By Susan Merrell
It was a year ago, almost to the day that I first travelled to the United States. It was President’s Day weekend (third Monday in February) when the plane landed in Los Angeles. It was the first Presidents’ Day where the White House incumbent was black. So, did the election of Barack Obama to the most powerful position in the country, if not the world, signify that racial prejudice and the white superiority complex was a thing of the past in America? Did it hell.
Not a cloud was in the sky the Saturday morning we left Los Angeles for San Francisco. From the warmth of our train carriage you could be forgiven for thinking it was summer. It wasn’t. The temperature was hovering around freezing. The weather in stark contrast to what it appeared to be – as, we found, were so many other things here.
It had taken only a few hours on US soil to ascertain certain vital things. Like ‘regular’ coffee is undrinkable. If you really want to drink the coffee rather than just use the cup for warming your hands, ask for ‘espresso’. Neither is there such a thing as a ‘small’ size. Small equates to large and the sheer volume of liquid in a ‘large’ could break the drought in country Victoria.
Having only one night in LA, the ‘loved one’ and I spent it at the theatre. Playing was a musical comedy, Minskys at the Ahmanson Theatre in downtown Los Angeles – just a pleasant stroll from our hotel. Pre-theatre, we’d dined at a charming French Bistro nearby.
In the theatre foyer during interval, we amused ourselves people watching. Americans speak English, but not as we know it.
“Where yer headed?” for instance, was a question that would stump my husband time and time again.
“He wants to know where you’re going,” I’d translate.
But, be that as it may, things in LA had a certain air of familiarity grace of our televisions and movie screens. And some of those television characters were right there in that foyer. I swear, if I’d only heard her voice and not seen her face to convince me otherwise, I could easily have believed that the actress who played Robert’s mother-in-law in Everybody Loves Raymond was in that theatre foyer. You know the one – she has a high-pitched, little girl’s voice. Her voice so exaggerated that you’d think nobody could really speak like that. Wrong.
There was something disconcerting about this theatre audience that we couldn’t immediately quite put our finger on. Ditto the congenial crowd at the bistro. In a ‘light bulb’ moment it came to us. Almost everyone was white. (The exception was a couple of Rastafarians sitting in front of us at the theatre.) Where were all the dark-skinned Americans?
It’s not surprising that we, as Australians, took so long to become aware of their absence as, grace of the now defunct ‘White Australia Policy’, (Australia’s very own substantial contribution to racial discrimination) Australia’s contingent of dark skinned people, especially African, is still not large. There’s no expectation that we will encounter many in our everyday lives.
But African/Americans make up 13.5% of the population of the US and that night in Los Angeles, African-Americans were grossly under-represented in the few places we’d been: a four-star hotel, an upmarket French Bistro and the theatre.
The next day, in the early hours of Saturday morning, cocooned in our warm, comfortable taxi en route to Union Station we found the missing Americans.
The taxi meter had not clicked over very far when mean streets replaced the congenial boulevards of downtown LA. They were bustling with humanity unlike the still empty weekend streets surrounding our hotel. Clearly homeless, these people were wrapped in blankets against the cold. It seems when you’re homeless and it’s freezing sleeping late is not that desirable.
And it was very cold. Warm breath turned white when it made contact with the icy LA morning. People blew this warmth onto their hands to thaw out rigid fingers. They were queuing. I don’t know why. Perhaps for food, perhaps for work. There were few Caucasians. Poverty and skin colour seemed to be bedfellows in downtown Los Angeles.
To give further credence to this developing theory, in our first class cabin on board the train to San Francisco all were Caucasian.
Notwithstanding this, the people with whom we struck up a conversation were nice, decent, friendly people…except…when we started to talk politics their necks grew increasingly red.
They had an evangelical approach to democracy. Wishing to impart their beliefs worldwide they favoured doing so whether the recipients of their largesse wanted it or no. It was their justification in advocating the right – nay the duty – of America to intercede in global skirmishes and, if necessary, to invade other sovereign nations. “It’s for their own good, you know.”
Opinions were resolute even after I’d identified myself as an Australian journalist and asked if I could record the conversation and quote it in future articles. They were delighted to cooperate and it wasn’t too long into the conversation that I realised their ease in expressing their prejudice had a lot to do with the colour of my skin. They’d assumed because I was white I was simpatico.
The scenario was akin to the episode in Sacha Baron-Cohen’s Borat movie where a bunch of young American men’s reactionary views escalate into something grotesque with the encouragement of Borat and alcohol. I wasn’t encouraging them, in fact I struggled to remain neutral, to rein in my often shocked reaction in order to let their voices through.
Only one of my co-travellers suspected that I might in the future betray them in print.
“You’re going home to tell of these cock-sure Americans. I bet,” he said to me as he left the club carriage. Bingo!

Hi Susan, nice piece of work… your description of modern Americans (at least, of the majority of the ones you apparently spoke with) fits my description of a ‘Chosen One’ complex which stems from their Christian fundamentalist ideology…
Godlike, they assume the right to invade other sovereign countries and then tell them it is ‘for their own good’… Marvellous, is it not, how they can be so blind to their own barbarism?
🙂
LikeLike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyNfunqpSxc&feature=related
Jody Miller from 1965. The original and still the best.
Tell me Susan, that pleasant, happy looking man up there; has he ever played the non-conformist card, was his hair ever a bit too long, his ideas and attitudes a bit off kilter, was he, is he, “just a little bit different?
LikeLike
Pleasant and happy; a person like that, IS already different 😉
LikeLike
Nah.
LikeLike
Good story, Susan,
They say, that if you want to avoid people getting red necks in the US, one has to go to New York. It is a different country there, they say!
