Racism and Prejudice Theme Analysis

Throughout “White Spirit,” the narrator, other staff at the public housing centre, and the mural artists benefit from their whiteness and even at times make prejudiced and racist assumptions about the mostly nonwhite refugees they work for. While the white organizers at the centre intend to create a positive living environment and community for the residents, in actuality they often are patronizing and unhelpful to the mostly nonwhite centre residents. In this way, the story demonstrates the pervasive nature of racism and prejudice, and how these sorts of intolerance can emerge from well-intentioned individuals and out of what may seem initially like “nice” behavior.

While the white artists’ and organizers’ words about the nonwhite refugees may initially seem kind, the story shows how in practice they are often patronizing and disrespectful. When the narrator suggests that someone may graffiti over the mural, the artist, Mandy, is quick to deny that this would ever happen, claiming that “nobody will graffiti anything they feel a sense of ownership and inclusion about.” While the idea behind Mandy’s statement is superficially kind, in reality, it reveals her willful ignorance about the residents, who have not given any indication they feel ownership or inclusion about the mural. Further, Mandy’s statement shifts the blame to the residents. Mandy’s belief that the residents will and should feel a sense of “ownership and inclusion” toward the mural seems founded solely on the fact that she thinks they should. This circular logic would mean that, should any resident end up putting graffiti on the mural, Mandy will assume there is something wrong with the resident, not the mural.

Even the narrator, who clearly has a more intimate relationship with the people living in the complex than the artists and other staff, acts in prejudiced ways. Like Mandy and Jake, the narrator makes willfully ignorant assumptions about what the residents want. She assumes that the workers will like a mural that shows “their community’s diversity” and is initially surprised when the residents choose not to participate in painting. But the story makes clear that the narrator’s perspective on the residents is not always accurate. She tries to encourage the women in her fabric-painting class to come to the mural opening in their “traditional dresses” because “the minister would love to see [it].” The narrator’s suggestion is met with “charged awkwardness” and a no. Rather than respecting the women’s autonomy, the narrator has attempted to make them into prop displays of diversity. Through the flawed narrator, the story shows how racist and prejudiced thinking can manifest in a multitude of ways.

Another way that the story shows a less overt manifestation of racism and prejudice is through the mural itself, which initially seems to display a positive image of the community but is really an example of a patronizing and homogenizing form of racism. The mural’s final product depicts “a rainbow of faces” in which everyone is standing “‘We Are the World’ style with arms round each other, grinning.” The mural suggests a community that is effortlessly integrated, in which ethnic and racial distinction is not a divider. But in trying to promote an ostensibly positive image of integration, the mural’s design diminishes the different community members, erasing their individualism as well as the reality of their experience. It makes them into a symbol of uncomplicated integration that benefits white perception of the work the centre is supposed to be doing.

Moreover, it’s clear that the mural has design elements intended to make it more palatable for white viewers. By noting that the “Anglo” (white) faces are “judiciously” present next to the nonwhite faces, the narrator makes clear that the mural works to make white people feel included in this image of diversity. Despite the fact that the mural is, in theory, meant to be for nonwhite members of the community, the narrator’s observation gives away the fact that its real purpose is to make white people feel good about themselves. Finally, by referencing “We Are the World” (a 1985 charity song intended to raise money for famine relief in Africa) in her description, the narrator indicates that the mural, like the song, is something that promotes an outright message of unity and togetherness. However, she complicates this message by reflecting that “in real life” it would take “several simultaneous translators” to get everyone to laugh at the same time, as well as “a fair whack of fairy dust”—the narrator’s sardonic commentary shows that the mural’s homogenous depiction of the community is not authentic, but rather a patronizing fairytale which, despite its superficial positivity, perpetuates racist erasure of individual identity among the nonwhite community members.

The story deftly reveals the many ways that subtle forms of racism can manifest. The narrator, the artists, the centre staff, and the local political minister all believe they are doing good, kind work to help the nonwhite residents in the community. But through the narrator’s internal monologue and eventual realization about how these efforts are actually impacting the residents of the centre, “White Spirit” shows how a whitewashed, patronizing, artificial image of integration can actually do racist harm.