A CONVERSATION WITH JOSEPH PHILLIPS
By The RBM
The RBM: The title of your book "He Talk Like A White Boy" stems from an experience you had as
a junior high school student when a black girl said you spoke like a white boy. All too often young
black children who use the English language correctly hear this from their peers. How do you think
that mindset shapes generations of black children and honestly, how did that statement affect you?
Joseph: I have traveled all over the country and I have heard from people young and old that tell me that
either they have experienced this or that someone in their family is currently experiencing it. There is always
a sense of pain that accompanies the stories, particularly when they speak of children currently enduring the
taunts. I know from their stories that many of the children struggle with questions of identity. They are
intimidated into particular dress and behaviors in order to fit in. I was not immune to this when I was in
school. Honestly the statement didn't affect me as much as everything that followed. From that moment on I
as treated differently, or at least I began to really notice the difference in how I was treated by both black
and white students. I was physically and verbally assaulted by some of my black classmates and ignored by
white classmates. I can laugh about it now, but it was perhaps the most horrible period of my youth. What is
important, however, and what I talk about in my book is that this notion of authenticity in black behavior
morphs into a rigorous authenticity of black thought in adulthood. And it is just as silly, just as destructive
and the rules are enforced just as harshly in adulthood as they were when we were children. If you do not
toe the line you are cast off. Oh the names I have been called by folks that disagree with me! To me it is a
very narrow and limiting definition of blackness. Not to mention arbitrary. I am Black, this is how I roll so it
must fall within the parameters of authentic Black thought.
The RBM: You are a self proclaimed "conservative". When I heard you speak, you talked about
moving beyond labels, rather, just be a person and who you are. But is there a difference between
being a conservative and a Republican? A liberal and a Democrat?
Joseph: I do not admit to being a conservative unless I get to define what that means. To some folks
conservative means what they scrape from the bottom of their shoe and I am certainly not a self proclaimed
whatever that is. I do believe in the founding principles. I believe in the natural rights of all men to life, liberty
and private property. I believe the duty of government is to secure these rights and they receive their just
powers from the consent of the governed. I believe in the traditional family as the primary source of moral
education, I believe in God...I could go on, but, you see, this is what I mean by labels. What does
conservative tell you about what it is I believe? Actually very little. What does democrat tell anyone about
what it is you actually believe? We know a great deal more once we begin talking and sharing thoughts and
ideas. All Republicans are not conservatives and all Democrats are not liberals. It is one of those things
that drives political folks crazy. There are in fact two wings of the California Republican party and they do
not always like each other. The same is true I think of the Democrat party. It isn't until we begin talking
to each other and then we discover that we have a lot in common. Those labels and the baggage that comes
with them -- Conservative! Liberal! -- tend to end conversation rather than begin them.
The RBM: That being asked, your book discusses very thought provoking subjects, such as values,
being accountable and responsible, Spirituality, patriotism, and race. Yet at the same time you hope
to, again, remove labels from the conversation. How much of a hindrance does labels create when it
comes to the before-mentioned, and are those hindrances all that separate people from being united
on those issues?
Joseph: I answered some of this in the previous question. Let me go back and try to clarify a few things.
There is nothing that bothers me more than for someone to assume things about me because I am black.
Most Black folks hate when White folks do that. The truth is, however, we do it to ourselves all the time.
"Black" tells you nothing about what I think, in short it is a poor definition for who I am. I am in fact so
much more. Being fully realized means moving beyond race. Let me be clear I am not talking about
being invisible. The idea of being color blind has never been attractive to me because I think that it is a denial
of a certain very important part of us...of me. To behave as if my skin were not this rich, chocolate brown
is to deny an essential part of me. The key is that the color of my skin should not convey worth! That is
what we are struggling to move past. It is a struggle to realize the value of our characters, our virtue.
Similarly, the idea that a word like Republican can adequately define who one is and what they think is
absurd. Yet we do it all the time and again it prevents conversation rather than encourage conversation.
Does that mean we will agree on the issues? No! We will disagree, we will disagree sometimes vehemently!
But it is my belief that we will be better able to find solutions because we will finally be speaking from a
common foundation of values. This is something that I find attractive about Barak Obama. I disagree with
him on quite a few issues, but he does not take the tack that conservatives are evil. Or that Black
conservative (or conservatives that happen to be black) are sell out Uncle Toms etc. That is refreshing and
can't help but begin to create an environment that will nurture solutions.
The RBM: Are race, conservatism, and liberalism really labels or more adjectives, describing a way
someone lives his or her life?
