TPPM Watts: (19) The little man's you

[Paul Nightingale]

"The little man bugs these kids more than The Man ever bugged their
parents. [...] A Watts kid knows more of what goes on inside white heads
than possibly whites do themselves."

"The Man" is defined in terms of "the power structure"; whereas "the
little man" is "your average white L.A. taxpayer". This "little man" is
the one afraid of black kids, whom he has labelled "'Bad credit
risk'--or 'Poor learner,' or 'Sexual threat', or 'Welfare chisler'" etc.
The black kid's knowledge of "what goes on inside white heads", even
when they don't know "the requirements" of "white personnel men", is a
good illustration of the text's respect for the intersection of 'I' and
'Me'.

Furthermore, "what after all has he done? Mild, respectable, possibly
smiling, he has called you no names, shown no weapons. Only told you
perhaps the job was filled, the house rented."

Possibly the NY reader is resistant here to being yoked to the narrative
by this "you". The earlier "you" confronted by the gun-toting cop
offered the reader some kind of vicarious thrill, perhaps, so distant
was this image from their own experience (says he, speculating wildly
about the lifestyles of middle-class, white NYers). The image, based on
the Deadwyler incident and others, yoked black Watts resident and white
cop; the white reader might empathise, but does this empathy challenge
their status as tourist?

Confronted by "the little man" and his "smiling" racism, however, the
latter "you" has a slightly different function, I would argue.

The "you" is still 'the one to whom this happens'; the reader is still
drawn in by 'this would happen to you, were you there'. But the question
posed ("what after all has he done?") distances this (somewhat low-key)
image from the rather more potent (here, newsworthy) image of assault.
This kind of adverse judgement, based on nothing more substantial than a
personal dislike, the wrong kind of impression, is both a fate that
could, indeed, happen to anyone (and therefore the NYer doesn't have to
imagine being 'there', which in turn would allow him the comfort of
knowing he isn't actually 'there') and also the kind of behaviour any
law-abiding citizen might be guilty of. The fact that it might happen
more frequently when the applicant/victim is black is, at this point,
not the issue.