This series is an attempt to distill my research into a resource that can help the human family rethink human diversity and create a more equitable world.
The concept of race as a palimpsest is a profound metaphor for understanding the intricate and layered history of racial categorization and stratification in the United States. This metaphor suggests that just as a manuscript page can be scraped clean for new writing while still bearing traces of its past, the racial landscape of America is marked by the remnants of old ideologies and structures beneath the surface of contemporary narratives.[i]
Historically, racial categories were explicitly inscribed into the national consciousness through cultural and legal practices that sought to organize individuals based on perceived differences. Over centuries, there have been efforts to erase these inscriptions and replace them with new narratives that speak to justice, freedom, and equality. Yet, these original scripts of racial division and hierarchy were never fully obliterated. They linger as faint outlines that subtly shape and influence newer narratives, perpetuating racial stratification despite efforts to promote a more inclusive society.[ii]
The persistence of racial categories and their role in ongoing racial stratification reflect this historical layering, where each era's attempts to redefine or address race are invariably influenced by the remnants of past definitions, ideologies, and structures. This interaction between past and present is further complicated by modern genomic science, which holds the potential to either challenge traditional views on race or reinforce them, depending on how genetic ancestry research is framed and understood in relation to systemic racism rooted in historical categorizations.[iii]
Addressing pressing social issues in the U.S., such as disparities in healthcare, policing, poverty, and education, requires an understanding of race that acknowledges its palimpsestuous nature. Progress in dismantling racial inequality necessitates a critical examination of the underlying historical narratives and ideologies—the "scriptio inferior"—that continue to corrupt contemporary understandings and applications of race.[iv]
But the social construction view works fine...
While the social constructionist view of race is instrumental in highlighting how racial categories emerge from social interactions and power dynamics, it sometimes overlooks the intricate ways in which these constructions are influenced by earlier, biological conceptualizations of race. This perspective effectively debunks the myth of race as a static, biological fact, showing instead how race is a fluid construct, shaped by societal norms and policies. However, it does not always fully explore how past biological ideas about race continue to influence our understanding of human diversity and interact with social constructions to shape racial identities and perceptions today.[v]
For example, the use of phenotypic traits such as skin color, hair texture, and facial features in defining racial categories has roots in 19th-century racial science, which sought to classify human beings into distinct biological races based on such visible differences. Despite modern genetics revealing the superficiality of these differences and the vast overlap in genetic makeup among humans, these physical characteristics still play a central role in social categorizations of race. This is evident in everyday interactions, where people often use these visible markers to ascribe racial identities, and in institutional settings, where racial categories based on physical appearance influence everything from legal documentation to educational and health outcomes.[vi]
Furthermore, the interaction between biological and social constructions of race is manifest in the contemporary discourse surrounding genetic ancestry testing. Companies like 23andMe and Ancestry.com market the idea that individuals can discover their "true" racial heritage through DNA testing, implicitly drawing on biological concepts of race. While these tests can provide insights into geographic ancestry, they also risk reifying social constructs of race by suggesting that there is a biological basis for racial categories. This exemplifies how modern scientific endeavors can become entangled with, and even reinforce, social ideas of race, blurring the lines between biological and social constructions.[vii]
Additionally, the persistence of racial stereotypes and health disparities showcases the enduring impact of biological constructions of race on social perceptions. For instance, the misconception that certain races are more prone to specific diseases without considering social determinants of health perpetuates a form of biological essentialism that has been discredited by science. Yet, these beliefs continue to influence medical research and healthcare delivery, demonstrating the complex ways in which biological and social constructions of race interact and affect lives.[viii]
Acknowledging and examining the ongoing dialogue between biological and social constructions of race reveals the layered complexity of racial categories and the need for an approach that transcends simple binaries. By recognizing how historical and contemporary interactions between these constructions shape our understanding of race, we can better address the challenges of dismantling racial hierarchies and fostering a more inclusive understanding of human diversity.[ix]
Applying the social constructionist viewpoint to race without considering its character as a palimpsest overlooks the layered and cumulative nature of racial concepts, potentially leading to several critical implications. The social constructionist perspective rightly emphasizes that race is not a biological given, but a product of social processes, institutions, and historical contexts. However, failing to account for the palimpsestuous nature of racial constructions—wherein historical, biological, and social layers of meaning are superimposed upon one another—risks simplifying the complexity of racial identities and the persistence of racial inequities.[x]
Why is the palimpsest lens necessary?
