Abstract
When discussing race, we usually do not think about mixed-race or biracialness. Instead, we think in binary terms, usually with the predominant racial vision being our way of thinking about individuals. Mixed-Race in the US and UK by Sims and Njaka moves us beyond shortsightedness and brings us forward in our understanding through a complete comparative discussion of mixed-race status in eight chapters. The authors enlarge our sociological lens by rigorously studying the cultural differences and burdens of mixed-race members of our society globally. As they move through their manuscript, they bring about queries to study race and race-mixing globally. Within the book, each chapter describes the nuanced difference between the countries while also displaying similarities. Introduced as critical mixed-race studies, the authors reveal the dilemmas sometimes faced by “mixed-raced persons within their interviews woven into the book.” However, they also subtly leave a trail toward new research regarding the examination of racialization. It reveals answers leading questions about their feelings through responses to interviews provided a clear picture of the burdens of racial identity—especially mixed-race identity.
By chronicling perceptions and views regarding biracialness across the pond and in the United States, the authors clarify the questions’ cultural nature, such as discussing the important difference between “what are You” and “where are you from.” As the book moves along, cultural differences surrounding communication style and how a queries is presented to respondents in the UK and US. Then, the authors explain and review with readers the salience of understanding how race-specific features are a critical part of describing biracialness—“I am from Birmingham and, but my mum is from India, and my dad is from Scotland.”
Thus, the discussion of “ racialized gaze” noted by the authors has importance for all as it embeds itself once more in our mind’s eyes as to how not just persons of mixed racial ancestry but also how others visualize race and racial identity. Using original interviews, Mixed Race in the US and UK moves readers forward to answer some of the burning questions we all have regarding mixed-race individuals. Guided by the racial formation theory framework, the manuscript also uses U.K. and U.S. census reports highlighting the distinct ways that the United States and the United Kingdom discuss race. As in America, ethnicity question categories in the United Kingdom have moved from mono-racial identity to multiple racial identity categories, making the author’s discussion of the one-drop rule even more salient comparatively culturally. As they describe their respondents’ understanding of their racial identity as only one choice, this book’s more interesting and vital point is discussing national identity. Being a Londoner does not mean white, but the authors express respondents’ understanding of the intersection of national identity and race. Although similar to the United States, the authors centralize the strength of a racialized national identity as more substantial than in the United States. The authors take us through pseudoscientific theories and biological paradigms about race, all to have us understand comparatively race and humanity.
The authors’ discussion of civil society and race is significant in their comparison as in the United States, most discussion of race does not focus enough on civil society organizations. This chapter of the book enhances its value by examining civil society organizations not often discussed, but this adds to the book’s comparative nature in understanding race.
A discussion of hair for persons of color seems to be universal, but not family resemblance. The author’s discussion of this area of biracialness provides a vivid detail of racial identity not often discussed in America. Still, like this discussion of hair and phenotype, the authors discuss intersectionality, displaying distinctions in how they see these ideas for these citizens and others—especially Black gay men and their friendships, which the author(s) discuss using once again racial formation ideas. Ideas about race and sexual identity are still issues but even more nuanced for persons in the United Kingdom. However, skin color is also an issue discussed as well, which still unfortunate remains salient.
Despite its difference and close similarities in the books, its discussion of mixed-race status in the United Kingdom and the United States, the book presents sociologists with a needed nuanced view of the burdens for mixed-race people. Why? It challenges the notions of fixed race categories in both countries’ census and the larger community. The authors remind us that mixed-race and civil societies at the organizational level are fluid but include more than the race element and should not be only thought of in terms of census categories. The authors remind us this nascent comparative literature examining biracial persons is essential to think of for issues faced by these citizenries in light of their political and economic fortunes and everyday experiences.
In their conclusion, “doing race,” they note using a race-critical lens is vital for asserting identity, exercising power, and interacting with peers and family and peers. This book is an excellent read to move scholars along in reviewing new avenues of understanding race—comparatively.