SOMEONE has attempted to make Dunoon’s racist rock a little less racist. The Jim Crow Stone – a giant grotesque rock painted black with a “golliwog”-style red and white mouth and a name synonymous with white supremacy – has been a controversial landmark in Argyll for some years.
But any attempt to change the stone in any way has always been met with fierce resistance.
Staunch supporters of the boulder, locally and internationally, deny it’s racist and claim the stone is called Jim Crow because it’s name is Jim and it looks a bit like a crow.
That’s despite the rock featuring in one of the largest collections of racist memorabilia in the world, the Jim Crow museum of racist memorabilia in Montana, where it’s described as a “monstrosity” that left people who routinely deal with tales of lynching and slavery feeling disturbed.
One night last week, however, a painter or painters, made half of the rock a little less like an 19th-century caricature of a person of colour,
The side facing land, is now black with a small thin, white mouth, while the side facing out to the sea retains the original golliwog styling.
The change sparked furious debate on the Dunoon Observer’s Facebook.
“Jesus Christ, it’s a bloody rock that’s been there forever! It’s a Dunoon thing! No political or racial agenda involved! IT’S A ROCK!!!!!!!” wrote an impassioned Claire Bear.
James Low countered by saying: “It’s a simple fact that the term ‘Jim Crow’ now has racist connotations. Retaining that name and bright red lips (whichever side they are on) shows a totally different intent than making the rock look like a crow. And I for one do not think that our town/area should want to be associated with that sort of thinking in 2018.”
Alastair Baird noted that the paper’s article had received 167 comments. “I wish the state of the Argyll roads created so much debate,” he said wistfully.
Debate over the appropriateness of the defaced monolith was sparked again a few months ago when Neville Lawrence, the father of murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence, expressed his concern over the rock while holidaying in the Cowal Peninsula.
Lawrence, whose son was murdered in a brutal, racially motivated attack in 1993, told the Dunoon Observer he was “really disappointed to see such a thing” during his recent trip.
He said: “I have been coming to Scotland for many years, and since my son was murdered. Before that, I was part of the campaign to release Nelson Mandela which brought me there many times. There was a large group of us, 14 or so, who went into a pub in Glasgow.
“Nobody stopped and stared, it was very welcoming, and so when I returned to London I would tell people how different it was. I always look forward to coming to Scotland.
“I find it very disappointing that there is this thing that makes people feel very uncomfortable.
“We are all human beings. If you cut us, our blood is red. We do not need to have this kind of division in the world. We do not need to love each other, but we do need to respect each other.”
It’s not the first time the rock has been altered.
In 2009 two men used several tins of Drummond’s International grey paint – a preparation created by the Bill Drummond from the band, the KLF, to paint over anything “morally or aesthetically offensive” – to completely remove the face.
Days later Jim Crow was back.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel