|
Short Stories To Read ·
Clothes ·
On One
Accord |
The Dead Bird Syndrome By Myrna Roberts One spring morning I
rose two hours earlier than normal and decided to get a head start at
work. I vigorously dressed in a
lightweight linen suit with matching heels and headed for the office. I was so happy! My computer graphics company had recently moved to a new
location that I believed was in an affluent area of town and I felt particularly
blessed to be positioned for prosperity in this way. I parked my car and practically skipped
along as I wondered simple things. I was considering a new
marketing strategy for my new location.
I began to outline a rather obtuse strategy whereby I would pretend to
be an employee of the company rather than the owner because I didn’t want to
upset the delicate socio-demographical environment already in place. I believed that as an African American
female, my company may not be well received in a vicinity where European
American males were prominent. Well received or not,
all was right with the world at this particular point and I felt as though I
could conquer the world. I hummed
along as I approached the storefront, reached into my purse to get my new
keychain out. At the very moment that
I brought the keys out, I approached the door and there, laying on the ground
directly in front of the door was one of the most horrible sights I had every
seen. Petrified, I shrieked my alarm
and came to a complete halt. My heart
leapt in my chest as I realized, yes, it was what I thought it was. . . A dead bird lay at my feet with a broken
neck. Fear quickly mixed with
anger as I dashed to my car, tore out of the parking lot and sped home. I lived a short distance away so within
minutes I pulled into my driveway, hit the garage door opener and jumped out
of the car, leaving the motor running.
I ran into the condo and took the stairs two at a time. When I reached my bedroom I violently
shook my husband awake and cried, “Emmett, wake up! Those white people killed a bird and put in front of my office
door!” Emmett jumped straight
to his feet with concern. He soothed
my tears and admonished me to calm down.
Emmett dressed quickly.
Straight away we got into the car and hurriedly went back to the
office. As soon as we reached the
parking lot and Emmett saw the angle at which the sun hit the huge storefront
windows. Before we even got out of
the car to approach the building, at the very instant that he threw the car
into park, Emmett glared at me in disgust and yelled, “Girl! Have you lost
your damn mind? That bird flew into
that window and broke his neck.”
Immediately I whined a perfunctory, “No it didn’t,” that didn’t even
sound true to my own ears. We approached
the curb together and he was still fussing.
At that moment we were reduced to our least common denominator. In the past Emmett and I had quarreled
about all kinds of issues but at this moment we were “fussin’” on
unchartered territory because all truth had changed. We weren’t husband and wife debating
mortal issues of life. We weren’t the
preacher and wife contemplating biblical foundation. We weren’t even CFO and CEO discussing
company methodology. Neither were we
two professional adults arguing over abstract linear theory. We were the children of an enslaved people
arguing over the systemic world order; little people, debating universal
change, and we were honor bound to make humankind different from the
experience. Emmett had slipped out of
American Standard English and continued in the familiar ebonic dialect passed
down from generation to generation of the enslaved people to their almost
middle-class children. “You is ‘bout ta start ah race riot out hur an’ da’
bird hit da’ wall in mid flight.”
With each word I got a little smaller. I was overwhelmed with the
gravity of my mistake. “Whur is da
bird gurl?” he growled. I was forced to admit
that the groundskeeper had already picked up the mess. At that point the whole world stopped and
dared me to get off. I was
experiencing what is known as cognitive dissonance. (Garrison, 1997). The word cognitive implies working
thought process and dissonance meaning conflict (Nichols, 1996.) Together the phrase establishes
conflicting information in a person’s thinking process, a conflict which can
not resolved without change. I recalled how good “them
wiit peoples” had been to me. How
they helped me get into the lease, get commercial insurance, and get
utilities and alarms systems turned on.
Those “wiit peoples” had helped my company move from a mom and
pop country store to a world-class computer graphic center over night. But for some reason I believed the worse
in the business community. My
attitude showed tendencies of a negative self-fulfilling prophecy. I had predesignated unacceptance by my new
peers and was in the process of scheming against them when I saw the bird. Time stood still and God
gave me a chance to ponder my stupidity.
