When journalists and cultural critics discussed arrest of Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. for disorderly conduct July 2009, a particular phrase appeared with regularity Gates was arrested, we heard time and again, in home. Most readers will remember that Gates was arrested after an argument with Cambridge, Massachusetts, police, who came to investigate a report that two men were attempting to force open front door of a an upper-middle-class neighborhood near Harvard campus. We now know that Gates, just offa transcontinental flight, was actually trying to wrest open jammed front door, with help of driver. Critics, of course, typically invoked Gates s occupancy of own home order to underline outrageousness of arrest. Mark Anthony Neal (2009), for instance, points out, Few would begrudge Professor Gates s rage ... response to questioning of right to be home. President Obama himself declared that police had acted stupidly arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were their home (Seelye 2009). And Stanley Fish (2009), writing New York Times, alludes to rights and privileges that ownership is supposed to confer, suggesting that perceived implausibility of an African American man occupying a particular kind of - large, well-appointed, and a prestigious neighborhood - played a large part unfolding of encounter. He recalls disbelief that attended Gates s tenure at Duke, where, Fish tells us, Gates purchased and began to renovate grandest town. In Durham, Gates was frequently taken for a service worker at home; the message was unmistakable: What was a black man doing a place like this? Critics, then, legitimately foreground skepticism that greets an African American man such a neighborhood. At same time, they take for granted right to all of security, privacy, and respect that possession of such a is supposed to guarantee. The density of detail which story of Gates s encounter with Sergeant Crowley was embedded - emphasis press coverage on texture and tenor of Cambridge neighborhood and PBS documentary on which Gates had been working China - kept Gates s class privilege visible to public from start. A number of critics pointed out that Gates s arrest, while shocking and anomalous when it happens to a distinguished Harvard professor - one who counts New York Times columnists and even president of United States as friends - are of course routine events for African Americans, especially men, throughout United States. As Mark Anthony Neal (2009) writes, Our concerns should reflect regularity of such abuse, not just selective outrage that befits those of more privilege. Michael Eric Dyson similarly suggests that Gates was guilty of HWB, Housing While Black, and contends that if a famous and affluent black man can be accosted, arrested, and humiliated, then all black folk can reasonably expect same treatment (2009; emphasis added). What went uninterrogated and undisputed rush of critical commentary that followed arrest was presumption of latitude and deference - safety from outside intervention and general hassle - that should attend a homeowner when he is within parameters of his home. Certainly, as Neal and Dyson attest, this is a profoundly classed notion, attaching to middleclass or wealthy homeowner a way that it does not to working-class or poor inhabitant of a rented or government-subsidized domestic space. I would argue as well that remarkably, even hyperbolically, male tableau that followed fallout from arrest - when President Barack Obama invited both Gates and Sergeant Crowley to have a beer at White House with him and vice president Joe Biden - did nothing to dispel sense that notions of sanctity and security within continue to have a male face. …
Read full abstract