Shackles and Style: The Systematic Commodification of the Black Identity

Shackles and Style: The Systematic Commodification of the Black Identity

By Ronae Watson

     America’s relationship with race is toxic, to say the least. As the recognition of race as a social construct becomes increasingly popular, it becomes easier to identify how race and racism have served as markers of discrimination. America was not just founded on racial discrimination, but race was created on its shores to justify the enslavement of African Americans. For the modern-day Black person, living in a country whose principles were shaped by slavery makes the idea of race inescapable. The Emancipation Proclamation declared that Black bodies could no longer be physically exploited and commodified; however, this proved ineffective since the misuse of Black bodies was not all that was at stake. Generations after emancipation, Black culture continues to be exploited and commodified, similar to how slaves were. This relationship coincides with the history of minstrel shows, where blackness was put on display and being Black was seen as comical. Black people have always been a source of commerce, allowing the commodification of Black culture to also become central to America’s racial machine. Thus creating a paradoxical relationship: the “outputs” or creations of Black people are valued, but Black people themselves are not.

     The use of Black people to maximize profit (for slave owners) while minimizing the rights of the enslaved is a direct result of capitalism. Capitalism has been characterized as an economic system that is inherently unequal. An infamous critic of capitalism, Karl Marx, listed alienation as a contributing factor to capitalism’s inevitable trend towards crisis. When a worker is alienated from their product, it is because they are quite literally unable to reap the benefits of what they’ve sown. In the context of chattel slavery,  the alienation of enslaved Black people was severe. The enslaved were forced to perform labor that was not of their choosing for the benefit of their white owners, who were dehumanizing them. The conflicting conditions the enslaved were conditioned to can be explained by Marx’s theory of alienated labor (from Selected Writings), since “[the]  realization of labor appears as a loss of reality for the worker, objectification [appears] as a loss of the object or slavery to it, and appropriation [leads to]  alienation, as externalization” (Marx 86).  In Marx’s theory, he proposed that in capitalist conditions, workers are not just disconnected from the products of their labor, but they also become subservient to them. The proletariat no longer has the luxury of working for fulfillment and must work to survive. This allows the products of their labor to be easily appropriated by the bourgeois. When these products are sold for profit, and the worker does not benefit in any capacity, the worker's existence becomes dependent on the production and sale of an object. Workers are viewed as disposable, and mass production is prioritized. Workers become dependent on the output of their labor to survive, but production is interdependent on the workers. Members of the bourgeoisie get to hover over it all by forcing their workers to produce constantly, while they profit off of their forced labor. Marx continues to sum up the theory of alienation of labor as follows: “[...] (the worker) only feels himself freely active in his animal functions of eating, drinking… dressing up, etc.; and in his human functions he no longer feels himself to be anything but an animal.” What is an animal becoming human, and what is a human becoming animal?” (Marx 89). Marx characterizes the estrangement from labor as a tragedy. Through alienated labor, humans lose the essence of what separates them from the rest of nature since they are detached from both the process and product of creation. 

     A similar pattern of detachment can be observed in chattel slavery since slaves lost parts of themselves in the commodification of their labor, their product, and their person. In this context, alienated labor is not just a theoretical framework but a literal coerced and enslaved process. Marx’s notion of alienated labor reaches its most extreme expression in slavery. This is not to say that Marx centered race in his theory, but it does showcase how history has made it easier for the contributions of Black people to be diminished. Enslaved people were not just detached from their products, but they were also denied the right to have any ownership over their products. Enslaved people were not able to control how or when they worked, form bonds independent of their enslavers, and ultimately had no claim to their identity. The enslaved were not just alienated from their labor and detached from their products, but they were also alienated from the world and detached from their bodies and wills. This dehumanization caused the enslaved to avoid claiming ownership over anything they had created. Generally speaking, anything created under chattel slavery was not created with autonomy and instead was a product of coercion. However, there were many forms of Black cultural resistance, where Black people began to reconnect to something that Marx believed capitalism had deprived people of—creating for fulfillment (not for profit). Black people built a culture and created meaning in other places. At this point, American society had become so dependent on its idea of race and, more specifically, ideas about Black inferiority. This resulted in Black cultural resistance becoming a point of ridicule through minstrel shows. 

