Essay 1430

Folks sure are in a forgiving mood, based on the letters in the latest issue of Newsweek. The letters below are responses to stories and essays published in the December 4, 2006 issue, directly after Michael Richards’ racist rant.

---------------------------------------------

Racism and Forgiveness

While the truth and reconciliation Commission may have done much to heal South Africa, Ellis Cose’s article (“Forgiveness Isn’t Just Another Word,” Dec. 4) misses the point that forgiveness has nothing to do with the offender. It is a gift victims give themselves. By passing judgment on those who wrong us and the sincerity of an apology, we compound the original transgression. Healing can result from sincere apologies. But that is not the only way. Let’s remember the beautiful example of the Amish who forgave the gunman who killed their daughters. If they can forgive, surely we can move past a tirade by a has-been comedian like Michael Richards. The only actions and attitudes we can control are our own. We must attempt to forgive as we expect to be forgiven.
Nancy Hagman
Kensington, Kans.

As a southern white man, I enjoyed and agreed with most of Raina Kelley’s column “Let’s Talk About Race.” I was most gratified by what she said regarding progress in the area of race, acknowledging that as a Yale graduate, she’s an example of that change. For years many civil-rights leaders have complained that little has changed, which is untrue and does absolutely nothing to enhance race relations. My only disagreement with Kelley was her inclusion of the affirmative-action vote in Michigan as part of racist America. I don’t believe being against affirmative action is necessarily racist. If the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. or Frederick Douglass were alive today, I firmly believe they’d be appalled by the message affirmative action sends—that blacks are incapable of making it without help. The only thing these eminent men asked for was a level playing field, not more discrimination.
Jim Martin
Clearwater, Fla.

I suspect that Michael Richards’s insults were selected more for their ability to wound their targets than to express his inner beliefs. If the target is fat, bald or black, the speaker selects an insult most likely to be hurtful. The speaker actually may be indifferent about fatness, baldness, blackness, but that’s the easiest way for him to hurt his target. It takes either unusual self-restraint or an especially sharp wit not to take that course. Richards clearly lacks that self-restraint or wit, but it’s possible his outburst was based more on the target’s vulnerability than his own beliefs.
Larry Riedman
Gaithersburg, Md.