioned by the author referencing the role and impact of the train to the Blues idiom and migration to the North.
Remember you have to scroll down to see earlier postings.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Its hard to say which group must have felt more out of place in Chicago, but I would have to think the Chess family had a more difficult time adjusting--at least at first--because of the language & religious differences. However, with time these could be overcome or watered down with economic success; the southern blacks, no matter how long there or how successful would always be set apart by their race.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, I'm not sure railroads had quite the same significance to the Chess family as it did to the southern blacks. The trip across the ocean might have had more meaning/significance to the Chess family than the shorter trip on the railroad. The railroad might symbolize freedom to the blacks but less so for the Chess family.
Also, while trains are big at the start of the book, its cars that seem more prevalent and potent symbols later on--they called the movie "Cadillac Records" for a reason. Think about the how much time Leonard Chess spent on the in cars on road, the blues artists taste for fast, fancy cars, and all the lyrics about cars in the early rock and roll songs.
I think that the Chess family probably had to feel out of place. They went to a city that was unfamiliar to them,and the city its self was unfamiliar of them.The family had different values and beliefs than most people in the city. So I believe it was hard for them to adjust.For blacks to migrate to chicago i feel they went with alot of hope, they saw a future for themselves.They felt as if Chicago was the promise land.
ReplyDeleteBlacks and Jews could have been considered "Marginal Men." The concept of Marginal Man is that they are on the edge of a group or society, not in the mainstream. Ethnic groups entering a city were the newcomers. It takes a long time for the "outsiders to incorporate into the main society. Because the neighborhoods were next to each other in Chicago, it turns out both groups would live off of each other in many ways. Eventually, it would be in the music world and the Black/Jew collaboration was sold to the mainstream society.
ReplyDeleteBoth the Southern Blacks and the European Jews migrated within and to the United States. There is a Push/Pull effect that happens. The Ethnic groups are "Pulled" to new opportunities in a new country or locale. At the same time, they are "Pushed" out of their homes. The Blacks and Jews were pushed out of their homes by discrimination and economic forces at the same time they are "Pulled" to a perceived better life.
It is interesting that both Leonard Chess and Muddy Waters are using names other than their own. The old life and their new lives in Chicago.
Chip's point about the Black/Jew collaboration being sold to the mainstream society is an interesting one. Because it has been sold and accepted that Blacks and Jews have some kind of mutual history, concerns, and aspirations, people expect instances of the relationship to be mutually beneficial. What has happened instead is that Jews like Chess(and others who
ReplyDeletestarted record labels)tend to not only take a paternalistic attitude towards blacks, but also tend to put monetary concerns first. Because many of us have accepted the myth of mutual benefit, we are shocked when Jews exploit Blacks. We shouldn't be. To paraphrase Marx, the capitalist will always exploit the worker.
I think migration among blacks and the Chess family was somewhat similiar. As race still play a role in today's society, it did then also. They both felt uneasy, I'm sure, in Chicago. But that didn't stop Leonard Chess from being himself while still trying to fit in. It also seems as though his family had reached somehwere beyond their imaginations when they reached Chicago.
ReplyDeletere turner's analysis of rosher's comments: creation of self- and other-images among groups and within groups, as we saw in arc of justice readings last spring, usually (always?) protect the dominant economic culture. And these image depictions are probably seldom the province of the marginalized, but are instead a way of managing the marginalized groups. i will try to figure how this relates to the hegelian idea of groups adopting the culture's idea of who they are as a group, even when they are told they aren't equal.
ReplyDeleteFebruary 24, 2010 6:04 AM
I asked a question in my classes -- a question which one section deliberated on in a formal way-- about whether Leonard Chess was a good man or not. In trying to decide this for myself, I looked for how Chess represented himself; i.e., his own words about himself. I was surprised to find upon re-reading and skimming the book again that there is a scarcity of quotations from Chess in the book. That lack is important to me. What did Leonard Chess have to say for himself?
ReplyDeleteIn the absence of Chess' comments about himself and his intentions it is hard for me to decide whether he was morally "right". I need to hear him speak to know what he intended, or at least, what he thought he intended.
I would like to know what others need to know to try to answer whether he was a good person. What are your criteria for answering that?
DIANE WILKINSON
I think Chess was basically a good person. He was definitely human and made mistakes, but we all do. Then again, sometimes he was not such a good person...I think at times he was greedy and corrupt. There were times in the book it showed that he could be "good," for example when he bought Etta James a house, ever though it was with her money, at least she then had something. I really don't know him, so it's hard to say what he was really like.
ReplyDeletebfh4321 is Bonnie Hale
ReplyDeleteIn response to Ms. Wilkinson's question was Leonard Chess a good man. I say he was a good man. He indeed made Muddy into the person that he was. Even though he may have cheated him some along the way, but what good business man don't? Muddy didn't suffer. He and his family were well taken care of by Mr Chess making Muddy into someone famous. Someone that the public adored.