One of the primary implications of this oversight is the potential to underestimate the resilience of racial stereotypes and prejudices that are deeply embedded in the fabric of society. By not recognizing that contemporary racial categories and stereotypes are built upon historical foundations that include discredited biological notions of race, efforts to combat racism might not fully address the underlying assumptions that sustain racial disparities. For example, contemporary racial biases in policing, healthcare, and education can be traced back to historical prejudices and stereotypes that have been reinterpreted and sustained within the social fabric, despite changing societal attitudes towards race.[xi]
Moreover, ignoring the palimpsestuous nature of race may lead to an overly optimistic assessment of the potential for change through policy and social reform alone. While such interventions are undoubtedly crucial, their effectiveness may be limited if they do not grapple with the deeper, historically entrenched layers of racial ideology that continue to shape perceptions and outcomes.
For instance, policies aimed at addressing racial disparities in healthcare access and outcomes must contend not only with current socioeconomic factors but also with longstanding mistrust in medical institutions, which is rooted in a history of medical experimentation on racialized groups.[xii]
Additionally, the failure to consider race as a palimpsest might hinder the development of a more nuanced understanding of identity and belonging. The fluidity and multiplicity of racial identities reflect the interplay of various historical, cultural, and social influences. A social constructionist approach that does not account for this complexity may inadvertently reinforce binary or simplistic notions of race, rather than recognizing the diverse and intersecting identities that individuals navigate in their daily lives.[xiii]
Finally, this oversight can impact the discourse around genetic ancestry testing and its implications for racial identity. Without acknowledging the historical layers of racial construction, there is a risk of reifying race as a biological category through the interpretation of genetic ancestry results. This not only perpetuates the fallacy of distinct biological races but also obscures the social and historical forces that shape our understanding of race and identity.[xiv]
While the social constructionist viewpoint offers a critical lens through which to understand race, its full implications cannot be appreciated without considering race's character as a palimpsest. Recognizing the historical, biological, and social layers that contribute to contemporary understandings of race is essential for addressing racial inequalities and fostering a more complex and inclusive view of human diversity.[xv]
Thus, viewing race as a palimpsest provides a powerful lens for analyzing the complexity of racial dynamics in America. It highlights how historical layers of racial thought and practice persist beneath the surface of current discussions, shaping and being shaped by contemporary social, political, and scientific discourses on race. This perspective invites a deeper interrogation of how past and present racial categorizations intersect and inform one another, urging a critical re-examination of the ways in which racial identities and hierarchies are constructed and perpetuated.[xvi]
Reading
[i] Saint-Amour, Paul K. "Tense Future: Modernism, Total War, Encyclopedic Form." Oxford University Press, 2015.
[ii] Kendi, Ibram X. "Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America." Nation Books, 2016.
[iii] Roberts, Dorothy. "Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-First Century." The New Press, 2011.
[iv] Ibid.
[v] Morning, Ann. "The Nature of Race: How Scientists Think and Teach about Human Difference." University of California Press, 2011.
[vi] Nelson, Alondra. "The Social Life of DNA: Race, Reparations, and Reconciliation After the Genome." Beacon Press, 2016.
[vii] Ibid.
[viii] Roberts, Dorothy. "Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-First Century." The New Press, 2011.
[ix] Morning, Ann. "The Nature of Race: How Scientists Think and Teach about Human Difference." University of California Press, 2011.
[x] Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. "Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America." Rowman & Littlefield, 2017.
[xi] Ibid.
[xii] Ibid.
[xiii] Nelson, Alondra. "The Social Life of DNA: Race, Reparations, and Reconciliation After the Genome." Beacon Press, 2016.
[xiv] Roberts, Dorothy. "Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-First Century." The New Press, 2011.
[xv] Morning, Ann. "The Nature of Race: How Scientists Think and Teach about Human Difference." University of California Press, 2011.
[xvi] Kendi, Ibram X. "Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America." Nation Books, 2016.
Next: Applying the palimpsest
Comments