|
GUEST ARTICLE
Book Review:
The True Martin Luther King, Jr.
Article description: This
is a review of Professor Michael Dyson’s new book, The
True Martin Luther King.
Any student of recent American history knows that one of
the significant figures in the civil rights movement was
Martin Luther King, Jr. And though some of his methods for
achieving racial equality were not consistent with New Testament
principles for changing wrong attitudes, America , nonetheless, owes a great
deal to him.
In Martin Luther King’s famous “I-have-a-dream,” speech
(1963), he poignantly expressed the hope that someday his
four children would be able to “live in a nation where they
will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the
content of their character.” Character indeed.
However, if the famous civil rights leader had been judged
more by the content of his character than by his civil
rights activities, he would have carved a far different niche
in history. At least that is the conclusion one might draw
after reading Michael Eric Dyson’s new book, I May Not
Get There With You: The True Martin Luther King, Jr. (Free
Press, 2000).
Lest anyone should think that Dyson is some radical racist
out to “lynch” King’s historical legacy, that is far from
the case. The black minister and professor ( DePaul University ; Columbia University – African
American Studies) contends that Martin Luther King, Jr. was “arguably,
the greatest American ever produced on our native soil.” Many
would suggest that descriptive is a gross exaggeration.
But in spite of such a laudatory accolade, Dyson honestly
exposes some of King’s egregious character flaws – though
he attempts to rationalize them.
The thrust of Professor Dyson’s book is this: Martin Luther
King, Jr.’s image has been so glamorized by the popular press
over the years (among blacks and whites alike), that the
current black generation is inclined to distance itself from
its prominent leader. The author characterizes King as a “safe
Negro” with whom white people became comfortable. Dyson,
therefore, attempts to humanize (even radicalize) King, so
that modern black people, especially the younger generation,
can identify with him.
In order to remove what he calls King’s “soapy” and “sanitize[d]” image,
Professor Dyson felt obligated to throw the floodlight upon
the more unsavory elements of King’s life. For example:
- King’s critics have long noted
that much of the civil rights leader’s academic writings
were plagiarized. Dyson concedes the point, but justifies
the conduct by suggesting that this tendency had its roots
in a “black tradition” of borrowing and expanding the ideas
of other people. [Note: That “tradition” is not limited
by ethnicity.]
He contends that “King’s plagiarism
at school is perhaps a sad symptom of his response to the
racial times in which he matured.” And so, King stole from
the writings of others because of his “black” heritage. But
what of the thousands of honest black students who never
stooped to literary thievery? How did they overcome their “tradition”?
- It is widely known that King
was a womanizing adulterer. Again, Dyson comes to the leader’s
defense. He asserts that the reformer’s “relationship with
Coretta symbolizes the difficulty faced by black leaders
who attempted to forge a healthy life with their loved
ones while the government aimed its huge resources at destroying
their families . . . .”
He talks of how “the state has
often abandoned or abused the black family with cruel social
policies.” So now we know – Martin Luther King’s marital
infidelity was the state’s fault! His lack of morals was
thrust upon him by the conditions of society.
Every principled black person in America ought to be insulted and
outraged by this sort of rationale. It, in effect, says this.
You cannot appreciate the advancements of the civil rights
movement, and the contributions of Dr. King to that effort,
unless you recognize how flawed and victimized by his culture
he was! If King’s cheating and adultery have to be played
up, in order for the current black generation to “connect” with
him, what does that imply about today’s black youth? That’s
Dyson’s implication. And young black people ought to resent
it.
Finally, there is this notation. While it is widely believed
that Martin Luther King, Jr. was committed to the “Christian
religion,” he was far from it. He denied some of the most
fundamental components of historic Christianity. He repudiated
the doctrine of the deity of Jesus, and he rejected the concept
that the Lord was raised bodily from the dead. King disdained
the New Testament affirmation of Christ’s virgin birth, asserting
that the early Christians devised a mythological story to
account for the moral uniqueness of Jesus of Nazareth. His
theology has been profusely documented in The Christian
News Encyclopedia.
This was the Martin Luther King, Jr. that many never came
to know, and who has been concealed for so long. And so,
as Dyson aptly says in this new volume (regarding his hero): “You
don’t need to go out saying Martin Luther King, Jr. is a
saint.”
--Wayne Jackson
© 2000 by Christian Courier Publications.
All rights reserved.
http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/
print/book_review_the_true_martin_luther_king_jr
|