     Minstrel shows reached their zenith during the mid-nineteenth century. The scholar Jennifer Bloomquist links the rise in popularity of minstrel shows to the end of slavery and notes that minstrel shows were a way to repackage ideas of white supremacy.  In Bloomquist’s article,  The Minstrel Legacy: African American English and the Historical Construction of ‘Black’ Identities in Entertainment, it is made clear that “America has had a protracted history of whites creating Black caricatures [and even though] blacks served as amusement for white audiences on plantations during the enslavement period, the national White fascination with African American life as popular entertainment began with the proliferation of minstrel shows” (5). This passage illustrates the dynamics of relations between Black and white people before and after emancipation. As established, slavery made Black people into physical commodities. With the end of slavery, Black people could no longer be physically commodified. This allowed minstrel shows to become a way to repurpose the very ideas that contributed to the physical exploitation of slavery. American society continued to pander to racist ideas, and minstrel shows became a symbolic way to commodify Blackness. Black culture was profited off of without Black people since “[minstrel] performances drew large and enthusiastic White audiences,  many of whom had never seen an African American face-to-face—and [...] accepted these comedic distortions of Black life as valuable entertainment” (Bloomquist 6). Minstrel shows were able to commodify Black culture by making stereotypes marketable characters and profiting off of Black culture without the presence or contributions of Black people. Stripping Black culture of its essence and making it into a parody showcases how commodification did not end at emancipation; it simply changed form. White capitalists continued to profit off of Black people just as they did before. Instead of physically exploiting Black people, they doubled down on their racist ideas.  Blackness was made to be more than a marker of inferiority, and simply being Black was also portrayed as a joke. Black people were forced to take on a new role as sources of entertainment, and instead of Black labor being ridiculed through shackles, Black culture was ridiculed through (and because of) its style. Minstrel shows built on the belief system created and furthered the idea that Black people could only ever be valued for what they produce and the money they can make, but could never be respected for what they have created. 

Minstrel shows set the stage for modern racial relations, where cultural output became extracted and sold rather than labor. The legacy of minstrel shows continues to shape digital and cultural industries today. People continue to be amused by the spectacle of white people butchering Black culture, allowing one of white people’s greatest privileges to be capitalizing on their imitations of Black culture. In the article New Commodities, New Consumers: Selling Blackness in a Global Marketplace, Patricia Collins describes the new ways in which Black people are being disempowered. Under global capitalism, “[Black culture is recognized as a marketable commodity put up] for sale, selling an essentialized Black culture that white youth could emulate yet never own” (Collins 2). This passage directly speaks to the complex and paradoxical relationship between Black Americans, systemic racism, and capitalism. Black people have always held commercial value, which has made Blackness a subject to capital exploitation. The recognition of Black culture as a commodity has once again found a way to change its shape from minstrelsy. When Black culture is made more palatable for white audiences, Black culture is stripped of its nuance, allowing it to become more easily appropriated. White people try on this watered-down version of Black culture like an ill-fitting hat and dance around. While the creations of Black people make white people cool, Black people themselves are undervalued. Black struggles have a hard time getting the same attention as white butchered imitations, showing that Black culture and, in turn, Blackness can only be celebrated when it is detached from the humanity of Black people. Collins also observes that “new forms of commodification within the constant pressure to expand consumer markets catalyze a new Black body politics where social class relations rest not solely on exploiting labor power and/or mystifying exploitation through images, but also on the appropriation of bodies themselves” (7). This quote furthers the idea that modern exploitation revolves around the appropriation of the Black identity.  Modern capitalism has progressed past the point of Black labor and aims to sell Blackness itself. When black culture is admired but not empowered, it becomes clear that America continues to value what Black people produce more than it values Black lives. 

