Mr. Madison:

Roughly six months ago I stumbled upon your talk show accidentally and have been listening to it ever since as my morning alarm.  I occasionally agree, sometimes disagree, and am usually amused and/or motivated by your show. 

However, it was not until this morning that I had the nerve to call in to offer my perspective, which had merit by my knowledge and education.  As is your style, you wait for the wrong word and/or a perspective that you disagree with or misinterpret and fly off the handle.  While this is what makes your show entertaining, it is very unenjoyable for someone who is actually trying to offer a valid perspective.

This morning I, against my better judgment, called and mentioned the artist Henry Ossawa Tanner, one of the best known African American artists of the nineteenth century.  You were discussing racial identification such as the racial identity of our current Commander-in-Chief.  In response, I called to offer a perspective, which touched on the following:

Henry Ossawa Tanner was considered an African American in the United States despite his appearance which was not distinctive of a particular race (his father was a well renowned religious leader).  He was the victim of racism in America even as an art student in Philadelphia.  While he was not unsuccessful in America, he was able to blossom as a successful artist upon relocating to study in France.  Once in France Tanners racial identity was a non-issue.  He was married to Jessie Macauley Olssen, a white opera singer from San Francisco and had one child.  Eventually, Tanner permanently relocated to France where he and his family lived among whites in society.    

My point was that while living in America he was perceived as black and, in turn, a victim of racism; whereas, in France his race was a non-issue and was welcomed into the art world. 

This morning you said they knew he was black, as though it seemed to matter, and alluded to the notion that I was ignorant on the topic of racismconcluding that my point (that it was more of an American thing to label him as black) was moot, incorrect, and/or false.  I may not be focused on racism as an area of study, but I know that if someone is victimized because of race in one country and fully accepted in another, there is an obvious difference in how certain nations and/or the people of such nations perceive race.  This is undeniable. 

Furthermore, I made the mistake of alluding to the idea that one cannot determine Tanners race from looking at his paintingshis subjects or his technique, meaning that in assessing art work the race of the artist doesnt have to be a factor.  Yes, he did paint black genre scenes, but he was primarily a painter of religious works.  Eastman Johnson, who was a white artist, painted black genre scenes, but that didnt make him black.  While Tanners black genre paintings are best known works to popular culture, these pictures do not accurately represent him as an artist in full.

Regardless of your perspective, I called into your show to offer an interesting historical example of racial perception.  Tanners case, when studied in full, is very interesting.  It is very discouraging not to be able to offer my perspective on your show without being browbeaten and demoralized by your biases.  You often do not allow people to articulate their perspective, which means that you do not fully understand the meaning of their comments and, in turn, you are rendering an ineffectual and unimportant response that is often unrelated to their point.

Please understand that listening to all viewpoints in a forum such as yours can only benefit you as influential person; otherwise, I do not understand how any positive outcome can derive from the ability to call in to your show.

Sincerely,

Oscar Beisert