Most people that I know that have been there are surprised at the level of abject poverty. Forty or was it sixty million without health care? Yet, a local election was lost because of the audacity of introducing health care reform. The voters related it to ‘socialism’.
LikeLike
Hi Voice,
You know, I didn’t ‘chat’ to any black Americans. There wasn’t an occasion to do so. I don’t actively seek out people with whom to converse when I’m on holidays but am happy to do so if they’re there – such as on the long-distance train. The black Americans just weren’t where I was.
As for “grace of” I guess it is quite an old-fashioned expression synonymous with ‘thanks to’. I was using the term ironically.
I think it’s widely used in French, isn’t it? I certainly used it widely when I was studying French.
And Helvi,
As for the Americans polishing their guns – well. Did you read my story on UL called ‘Another Country’?
Yo yourself HOO.
LikeLike
Yes Susan, it was a pointed question. The thing is, stereotypes are tricky, and noticing only what you are expecting to see is remarkably common. Dare I say particularly common among visitors breezing through a country and then making pronouncements about it? Or would that be another stereotype?
I’m not going to say anything more because you are more than capable of seeing some of the ironies without me shoving them down your throat.
My guess about why they were so comfortable expressing their view about American intervention for a country’s own good is that they misguidedly but honestly believe it to be not only their right but their responsibility, and that had you been any other colour their answer would have been the same. Furthermore, many black Americans would agree. A complicating factor is that they are not totally incorrect. The intervention question is a continuum, and at the other end is no intervention at all.
However the the question about “grace of” was not a pointed question. I’m always interested in regional language variations and I bet you one of your mother’s trifles that it is a Welsh thing. (Now I am desperately hoping that it is only a personal idiosyncrasy.)
LikeLike
Trouble with that theory Voice, is that the reason I was so shocked is that I didn’t expect to encounter such views – not these days – and especially not openly expressed in such a forum. But you know, you’re right about the Americans I spoke to considering intervention to be their responsibility. In their defence, I don’t think their attitude was at all malicious – just a misguided (in my opinion) messianic zeal. And I agree that the decision of when to intervene and how much intervention is a vexed question for them (and also for the countries that are on the receiving end)
However, on the other hand my new acquaintances were particularly malicious about those they considered to be in the American ‘underclasses’ including “them goddamn Mexicans” who would bankrupt the nation expecting health care.
As for my mother’s trifle, if I find out you’re right about ‘grace of’ I will despatch one to you immediately. It has many uses – just don’t eat it. You’ve been warned!
LikeLike
Love your stories, Susan. I ‘pray’ and hope that some of those trigger happy Caucasians are not polishing their guns; some of them must absolutely hate having a black president.
LikeLike
Susan, what did the blacks say about American military intervention overseas when you were chatting to them?
LikeLike
I reckon they said shoot first ask questions later
LikeLike
Is “grace of” grace of the Welsh background? I’ve never heard it used quite that way before.
LikeLike
The use of the expression goes all the way back to John Bradford, sometimes referred to as “Holy Bradford”, in the early 16thC who formalised the notion that all of us, whether for good or bad, do all that we do as a consequence of the the “grace of God”.
It was him that first uttered the line, “There but for the Grace of God goes John Bradford”. Bradford was a reformer and was later burned at the stake as a heretic by Bloody Mary as she tried to turn back the clock on an increasingly comfortable protestantism in England. Cranmer kept him company in the tower.
Bradfords writings and sermons became meat and potatoes for non conformist religious and where non conformism led to the establishment of different interpretations of the state based “Anglicanism” the expressions and constructions of his writings become more commonplace. Wales being a Methodist stronghold would exhibit in the speech of its denizens such historical verbal non conformity.
Was your Mum a Methodist Susan?
LikeLike
Sounds like you’ll be needing my address Susan. Here it is:
653 Wynnum Road
Morningside Qld 4170
Don’t forget to include a return address for the thank you note.
LikeLike
Of course she was Warrigal. As you said, Wales was a stronghold of Calvinism. It was compulsory. Although there were a few different non-conformist strains apparent. My favourites were the evangelicals who used to speak in tongues. My father used to call them the ‘Oh be Joyfuls’.
Don’t tell me this is giving credence to Voice’s theory. She’d do anything for my Mum’s trifle!
LikeLike
There’s an old saying in the law, usually rendered in Latin as “de minimis non curat lex”, which for brevity and clarity’s sake I will render in English as “The Law does not concern itself with trifles.”
First we must establish whether or not a contract existed and the true nature of that contract. Was consideration paid or agreed to be paid upon performance? Under what circumstances could it be said that Vox had proven her point and the trifle actually be owing. What if any determining role does Susan’s Mum play as the creator of said trifle. Look I could go on for some time. It’s a vexed question this one and I don’t really feel like weighing in.
If you want my expert witness opinion, I would have to say that it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to support a causal link between Holy Bradford’s sermons and Susan’s Mum’s locutions and constructions, trifles notwithstanding. That having been said there is a high statistical probability that the expression, having entered into common usage in certain geographically defined regions for well established historico-politico-literary reasons, is now just part of vernacular speech, its origins and provenance lost long ago.
Phew! That’ll be my story and I’ll be sticking to that.
LikeLike
Ave! Warrigal. Vestri discipulus te salutant.
LikeLike
Difficile est tenere quae acceperis nisi exerceas, Vox.
LikeLike
“The law does not concern itself with trifles…” Wonderful stuff Warrigal. You know what? I think I may have a promising career as a trifle-theif!
😉
LikeLike
yo
LikeLike