Tag: reviews

Image:  Sterling A. Brown  Academy of American Poets

Sterling A. Brown’s “Southern Cop”

This commentary on Sterling A. Brown’s “Southern Cop” offers an alternative reading to the sycophantic interpretation given by postmodernists who subscribe to the prevailing ideology of victimhood.  The curse of identity politics soft censors such stances; thus they remain rare.

Introduction with Text of “Southern Cop”

While the speaker in Sterling Brown’s “Southern Cop” seems to be exposing and rebuking racism, he actually engages in racism himself. This widely anthologized poem features the following scene: A rookie cop named Ty Kendricks has shot a man who was running out of an alley. 

The poem does not report the reason that the man was running nor the reason that the police officer happened to be at the scene.  However, the report clearly states that the man’s reason for running was not because of any guilt on his part. It is useful to keep in mind that the caveat stating that one is innocent until proven guilty applies to all citizens—even those who are running.

The speaker of the poem purports to represent the outraged citizenry, whose emotional reaction is so powerful that the speaker must turn to verbal irony in order to convey that outrage. The outraged speaker assumes that his audience is as offended as he is and thus will agree with his statements on all levels. 

But the speaker also assumes that a racist audience will take him literally, even though brushing away the irony would demonstrate the utter bankruptcy of his intentionally ludicrous exhortations. The ideas that because Ty Kendricks was a rookie in the process of proving himself and that the citizenry should decorate him for shooting an innocent man cannot be taken literally.

The ideas of proving manhood and decorating a cop for shooting an innocent man are clearly absurd. The ideas are absolutely preposterous, yet the speaker does not suggest the course of action society should take in dealing with Ty Kendricks, the rookie cop, who likely made a mistake, without consideration of the race of the victim. 

What does this rookie cop deserve? Who is to decide? An angry, disorderly mob? The speaker’s emotion becomes magnified with each stanza from the first line of the first stanza that would appear not to be ironic at all but quite literal to the first line of the last stanza that is undoubtedly filled with irony. 

About half-way through the poem the irony becomes obvious. And the speaker then sets center stage his ironic barbs in his effusion.

Southern Cop

Let us forgive Ty Kendricks.
The place was Darktown. He was young.
His nerves were jittery. The day was hot.
The Negro ran out of the alley.
And so Ty shot.

Let us understand Ty Kendricks.
The Negro must have been dangerous.
Because he ran;
And here was a rookie with a chance
To prove himself a man.

Let us condone Ty Kendricks
If we cannot decorate.
When he found what the Negro was running for,
It was too late;
And all we can say for the Negro is
It was unfortunate.

Let us pity Ty Kendricks.
He has been through enough,
Standing there, his big gun smoking,
Rabbit-scared, alone,
Having to hear the wenches wail
And the dying Negro moan.

Commentary on “Southern Cop”

This irony-filled drama portrays a bundle of rage and racism. The attitude of the speaker weighs in at least as heavily as the actual event that the speaker is decrying.

Stanza 1:  Forgiveness Is Good

Let us forgive Ty Kendricks.
The place was Darktown. He was young.
His nerves were jittery. The day was hot.
The Negro ran out of the alley.
And so Ty shot

The first stanza opens with the speaker seemingly quite controlled as he suggests that he and his milieu “forgive” the young cop named Ty Kendricks. The invocation of the Christian value of forgiveness offers no clue that the speaker would not, in fact, forgive this rookie cop. Of course, the biblical injunction demands that  trespassers be forgiven.

However, in this particular scenario, what is the speaker suggesting be forgiven? He is urging forgiveness of Ty Kendricks the rookie cop who shot an man because he was running out of an alley.  The speaker does not reveal the reason that the man was running, nor what caused the cop to shoot; the speaker is simply asking that the rookie be forgiven. 

Stanza 2:  Understanding Is Also a Good Thing

Let us understand Ty Kendricks.
The Negro must have been dangerous.
Because he ran;
And here was a rookie with a chance
To prove himself a man.

Next, the speaker asks that he and his listeners “understand” the rookie cop. Of course, they should try to understand both the perpetrators of crime and the enforcers of law. Otherwise, justice cannot prevail without understanding. 

But then the speakers’s audience is apprised of what they are being commanded to forgive and to understand: the man was surely dangerous/guilty because he was running.  Not only that, the rookie Ty Kendricks now has the opportunity to show himself to be a man.

Because running does not equal guilt, and the notion of proving manhood by shooting someone is ludicrous, it now becomes clear that the speaker is engaging in verbal irony to portray his true message.  This speaker does not, in fact, want his audience to forgive nor understand Ty Kendricks, the rookie cop.

What does the speaker hope to accomplish with his use of irony? He intends to brand Ty Kendricks a racist and elicit sympathy for the man shot by this cop. Of course, the man who was shot deserves sympathy, but the speaker offers no evidence that Ty Kendricks was a racist cop.  

That fact that Kendricks shot a man running out of an ally does not equal racism, despite the fact that the running man was black. All things being equal, Ty Kendricks would likely have shot any man of any race in this situation.

Stanza 3:  Condoning the Killing of an Innocent Man

Let us condone Ty Kendricks
If we cannot decorate.
When he found what the Negro was running for,
It was too late;
And all we can say for the Negro is
It was unfortunate.

Condoning this apparently despicable act of a rookie cop shooting an innocent victim becomes a near surreal request.  But because the speaker is engaging in irony, he does not intend his listeners to “condone” but instead to “condemn” the rookie cop.

