Reviews for Hey! Let a revolutionary brother and sister come in

The average rating for Hey! Let a revolutionary brother and sister come in based on 2 reviews is 5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2013-02-18 00:00:00 Ronald Aronds From my writing on the inside front cover: “For Consultation on Racism March 17-18, 1972. Perkins [School of Theology], SMU.” It’s not evident that I read much of this book at the time, so in my quest finally to peruse unread books in my library, I slogged through this thin tome—for the fun of it. Terry wishes during this period of the late 1960s to bridge the gap between Blacks and Whites. He seems to coin the term “New White,” in speaking of those who would attempt to change. These souls have six tasks, says he: 1) Become agents of change 2) Seek ethical clarity 3) Identify multiple forms of racism, both past and present 4) Find social strategies for change 5) Develop proper tactics and 6) “Experiment, test, and refine personal styles of life congruent with our newly affirmed values—experience who we might be” (21). The first third of the book seems terribly dated, and yet his words written in the 1960s, in the latter part of his book, are eerily familiar: “In America, as well as other countries, civil disturbance is often intensified by overreaction by police and other law enforcement agencies. This overreaction is the fifth type of violence Hough [Joseph, Jr.] points out. ‘Police violence occurs,’ he says, ‘when more force is employed than is necessary to contain a civil disorder, or when excessive force is used as an ‘example to others who might be contemplating some kind of disruption’” (79). I cite these words the very weekend of the 2020 disturbance in Minneapolis, following demonstrations protesting the police murder of George Floyd. Have we come such a short distance in fifty years? The book has one other difficulty for contemporary readers and that is the language itself. As many academics from that period, he displays an excessive use of the passive voice, which among other things removes or obscures the subject of a sentence—putting his readers at a distant remove from his emotional intent. I can see why I apparently did not finish reading this book in 1972. It was just too tedious and dry.

Review # 2 was written on 2016-10-31 00:00:00 Arie Budhinata Enjoyed it. Plans to read it again. Read it many years ago.