The Rejection and Acceptance of Black America in The Boondocks
A brief paper and presentation from a rhetoric course from spring 2008 has developed into a provocative collaborative project between Grant Gussman ’09, Daniel King ’10, and Professor David Timmerman. Seeing potential in the text, the provocative adult swim cartoon The Boondocks (based on the comic strip of the same name), and the initial work of the students, David Timmerman offered to mentor Grant and Daniel in a four week internship last summer. During the course of their research, which was supported by the Undergraduate Research Celebration Committee (which is funded by the Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts), the scholars spent many hours watching every episode from the first two seasons of the program and analyzing themes, characters, and visual elements from the show. They sought to find entry points into the way in which the show uses humor and race to address important societal issues and were guided by a difficult question: does The Boondocks provide a new space for dialogue about race?
While the four week summer internship was productive, it was not enough to complete a project of this scope and complexity. And after the four weeks they each initially went their own way—Grant visiting Spain at the generosity of the Rudolph Fund, Daniel engaging in an off campus psychology internship before spending his fall semester abroad, and David Timmerman engaging two other students in collaborative research projects that were supported by Know Indiana. Despite these seeming obstacles—and without the incentive of additional grades or additional internship monies—the project has continued to develop this semester. The students continued working on the project while David Timmerman worked with them to assemble the ideas into a form fitting for publication in a rhetoric journal. Grant and Daniel presented a revised version of their project at the Student Research Celebration in January and on March 2 the three of them combined to present the next iteration, an essay that is now approaching 12,000 words, to a room full of Wabash students and professors in the context of a Humanities Colloquium. On the one hand this is a non-traditional project: a collaborative humanities project, a rhetorical analysis authored by a Wabash professor and two students, outside of class. On the other hand, the project represents the best of Wabash and the most valuable aspects of our tradition: direct student-faculty engagement over a complex text; three engaged researchers collaboratively considering the social implications of contemporary depictions of race and humor. What could be more influential on students’ educational experiences than that?
The presentation itself was a great success. After an introduction by Timmerman, each participant presented a segment of analysis that showed how The Boondocks makes meaning. Gussman discussed how the visual characteristics in the show, including the use of anime, lead an audience to either accept or reject characters. For instance, the scholars argue that the visual elements used to portray the character Huey encourage the acceptance of his views while visual elements used to portray the character Uncle Ruckus lead the audience to reject what he represents. In a similar fashion, King illustrated how music is also used to signal the desire for comedic acceptance or rejection. Uncle Ruckus is rejected through the application of a harsh trombone that undermines the most objectionable of his verbal messages while the philosophical reflections from Huey that are designed to explain the meaning of the message are positively accentuated with an elegant, graceful jazz piano. Finally, in the last section, which is still in development, Timmerman examined the meaning of the dialogue delivered by Ruckus, reflecting on the use of satire and the grotesque as a transitional device that leads the audience between the possibilities of acceptance and rejection. Following the presentation the authors welcomed enthusiastic questions and discussion. Audience members at once corroborated and challenged the reading while suggesting additional avenues of development for the authors to consider as they finalize their essay for submission to a journal.