     The commodification that Collins outlines is another reflection of a broader historical pattern of Black culture being separated from Black individuals. In The Souls of Black Folk, W.E.B. Du Bois discusses the concept of “double consciousness” as a way to explore the psychological consequences of this separation. In Du Bois’s theory, Black people perceive themselves through a dichotomic lens. Du Bois describes double consciousness as a “[...] peculiar sensation of always looking at oneself through the eyes of others [and] measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity” (8). This highlights how double consciousness causes Black people to see themselves through their own eyes and through the eyes of a white society that does not value their being. Double consciousness is what emerges when blackness is fractured by white supremacy. A part of white supremacy is the perception of blackness and how it is understood.  Given that white perceptions adversely impact black reality, “[Black Americans always feel this sense of  ‘two-ness’],––an American, a Negro; [with] two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder” (Du Bois 8). The fact that Black people have a perception of themselves and an awareness of how they are stigmatized can lead to a sense of alienation. Being aware of your racial identity and the judgments that come with it is agonizing. Du Bois also notes that doubly conscious people might censor or alter their behavior, self-expression, and speech to conform to societal expectations. Even when Black people do everything to avoid fitting the stereotypes (as often is the case), it is never because the white perception is narrow and unfair; it is because they are an “exceptional" or “unusual” case of a Black person. Double consciousness helps the commodification of the Black identity to be understood in a context that is not just economic. When black culture is sold separately from black people, they are forced to navigate the marketplace or digital media in ways that are similar to how they navigate the world. There becomes a conflict between the portrayals of Black people and culture that circulate and the authentic Black culture and experience. As double consciousness forces Black people to be hyperaware of the white gaze, the commodification of the Black identity widens the gap between their perception of themselves and how society consumes them. Double consciousness puts an emotional and psychological burden on Black people to always be aware of how white people are perceiving them, and the commodification of the Black identity simultaneously makes it harder for accurate depictions of Black people and Black culture to be shared. To summarize: commodification is what causes the white perception of the Black identity to become a product, and double consciousness reveals the emotional toll that comes with realizing that the images of Blackness that circulate within media were never meant to represent you and instead allow white people to profit off of the stereotyped depictions of Blackness they have created. Double consciousness becomes more daunting when Black people are again forced to realize that what they produce is deemed more valuable than they are. 

When concepts such as double consciousness are introduced, Black people may resonate with these ideas because they perfectly put words to the feelings they may not have known how to conceptualize. Through double consciousness, the alienation that Black people have been conditioned to feel since the founding of this country becomes heightened. In an attempt to control these feelings, Black people have to become more comfortable in their Blackness and essentially redefine what Blackness means to them, independent of white or racist ideologies. The question of  “What is blackness?” can be compared to the question “What is ‘woman’?” The French existentialist Simone de Beauvoir set out to define the idea of being a woman. Simone de Beauvoir argues that women have always been defined through the male perspective, and she cements this belief by showcasing that women have always been made out to be the “other.” This sense of “otherness” becomes most prevalent in women’s quest for equality because conversations about equal rights for women only ever discuss becoming equal to men and never solely mention being a woman. De Beauvoir explains that the category of ‘other’ “is as primordial as consciousness itself [...] [and that] no group has ever set itself up as the One without at once setting up the Other over against itself” (16). This text serves as an introduction to De Beauvoir’s idea that womanhood itself has never been defined and was always thought of as the opposite of manhood. Simone de Beauvoir continues to build on this idea by showcasing how women have historically been defined as weak. The roles that women have been assigned, such as caretakers, birthgivers, or the protection-needing beings, only emerged due to male subjugation. Since society perceives men as strong, and men and women have always been seen as opposing forces, we are led to believe that women are weak. De Beauvoir explains how the concept of being “othered” appears in other situations since “Negroes are 'inferior' for American racists [and] proletarians are the 'lower class' for the privileged” (16). In the same ways that women were forced to be the opposite of everything men were, Black people were forced to be seen as the opposites of white people. 

    As a result, defining Blackness becomes more complex. The Black identity should not just be the negation of whiteness, but it has been shaped by a white supremacist need for hierarchy and domination. Recognizing that blackness was created under the forcefully imposed social construct of racial binary showcases how race can be defined in the same ways as Simone de Beauvoir defines gender. Just as womanhood has been defined by its opposition to manhood, the Black identity has been created through its systemic positioning against whiteness. This separation keeps America’s racial machine turning since the Black identity could not be commodified if there were no separation between Blackness and whiteness. The commodification of blackness is dependent on ideas that uphold white dominance. The way we have come to understand race plays a foundational role in creating a system that devalues Black lives while exploiting Black culture. 