The cop’s reaction of shooting the running man became just another “unfortunate” event by the time the cop learned the reason for the running.  But what is the efficacy of forgiving, condoning, and decorating a cop for a bad shoot? 

The ironic use of the terms means that the speaker is in reality suggesting that his listeners continue to hold a grudge and to condemn cops, even those who might have mistakenly shot someone. The intensity of this verbal irony may possibly encourage speculation that the speaker is even attempting to instigate rioting, burning buildings, and killing other cops.

Stanza 4:  Pity for All Involved

Let us pity Ty Kendricks.
He has been through enough,
Standing there, his big gun smoking,
Rabbit-scared, alone,
Having to hear the wenches wail
And the dying Negro moan.

Finally, the speaker appears to return to some semblance of humanity, asking that he and his listeners “pity” this poor rookie cop.  Of course, the cop deserves pity. Or more accurately, he deserves sympathy and support. Taking the life of a fellow human being causes emotional damage—even to the most well-adjusted veteran law enforcement officer.

And taking a human life constitutes a serious, deeply spiritual offense against Creation and the Creator, even though that Creator has arranged Creation to require such an offense at times. Even man’s law allows for self-defense.

But notice that the speaker is still in his own racist venue, as he applies his final acerbic barb of irony: he does not, in fact, want his audience to pity that rookie cop. Instead, he wants his readers to pity only the family of the deceased man: they stood there crying and moaning the loss of their loved one. 

The speaker asks us to pity the rookie only because that rookie has to listen to that crying and moaning.  By stating ironically that the pity should apply to Ty Kendricks and contrasting his situation with that of the deceased man and his family, the speaker is implying that any loss suffered by the cop remains negligible.

But suffering cannot be compared and contrasted especially in such a callous way. There is no way of calculating and weighing the suffering on either side: it’s a lose-lose situation.

Ultimately, there is no pity for Kendricks from this speaker and his ilk—only a hollow attempt to portray the cop as a criminal, not simply a human being who has made a mistake.

The Issue of Racism in the Poem

A cursory reading of Sterling A. Brown’s “Southern Cop” may result in the assumption of the stereotypical view that cops shoot young black men because they are black.  An example of such a reading includes the following:

Sterling A. Brown’s poem “Southern Cop” published in 1936 is an extremely powerful piece of poetry in American history because it cuts at the heart of racism in America. Unfortunately, many of the points Brown makes are still relevant today. In fact, this poem could have been written after any number of recent events, Ferguson perhaps being the most well known, and it would be as pertenant (sic) as ever. [1]

The claim that this poem parallels the situation in “Ferguson” is patently false.  The shooting in the poem “Southern Cop” and the shooting in Ferguson have nothing in common.  In the “Ferguson” shooting, the race of the cop who shot and the race of the victim are known.  In “Southern Cop,” the race of the cop can only be assumed—and then only prejudicially.

The “Hands up, don’t shoot!” claim, following the shooting of black teenager Michael Brown by white cop Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014, has been debunked repeatedly; yet its basic impetus has refused to be abated [2] [3] [4] [5].   In fact, the only racism discoverable in the poem”Southern Cop” comes from the speaker, who identifies the victim as a “Negro” but does not ever mention the race of the cop who shot the “Negro.”  

Because the stereotype of white racist cops, especially southern cops, is so ingrained in the culture, the speaker feels no need to identify the race of Ty Kendricks, who could as likely have been of any race. But because of the assumption that the cop is white, the speaker demonstrates his own racism by his utter contempt; he is deliberately attempting to pit the race of the shooting victim against the race of the shooter. 

The speaker demonstrates sympathy only for the “Negro” while he attempts to promote hatred and contempt for the cop. 

Sources

[1]  WESSWIDEREK.  “Southern Cop.” ENGL 213: Modernist Lit & Culture.  November 14, 2016.

[2]  Noah Rothman.  “‘Hands up, Don’t Shoot’: The Myth That Refuses to Fade.”  Hotair.  December 03, 2014.

[3]  Andrew C. Mccarthy. “Progressive Mythography.”  National Review.  November 29, 2014.

[4]  Nick Gass.  “‘Hands up, Don’t Shoot’ Ranked One of Biggest ‘Pinocchios’ of 2015.”  Politico.  December 14, 2015.

[5]  William A. Jacobson.  “Reminder: “Hands up, Don’t Shoot” Is a Fabricated Narrative from the Michael Brown Case.”    LI: Legal Insurrection.  June 4, 2020.

Note on Usage

Before the late 1980s in the United States, the terms “Negro,” “colored,” and “black” were accepted widely in American English parlance. 

While the term “Negro” had started to lose it popularity in the 1960s, it wasn’t until 1988 that the Reverend Jesse Jackson began insisting that Americans adopt the phrase “African American.”  The earlier more accurate terms were the custom at the time that Sterling A. Brown was writing.

Suggestion for Students Writing Papers on Sterling A. Brown’s “Southern Cop” and Other Sensitive Issues

The following advice applies to students attending most American colleges and universities.  Exceptions are Hillsdale College and a few others, where the First Amendment and other constitutional protections are still operative.

The current prevailing societal emphasis on identity and the politics of racial victimhood insures that my critical stance in this commentary is deemed unacceptable and will be at least soft censored, if not completely canceled.

So if you take such a stance in your classes, you are likely to be graded down or even censored—at best.  At worst, you may be labeled racist, even expelled.   

Therefore, please consider your options when writing on sensitive subjects like this one.  Know your professors’ biases and use caution in crossing them.

However, the best outcome is that you are in position to take legal action against those professors who violate your constitutional rights. With such endeavors, I wish you all the best success.