Imagine "The Warriors", but on a boat!

June 4, 2010 7:09 AM

Is this crazy-seeming claim from "The Cracked Bell" even remotely accurate?

In his never-footnoted book "The Cracked Bell", author Tristam Riley-Smith makes the following claim:

This ghetto existence [of African-Americans] extends to US aircraft carriers: the population numbers 5,000 on these battleships, of which 75 per cent are black, and it is said there are areas of the ship where no white officer would dare to tread.

Really? I've never been in the Navy, but I'm guessing that it's not run like the floating gang war that Riley-Smith seems to be suggesting here.

There's so much about this that screams BS. The lack of attribution, the equivocating "it is said", etc. But I thought I'd throw it to AskMefi to see if it has any basis in fact.

posted by iwhitney to Society & Culture (11 answers total)

Having spent three years in the Army (and this was 35 years ago when the world was even less enlightened), the US Military did not operate like that. I've not been on a Navy ship, but this sounds like bullshit to me as well.
posted by HuronBob at 7:31 AM on June 4, 2010

Also, in 2004 (most recent figures I could find) 18% of the enlistments in the Navy were African American... yeah, 75% black population on battleships is a false statement.
posted by HuronBob at 7:34 AM on June 4, 2010 [1 favorite]

Well, there was certainly segregation on military vessels, right up until 1948. Still, "would dare to tread" is a pretty odd way of saying "was allowed to go."
posted by Sys Rq at 7:36 AM on June 4, 2010

What time period is the author talking about? My understanding is that the military post-Vietnam was not nearly as disciplined as it is today, and that racial factions did exist, though I don't know to what extent.
posted by procrastination at 7:58 AM on June 4, 2010

Response by poster: The book is talking about the present day.
posted by iwhitney at 7:58 AM on June 4, 2010

My husband was in the Navy. Absolute bullshit.
posted by desjardins at 8:10 AM on June 4, 2010

I suspect that if you translate the line to the following, it will make more sense:

it is said there are areas of the ship where no racist officer would dare to tread.
posted by gjc at 8:37 AM on June 4, 2010

The Wikipedia entry for Nimitz class aircraft carrier sez:
Ship's company: 3,200
Air wing: 2,480
So I suppose one could grant that his estimate of the ship's population has some basis in fact..

I wouldn't grant much more than that concession, however. I haven't seen the entire series of PBS's Carrier, but the similarity between that depiction and Riley-Smith's seems to be approximately none at all.

There's a review in the Harvard Political Journal which makes for a good calibration of the author's credibility. [I wonder how much of the let's-fool-the-anthropologist comes into play here..]
posted by Tuesday After Lunch at 8:56 AM on June 4, 2010

Response by poster: Thanks for the link, Tuesday.

Interesting that the Harvard Political Journal criticizes the author for "bombastic, unsubstantiated claims" and then praises the Navy claim as an "Interesting tidbit".
posted by iwhitney at 9:15 AM on June 4, 2010

Given the size of modern vessels, an officer might be afraid to tread to certain parts only because he might get lost. This quote sounds like refined baloney.
posted by chairface at 4:35 PM on June 4, 2010

Navy officer and pilot here. Done several short and long deployments on carriers and smaller vessels. At no time did I ever feel as if there were certain places on any ship that were off limits to me due to my ethnicity.

The author may be inadvertently referring to the race riot aboard the Kitty Hawk during Vietnam, but times are much, much different now.
posted by squorch at 5:42 PM on June 6, 2010