Originally Posted by
canklecat
I wouldn't read too much into the use of physical descriptions by some writers. It's a trap that many journalists fall into when trying to enliven a story. I did it as a newspaper reporter in the 1980s. We'd try to get the reader into the story by describing physical appearances, or manners of speaking. Occasionally a copy editor would discuss some rewrites with me to avoid descriptions of appearances or communication styles that could be interpreted as racist or stereotyping. By the 1980s most newspapers were avoiding the use of *sic* to denote literal transcriptions of oral statements that departed from conventional grammar and syntax. Instead we paraphrased and reconfigured statements to be conventionally correct in grammar and syntax, rather than using direct quotes. This often made Texas politicians sound more articulate than they really were.
I understand he wants to paint a picture and I really don't mind a little stereotyping. But this just can't be what he has observed, and together with the emphasis on Delft's medieval origin it's rather a picture of a quaint ethnic microcosmos than that of a very modern multicultural international little city. Is it an article about an example of modern urban life in a globalized world, or more like an National Geographic journalist discovering an isolated tribe with a funny cycling habit? It's actually quite a good article because it tells how it works and what makes it work other than just infrastructure, but then actively disconnects it from it's readers' environment. If he wanted to make the point 'we can have this too' he could have emphasized the thousands of foreigners (university mainly) who join in (not always seamlessly), no to mention the many thousands more with an immigration background and the fact that the native Dutch aren't that blond to begin with. So my question wasn't really about white supremacy or the writer's fascination with blond hair and sharp cheekbones (which is fine as a personal matter), but whether it's an article advocating cycling or not. That's why I question the angle.
Here's an advocacy video about Delft. Count the blonds.
If you dig around the internets there's a story about musician Brian Eno from 1974, written by Chrissie Hynde before she formed The Pretenders. In it Hynde describes a woman who apparently worked for Eno as a "negress." Even at the time that term would have been considered inappropriate by most publications. The only time I've seen that word used since was in literal translations of some Cajun and Zydeco songs, with lyrics written decades before.
Isn't this also a matter of 'two nations divided by a common language', as Hynde is British too? It's often hard to keep up with America's sense of what is inappropriate, which can be problematic because of Americans' tendency to consider American issues universal issues. Even today a lot of Europeans are surprised they're not supposed to use MLK's terminology anymore.
Nowadays most journalists are taught to avoid these traps. But the stories often leave the subjects as cyphers, blanks, stick figures.
I understand, and it's hard to go wrong with blond. It's not that I take offence other than it's just not reflecting reality. But if there are that many traps created that you can't have colourful descriptions, you can wonder whether there's a desire to get people trapped.