Tokens & Substitutes: Reflections on Aestheticized Values

Tokens & Substitutes: Reflections on Aestheticized Values

Of the many titles that big name American cities such as New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles have been assigned, they are also congested arenas of grid-structured city blocks that leak aestheticized visuals and conceptualizations of liberalism, diversity, art, modernity "at-its-best", and the creme-de-la-creme of "beauty". As these concepts--and it should be mentioned early on, effect the quality of life for subjects of the 21st century--both inform and project out of social, political, private and public spheres of American life, they remain prioritized discourse in a rather hypocritical and ironic fashion. Another way to approach this notion is to ask oneself: do these values actually exist or, are they merely abstract concepts that are entertained for centuries and now made into watered-down versions of themselves? When one pierces into this self-proclaimed archetypical city of the 21st century to investigate their existence, is one guaranteed to witness the values that define one's quality of life?

Is the more compelling item for consideration buried in the term "investigation?” An investigation of this nature—presumably academic as well as social in the raw sense, in that its realities are manifested on a simple level and a more complex level—requires an examination, a study of a problem comprised within a system. It is an inquiry into the particulars of this problem. Thus, an investigation of both the existence of these values and the ways in which they manifest themselves means one needs to simultaneously pay attention to the larger system from which they are produced in this manner.

Speaking more concretely, consider the example of Barak Obama’s presidency. His appointment to President of the United States was, and always will be, a climactic turn in American history, because for the first time in American history, a black male leads the nation. For the first time, the embodiment of core American values—which, up until now, have been no more than concepts scribed in the American Constitution—has seemingly executed itself (no pun intended). If the theoretical elements that surround this event reveal themselves in practice then there seems to be no dilemma, for the values themselves transgress being mere concepts and actualize themselves, which is their purpose. (Recall the Structuralist and Post-Structuralist premise that language is use, and that to understand the meaning of a word—we can also say a value here—one need observe that word’s usage.) That is, the ways in which these values unfold, how they play out, is what they really are. As mere concepts, print on a page, ultra-sensual sounds in a speech, they exist only theoretically.

On this matter, the theoretical element of these values, one can consider Barak Obama’s presidency a success insofar as the idea of a black male president goes. The total actualization of a black male president has yet to pass. The fact that his presidency was and still is celebrated in such an exuberant manner suggests that we are still far from full acceptance of the values in question. In other words, Obama as the first black President of the United States is theoretically a success, and more than that, because he is President in reality, it is a success in action. His presidency has taken the word “diversity” and put it to use. Nonetheless, that this event marks a shift in history, that it is celebrated, demonstrates that this event is not typical, but unique. Much like the passing of a birthday once a year, so to is the inauguration of a black male president; it is rare, a canonical event. This isn’t to say that we have not made advances to actualizing the great values we proclaimed at the start of American civilization. Such a claim would be unfair and simply invalid. Obama’s presidency is, for sure, a step in the right direction. The point is that so long as such events remain climactic and call for celebration, they values from which they are born will remain only partially fulfilled.

On the matter of token minorities, a discussion of “scholars-of-color” and “students-of-color” needs to be had. Statistics will show that the admittance of minorities into prestigious and pricey colleges and universities is growing. The livelihood of such students at these institutions remains a question tackled on a local level and a larger, academic level. (Take bell hooks, for example, who outlines one experience of being black and female in a predominantly white and male university in her essay, “Eating the Other”.) While I will speak to my own experiences and observations during my undergraduate years of college, my inclination is that these observations are not entirely unique, but that they generally lend themselves to the experiences and observations of other minorities who have (and perhaps still do) attend such academic institutions. Clubs, groups, events, and conversations to which the bulk of the audience comprises of minorities have more often than not related to the idea of diversity itself or the aestheticized manifestation thereof. “La Unidad”, or “Unity”, a club geared toward uniting Latinos was required to host a specific number of festivities throughout the school year, and was expected to celebrate Latino heritage during Hispanic Heritage Month. “UMOJA”, an African-American club also geared toward the same general, vague aim of unity blacks on campus was required to organize event(s) during Black History Month. “CCASA”, an Asian and Southeast Asian group demonstrated a similar persona, with the exception that this group, unlike the two former ones, was well endowed financially and popularly participated in and thus, hosted far more events. I often asked myself then, as I do now, does the value of diversity inasmuch as these ethnic and racial groups are concerned, actually exist? (By “value of diversity” I mean diversity as a value, not its worth). If the point is to host race-related events when convenient (i.e. Black History Month, Diwali, and when prospective minorities visit campus), is this truly about exercising diversity or about seemingly doing so? If diversity were, in fact, part of this college’s core, if diversity were an ingrained value that stood autonomously as individualism seems to, then does there need to be a division of cultural groups in the first place? Furthermore, need these groups celebrate their heritage in such a way that is apparently not for the group itself, but for the consumers who serve as its audience? Moreover, if the value of diversity actually existed in practice—without mere allusions to it—need it be investigated at all? That is, if a value is plainly evident, it needn’t be searched for. Beyond the fabricated symbols of diversity, such as the token minorities, where does full-fledged diversity on a college campus exist? (I presume that even interracial friendships and relationships encounter the dilemma, but that is a matter I prefer to hash out another time.)

These fabrications call for consideration. By fabrications I mean the people, ideas, images, structures, and events that make blatant claims to diversity, equality, superiority in “forward-thinking” and exemplary mores of a civilization. Token minorities are one such example. They exist within systems of power which they do not control, but are subject to, and in which they—consciously or unconsciously—play the role, so to speak. If diversity actualized itself, there would be no need for token minorities. If equality among the sexes truly existed, attention to Hillary Clinton’s wardrobe would not make the 10 o’clock news headlines. If such values really existed, they needn’t be assigned watered-down versions of themselves, which at bottom, are nothing more than substitutes or stand-ins; they are false silhouettes screaming the name of their respective values so as to attract attention to the fact of their existence.

Obama’s presidency speaks to the value of diversity no doubt, but it also raises the reigning issue of power, which can be perceived as the primary value that informs how and when (if at all) diversity is disclosed. Fabrications—tokens and substitutes—are constructs and as such, they have been constructed for a reason. The need to justify the existence of diversity suggests its lack of existence, for there is a difference between celebrating the thriving of a value that a people hold high and the superficial celebration via substitute heads. Celebration revolves around the aestheticization of rarities, which are allotted a time and place, but are not allowed to appear daily. So long as stand-ins for diversity, equality an