Recently during an extended session of internet perusal, I came across an intriguing video of Malcolm X addressing a debating session of the Oxford Union. I must confess to being only superficially acquainted with the ideas and biography of this internationally famous figure at that time.
The title of the debate was "Extremism in the Defence of Liberty is No Vice; Moderation in the Pursuit of Justice is No Virtue". The rapt attention of the assembled scholars and dons was palpable as Malcolm X spoke on power, revolution, and racialism. Immediately a problem arose in my consciousness: a conflict between instinctual admiration for someone resisting the hegemony of existing power relations and unease stemming from some of the more extremist ideas of the Nation Of Islam, and indeed Malcolm X himself.
My cursory familiarity with Malcolm X had been informed by his status as media icon; snippets of speeches sampled in hip-hop music, the unforgettable photograph in Life magazine of a suited black man peering out a window holding an M-1 Carbine, and other more casual pop culture references. I felt wary of his appeals to race based-nationalism, militancy, and a discourse of disunity and violence. Further research however revealed a more complex picture.
A marked difference seemed evident between his early period as a member of the Nation Of Islam's "sickness and madness", and his subsequent days as an independent activist. "I did many things as a [Black] Muslim that I'm sorry for now. I was a zombie then — like all [Black] Muslims — I was hypnotized, pointed in a certain direction and told to march.
Well, I guess a man's entitled to make a fool of himself if he's ready to pay the cost. It cost me 12 years.” I now understand Malcolm X as being an ineluctable product of his times, and feel deep sympathy with his appeal to the logic of human rights, his ultimate rejection of racism, and his perspicacious critique of capitalism. I marvel at the magnitude of an intellect which rose above such Sisyphean challenges to the heights of superlative.
"The Soul of Man Under Socialism"
This one specific conflict resonated with others which have presented themselves in my reading. Oscar Wilde, whilst delighting me with the poeticism of his appeals to a universal Justice, and the vibrancy of "The Soul of Man Under Socialism", has also given me pause to concern with regards to ill-judged flirtations with Fascism. Writing in the Manchester Guardian he praised the "extraordinary success" of Italian Fascism, and just a few years before heralded the "civilising" conquest of Abyssinia by the Italians in a letter to The London Times. The wider issue I face then, is the problem of separating out the various strands of ideas and actions which constitute the identity of public figures, whether they be artists, activists, or actors.
Should a moral anachronism by an artist ruin our enjoyment of her work?
Can a minority of unpalatable ideas despoil the unity of a political activists reputation?
Perhaps a reconciliation of such dilemmas is impossible, however I believe that attempts in this direction help form much of the logical processes which are utilised in our engaging with ideas and people.
Afrohistoria 