Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study is a “raciolinguistic genealogy” that theorizes the analytic category white-duplicity , which refers to instances in which Black speakerhood is paradoxically both affirmed and negated. I first trace the problem named by “white-duplicity” within a genealogy of Black thinkers, utilizing the discussion as a springboard to investigating white-duplicity in three discursive contexts: early modern ideologies of language and speakerhood as exemplified in “Enlightenment” origin of language theories, acts of enslavement through deceit, and surveillance of the slave ship. From the initial analysis, I conclude that anti-Black erasure is characteristically attended by the affirmation or recognition of Black speaker/personhood. Afterward, I engage in a “reconfiguration” of the events surrounding Rachel Jeantel’s testimony in the trial of George Zimmerman. The reconfiguration demonstrates how instances of white-duplicity are productive of “illegitimate” subject-positions from which a praxis of “listening from below” can be mobilized to critique the binary oppositions which underwrite “raciolinguistic ideologies of anti-Blackness” and other master narratives of modernity. Overall, the analysis indicates how a response to anti-Black erasure which exploits the conditions for unsettling erasure is preferable to the production of “vindicationist narratives.”
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Justin Lance Pannell (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: