Susan Saulny, September 2001

              September 2, 2001

              And There Was Light, and It Was Good?

              By SUSAN SAULNY

                  he "Michael Jackson" is all the rage in

                  Tanzania. And those too poor to

              bleach their skin with the mysterious pill

              named after the ever fading King of Pop turn

              to a messier method, coating their skin with

              koroga, a homemade, dangerous mixture of

              lye and bleach.

              Traveling through the heart of the Namibian

              desert recently, Dr. Ife Williams, a

              Philadelphian who spent the last six months

              teaching political science at the University of

              Dar es Salam, was stunned to see women

              using koroga there, too. "I thought I knew

              something about race, having studied it all

              my life," Dr. Williams said, "but I did not

              really understand the depth to which even

              African people had begun to internalize

              racism."

              There hardly seems a place on earth

              untouched by social and political hierarchies

              linked to skin color, which rank the world's

              rainbow of skin tones according to two

              shades, light and dark. That distinction is the

              foundation of the current notion of race.

              As how to define racism, much less what to

              do about it, roils the delegates to the United

              Nations' World Conference Against Racism

              in Durban, South Africa, it might be wise to

              remember that the importance of skin color

              is largely a modern invention.

              Certainly, slavery and many other oppressive forms of

hierarchy have existed

              throughout human history, as have differences in skin color.

But the idea that

              the two have a cause-and-effect relationship is relatively

new, with its

              genesis, many academics say, in the trans-Atlantic slave

trade and the

              colonialism that emerged with it.

              There is no word for race in the original language of the

Bible, or in the

              writings of the ancients, like Herodotus, the Greek

historian, anthropologists

              say. Marco Polo, in his 13th-century travels from Italy to

China and back via

              the Indian Ocean, described peoples as "idolaters" or "the

eaters of" this or

              that, not according to skin color, said C. Loring Brace, a

professor of

              anthropology at the University of Michigan and the curator of

cultural biology

              at the school's Museum of Anthropology. "The concept of race

does not

              appear until the trans- Atlantic voyages of the Renaissance,"

he said.

              ANOTHER way of thinking about skin color is to ask: When did

Europeans

              start thinking of themselves as white?

              "There was no whiteness prior to the 17th century," said

Manning Marable,

              director of the Institute for Research in African-American

Studies at

              Columbia University. "Whiteness is the negation of something

else. The

              something else are Africans who are described by Europeans

not by their

              religion or nationality but by the color of their skin. And

nowhere in Africa

              did Africans call themselves `black.' "

              The word race was used for the first time in a modern sense,

it is widely

              believed, in a 17th-century French travelogue, Dr. Brace said.

              Historians have yet to decide conclusively on chicken or egg

regarding

              racism and colonialism. Europeans used skin color to rank the

people they

              "discovered" around the world, and the black and brown people

at the

              bottom were judged to have little humanity, so colonizing

their lands and

              using them as slaves moved ahead freely.

              "People with dark skin were demonized in order to justify

their exploitation,"

              Dr. Williams said. "The people in power spread the belief

that: `These

              people are nothing but monkeys. We're helping them out.' "

              The Spanish began using the word negro to describe Africans

in the 1500's.

              They used claro, or light, for themselves. The application of

the term "white"

              to describe a person's color, and, by extension, race, began

in northern

              Europe thereafter, Dr. Brace said.

              Skin color became seen as evidence of an essential human

conflict, just the

              way art and literature pitted day against night,

consciousness against sleep,

              evil against sacredness. And relative lightness of skin has

proven a

              compelling ladder to superiority that people of many skin

tones have tried to

              climb.

              But if racial hierarchy is not a natural law, why was it that

European whites

              exploited African blacks, rather than the other way around?

              In his book "Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human

Societies" (W.W.

              Norton), Jared Diamond, a professor of physiology at the

U.C.L.A.'s

              medical school, contends that white dominance was a largely a

product of

              geography, climate and other factors, not race. European

habitats had a wide

              variety of plant and animal species that formed a reliable

food base and

              encouraged farming, he says, and farming led to stable

communities, stratified

              societies, governments and, eventually, armies and explorers

who sought to

              extend their culture's reach. Other cultures with those

advantages, he argues,

              faced different diseases or other constraints.

              "The main reason for the apparent domination of light-skinned

people over

              dark people is a historical accident," Dr. Diamond said.

              THE human will to dominate others is far too creative to be

satisfied only

              with skin color. Economic resources, dietary habits,

religious beliefs — the

              range of factors that can prompt discrimination seems

endless. And yet few

              are as pervasive as skin color.

              There are a few places on earth that don't see color quite

the same way. But

              before anyone gets excited about openmindedness, consider: On

Baku, an

              island in the Solomon Sea, and in various parts of New

Guinea, in the Pacific

              Ocean northeast of Australia, the majority are very

dark-skinned. Those

              who have pale skin are looked down on.

              There, too, color matters.