     The paradox of Black cultural visibility yet Black social invisibility reveals how ideas about race and capitalism intersect and result in the commodification of the Black identity. The contradictory thought process of the  “outputs” or creations of Black people being valued, but Black people themselves not being valued, is at the heart of American society. The commodification of the Black identity is a direct result of capitalism’s ability to extract any sort of value from marginalized groups while denying their humanity. This paradox was first illuminated by Karl Marx’s theory of alienated labor. Marx theorized that under capitalism, workers became separated from the products of their labor. The application of this theory in a racial context made it clear that Black people experienced extreme alienation of labor, and this made it easier for their creations to be appropriated since they bore no attachment to them. Alienated labor in chattel slavery served as a blueprint for how Black people could be continuously commodified. When slavery was abolished, Black culture became the interest of marketability rather than Black bodies. This can be shown through the history of minstrel shows, which repurposed ideas of Black inferiority and caused Black people to be reduced to aesthetic symbols. These ideas of Black inferiority did not just characterize Black people as the “Other,” as Simone de Beauvoir describes, but also made it so that Black culture became widely available for public use and white imitation. W.E.B.’s ideas of double consciousness explain how Black people were now forced to see themselves through this lens of systemic dehumanization, even though their culture held great monetary value for white people. Ultimately, the black identity could not be commodified if it weren’t for racism. It is racism that puts Black people in a position of inferiority yet desirability. The paradox of Black people being valuable but dehumanized is enabled through the commodification of the human experience under capitalism. As long as America exists as a capitalist country, Black people will be celebrated for what they create while being denied full acknowledgement and recognition of who they are and their humanity.

Works Cited: 

Beauvoir, Simone de. The Second Sex. Translated by H.M. Parshley, Vintage, 1953. 

Bloomquist, Jennifer. “The Minstrel Legacy: African American English and the Historical Construction of ‘Black’ Identities in Entertainment.” Journal of African American Studies, vol. 19, no. 4, 2015, pp. 410–25. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44508238. Accessed 19 May 2025.

Collins, Patricia Hill. “New Commodities, New Consumers: Selling Blackness in a Global Marketplace.” Ethnicities, vol. 6, no. 3, 2006, pp. 297–317. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23889381. Accessed 19 May 2025.

Du Bois, W. E. B. (William Edward Burghardt), 1868-1963. The Souls of Black Folk: Essays and Sketches. Chicago, A. G. McClurg, 1903. New York: Johnson Reprint Corp., 1968.

Marx, Karl, and David McLellan. *Karl Marx: Selected Writings*. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Image Credits (in order from left to right): 

McPherson & Oliver. The Scourged Back (Gordon, an Escaped Slave). 1863. National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

African American Field Hands Picking Cotton in Georgia. ca. 1890–1900. Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. 

The Black and White Minstrel Show. BBC Television, 14 June 1958–21 July 1978.

L Cool J and Run-DMC in gold chain and black Adidas tracksuit. 1984. Def Jam’s LL Cool J and Run DMC: Their Impact and Legacy, Entertainment Breakdown. Source: Wikipedia.

Band, Alan. Bo Derek Wearing Cornrows. Keystone/Getty Images, 1979. The Cut, 16 July 2015, https://www.thecut.com/2015/07/bo-derek-doesnt-want-to-talk-about-cornrows.html. 

Van Der Zee, James. Couple, Harlem. 1932, printed 1974. Gelatin silver print. National Gallery of Art, Washington. Alfred H. Moses and Fern M. Schad Fund. © James Van Der Zee

Tomkiewicz, Perri. [Image illustrating daily Black cultural objects like silk hair wraps and head scarves]. White Entrepreneurs Need to Stop Capitalizing on Black Culture, by Rachel Elizabeth Cargle, The Helm, 22 June 2020. Courtesy of Perri Tomkiewicz.

McCormick, Chandra. Waiting for the Bull, Men Waiting to Participate in the Angola Rodeo. 2013. Archival pigment print. Courtesy of the artist. © Chandra McCormick.