At that very moment I was forced to become a new person. I had to examine my motives under a
virtual magnifying glass, but first my mind jumped to the grave realizations
that: 1) I was potentially capable of starting racial unrest because as a
employer and business owner my position in the African American community
granted me capacity to influence groups of people; and 2) as an employer I
had workers at my disposal who pretty much did as I directed (i.e., they
might carry a picket sign not only because they were on-the-clock but also
because I might have coerced them into conformity or convinced them that it
was “the right thing to do”. ) I pondered my
error for a long time. That laborious
second became a minute, then an hour, a day, a month, a year. In my mind that simple little sparrow
became the metaphoric embodiment of the millions of cruel jokes that fate
(manifest destiny) had played on the whole United States. His innocent death coupled with my
irrational accusation of malicious intent represented 400 years of atrocious
misinterpretations similar to the Texas Troubles of 1860 (Red River Authority
of Texas, 2004; Reynolds, 1990) and the Rosewood incident of 1923 (D’Orso,
1996) and millions of other examples of hurt and shame directed toward
blatant discrimination against an entire people for one groups delusions of
grandeur. That situation grew into
what I now call the “Dead Bird Syndrome” (DBS.) DBS is what I call it when someone irrationally reacts
strongly to something that could be a figment of the imagination. But I had to ask
myself the hard question, ‘was I the one living in a delusion?’ Initially, I criticize myself severely and
set out to make positive changes in my own mind and in the structure of my
company to assure that I cleaned up any poisonous attitudes I had leaked into
the organization. I began to
recognize and improve attitudes that helped me take control and then shape my
company. The very first decisions
were to introduce myself to the neighboring business owners, treat them with
honor and respect, and immediately offer them some sort of preferential
treatment. I used this sincere greeting as a way of informally surveying the
racial attitudes of potential customers around me. Secondly, I had
to admit that there were historical reasons for my anxiety – events that I
could do nothing about. I could only
affect my piece of the cultural fixation.
I had to find the healthy balance (i.e., recognize reality but
creating my own destiny and the destiny of my company). I counted myself as progressively
pragmatic. My family and personal
values dictated that all people be assessed on their own merit; however, my
racial and ethnic value system were quite different – I was trained to
distrust European Americans, especially where business was concerned, and to
believe they would always discriminate unfairly against me. I had to admit
that while I was reacting to my own thought process, those thoughts were not
my own ideas. If my company was
going to survive, I was going to have to dump all the baggage I carried, like
cleaning a closet. Sometimes you take
everything out of the closet, only to put most of the items back in. I had to examine everything, dust it off
and then determine if I could wear it. To that end, my
next decision was to hire a diverse sales staff. That worked out well because each salesperson had his/her own
niche, none of which measure out the way I figured. I thought blacks would sell well to blacks and white sell well
to whites, etc. It turned out that my
African American male, whose hobby was cars, sold well to people in the car
business, no matter what racial or ethnic background. I personally sold well to Asians of
Persian descent (who knew?).
The white female was able to sell tremendously in the black community.
The trend seemed to be more along the lines of interests and hobbies rather
than racial. I spent (and
continue to spend) the next several years, dedicating personal and
professional time to studying interdisciplinary approaches to shaping (not
manipulating) the ways people treat one another. This art involves examining culture, gender, sexual
orientation, religion, age, traumatic experiences and many other
variables. I count this new attitude
as “ministry” because ministry means, “service”. Service means offering oneself to others as an example, sending
a good message and hoping that is will, in time be understood and accepted
(Coles, 1993.) In conclusion, I
must admit that I never would have realized my erroneous attitude had I not
had help. The interaction between my
husband and I displayed some very important communication elements. The elements that changed a whole series
of human relation problems were: 1.
A trusted party was present. Many times when people are
faced with a drama or trauma, they transmit or send a message to their most
trusted confidant. That confidant,
the receiver, usually shares previously established common ground with the
sender. When common ground exist,
communication becomes very efficient.
(Garrison, (1997). 2.
The receiver of the original message must be courageous
enough to communicate honest feedback to the original sender, in a clear and
unmistakable language, void of ambiguity. 3.
The sender of the original message must be willing to trust
the feed back of their confidant and then 4.
Be willing to realize when old social traditions are
inconsistent with reality. If old
attitudes are out of balance, then change the attitudes in order to restore
balance. 5.
The sender of the originally message must be willing to
forever monitor and change his/her attitudes to reflect more reasonable and
rational thought processes. If change
is not affected, one could find themselves stuck inside The Dead Bird
Syndrome. References Adversity.Net, Inc. (2004), A Civil Rights Organization for Color
Blind Justice. [on-line] retrieved from http://wwww.adversity.net
on March 5, 2004. Coles, R. (1993). The Call of Service. New York:
Houghton Mifflin Company. Denis, D. (1995) Black History for Beginners . New
York: Writers and Readers
Publishers, Inc. Ezell, M. (2001).
Advocacy In The Human Services. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Garrison, M., Bly M. (1997) NeedhamWeights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, A Viacom Company. Nichols, V. (1996). Webster’s
Dictionary. New York:
Nickel Press. |