ReplyDeleteI think Ms. Hale captured the point of what I was looking for to decide about Leonard Chess when she writes that we "really don't know him" and for me to hear directly from him and from Muddy Waters about him would help.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Ms. Callaway's observation, you are right that leonard offered muddy some of the main parts of what probably made Waters' life extraordinary. Also true is what Dr. Slaughter (Blues Man) is getting at when he says elsewhere we should look at what Waters' own part in his own life.
I never thought of it before but maybe we should give Muddy credit for choosing to stay with Chess Records because that may have been where he really wanted to be. It may have given him the life he consciously chose: one over which he (Muddy) had control to a satisfactory extent. I can certainly relate to that. I never even wanted to be the hottest stuff around -- too much effort, too much staging. I had rather be happy. So maybe Muddy felt that way too.
With the migration of Chess family, I think that is similar to the migration of African Americans fleeing to the north, in hope of finding a better life style and living conditions. With the different families fleeing for the south going to the north, they risk being killed, beaten, and even thrown in jail, but that little bit of hope gave them satisfaction that there was better some where.
ReplyDeleteCohen's statement simply reminds me that the lower classes in society often have enough in common to agree on something.i.e. "we are oppressed", etc. This commonality forges a sometimes temporary relationship in which each class involved helps the other get to a certain point until unfortunately greed (for example) reminds those classes that they are indeed different.
ReplyDeleteThe question of whether Leonard Chess is one that can have many different interpretations. No one will have the same definition for what a good individual is because none of us have the same experiences or moral backgrounds. But if we look at from Cohen's perspective, just noting the way he described Chess, he didn't think he was a good man. Cohen states, "In this book, Leonard Chess is, of course, the Devil, the Nosferatu-like businessman..." (85). Cohen doesn't leave it up for the reader to decide whether Chess was as corrupt of a man because he presents Chess as a tyrannical businessman. What we need to do is differentiate Chess as a man then as a businessman. Only his identity as a businessman is clear to us, so is it fair to transpose his flaws a businessman onto his identity as a man? I wouldn't say so, but it all we have to go off of. Leonard was an intelligent man who knew how to start the complicated game in the music world. He was good to the artists outside of this world. He provided the qualitative means to them and gave them what they had never had. Someone who is not a good person would not give these things. In a twisted way, too, Leonard taught his artists to not to always expect monetary gain for things. Look at jobs nowadays, getting a promotion isn't always a monetary gain, but it is an advancement from where you were before you moved up.
ReplyDeleteHow was the Chess family's migration to Chicago either similar to or different from the migration of Blacks from the rural South (especially Mississippi) to Chicago?
ReplyDeleteI personally like the similarities that Cohen refers and alludes to. The "kikes and the niggers" both were simply on unfamiliar territory especially first generation migrants and immigrants. The second generation often had family and/or friends waiting who were familiar with this "new land," but were not anymore accepted or acclimated completely. The obvious similarities of looking for a new start, better opportunities, and escaping very unhappy and unprofitable situations are only accentuated by their different geographical locations...Europe and Mississippi. I personally have the advantage(or disadvantage) of having grown up in Mississippi and being witness to the "covert racism" and the "tolerance" of some whites towards blacks as long as blacks stayed on their side of the tracks and were not to loud. Cohen reaffirmed and resounded that desire for African-Americans (even like me in 1988) to leave Mississippi in search of a place where the sun didn't shine so figuratively hard on my blackness. Cohen is also able to paint a similiar portrait of the Chesses and other European immigrants in which we are able to see their earnest desire for a better life.
1)The "kikes and the niggers" refers to the Jews and the Blacks of that time. Both races were treated with such discrimination. Even today when people find someone who can somewhat relate to their story they stick with it.
ReplyDelete2)Both were looking for something new, sound, image, place. Chicago was the beat of the country and that's where everyone wanted to be. Just as the Chess family was in need of new jobs and less discrimination so were the blacks coming from the south.
1. What does Cohen mean when he says the"kikes and niggers" at Chess Records were "rejects from proper society who found each other on a trip through a dark room?"
ReplyDelete- what he meant was that Jews and Blacks back then were both minorities belittled by society and treated unjustly. So then in Chess's neighborhood Jews and blacks lived very closely to one another and they had similar adversities they had to face. They were thrown together by society but they made a great impact on American culture.
2. How was the Chess family's migration to Chicago either similar to or different from the migration of Blacks from the rural South (especially Mississippi) to Chicago?
- The Blacks who came from the Rural south were looking for a right of passage. somewhere where they didnt feel opressed while chess and hsi family's move was not necessarily to get away from anything but to move towards it. At the same time both people ultimately came to chicago for similar reasons which would be a better life for themselves and thier familes
I think leaving a life you have been living for years either way is going to be a c0hallenge. coming from big cities like chicago and going to the south would be a very different life,and vice versa. This type of move takes alot of getting used to and adopting to aswell, I can say that when i came to the south from leaving in ny i didnt have the right expectations or even no what to expect at all. The change for me is really unexpected,it is truly a whole new way of life, a whole nother view but i learned to compromise and adapt to a new environment. The blacks leaving rural south and going to chicago i think were in need of a better life and a place were they could fit in. They were lookin to move up in life. A fresh start. Courtney Roberts
ReplyDelete