Joseph: What is a Black way to live ones life? I know there are folks that believe this exists...Harry
Belafonte for instance. These are folks however that set themselves up as race police -- guardians checking
ideological credentials and ripping up membership cards. They are playing a variation on the race game and
the authenticity game is just as rigged as is the race game. The guardians are always changing the rules on
the fly. They are the kids we knew growing up that ripped up your membership card for listening to rock
and roll. "What's wrong with you Brother? Black folks don't listen to rock and roll!" Two years later they try
to get you to go to a Rolling Stones concert with them. Silly example, but this is exactly how the game is
played. A better example might be the interracial marriage card. You would be amazed at how often I am
asked if my wife is black. Naturally the fact that I am a "conservative" means I must be married to a white
woman. Forget for the moment the numerous great black men that have had white wives -- Fred Douglass,
Jack Johnson, Julian Bond etc. Also put aside the fact that many of these same critics have had liaisons with
white women. My in-authenticity is proven by the fact that I am married to a white woman. Oh but wait a
moment. I am NOT married to a white woman. My wife is in fact Black. The gate keepers are not deterred.
They respond: "I bet she's light skinned!" True story! It absolutely happens! It happened once during a
speech in Columbus Ohio it happened AS I was telling the story. There is no greater proof than when folks
see it with their own eyes. The audience roared!
The RBM: A lot of our readers will remember your from "The Cosby Show" so I've gotta ask at
least one question referencing that experience. Obviously times have changed since the show, but
with your foundation and beliefs, how influential was the show for African Americans from a values
perspective? How refreshing was it for you to work on a project like "The Cosby Show" (from that
same perspective)? How has television changed since then when talking about "black" television
shows (or shows geared toward black audiences)?
Joseph: The Cosby show was incredibly influential. If nothing else the program portrayed a side of Black
life seldom seen before. I am not only talking about the fact the Huxtables were middle-class...upper middle
class. There were other things: two parents that ran the home with love and a strong hand. Children that got
into trouble but were not smarter than their parents, didn't talk back; the presence of generations of family.
There was also the art on the walls, the music...this program set the standard and all the "black" programs
that have followed have emulated it in some way. For me the most refreshing thing about working on that
show was that I had a job. As Harold Melvin says, "Regular J.O.B. baby!" I was 27 years old, single and
very heterosexual. The last thing on my mind was family values. C'mon! I will say, however, that the Cosby
Show proves something I am saying. This program was the most popular program on television. It was
watched and adored by white and black families. It was a program about a Black family, but it was not a
program about being black. The audiences identified with the values. It is the mistake so many writers and
producers make. They try to write a show about black people and what you get is a completely unbelievable
assemblage of gospel music and Kente Cloth wearing characters etc. Just write a good story about some
people with values the audience can identify with and the audience will come.
The most disturbing thing I recall hearing during those days was that this was not an accurate portrayal of
black life. How sad that there were folks only able to see us -- black folk-- through the lens of poverty and
despair...drug addiction and welfare. Our women are not as sophisticated and beautiful as Phylicia Rashad.
They chicken neck and put their hands on their hips! Thankfully these folks were in the minority.
The RBM: You and Tavis Smiley are friends, you've worked on his radio show, and he wrote the
foreward of your book. You two also have different political views, yet share the same founding
principles, faith, morals, and goals for not just black families but families in general. At the same
time there have been and currently are wars fought between nations who, like the two of you,share
political differences but the same fundamental principles. So then what is the triggering point for
these international conflicts? Is it when the politics outweigh beliefs, vice versa, or do they become
so integrated with one another that there is no difference? Should there be a difference?
Joseph: Honestly the answer to this may be a bit outside my comfort zone. However, that has never stopped
me before so I will dive in with both feet. First I think that obviously what happens is that people stop talking
to one another and stop listening. They get to a point that the label does all the speaking for them;
conversations end rather than begin. That said I also believe that war is on the continuum of diplomacy.
There are in other words times when it is necessary to flex a little muscle. I do not say this lightly or
flippantly. The founders put it very well in the declaration: "prudence, indeed, will dictate..." These conflicts
should not be entered into over "light and transient reasons." In my mind and in the minds of the founders
the denial of the natural rights to life liberty and property are reasons to fight and if need be die. Interestingly,
I think it is time for this nation to have a real conversation about those principles on which we agree. I was
in Denver, my home town and trying to connect with an old family friend. I told her my talk was being
sponsored by the Claremont Institute. "Who are they?" she asked. I answered, "a Think tank dedicated to
re-establishing the founding principles in the American politic." "Oh," She responded. "Ultra conservative."
Now, in fairness the Claremont is described as a "right" think tank. But what in my description is ultra
conservative? More importantly as a liberal, which of the founding principles does she disagree with? Just
briefly let's examine what they are: A belief that every man is born with a God given right to life liberty and
private property; that the job of government is to secure those rights and that government derives its just
powers from the consent of the governed...MMnn sounds awfully subversive to me. Unfortunately, she is
not alone. How many self described liberals would agree with her that anyone that promotes the founding
principles is an ultra conservative? AND how many of them on that basis would curb their involvement with
you based on that? Having had it happen to me more than once I can tell you the answer is more folk than
you think. So you see the beginnings of civil strife planted. Do we as Americans agree in a natural right to
private property or not?
Do we agree on what constitutes liberty or not? Do we agree on a God given right to life? We clearly
disagree on what the purpose of government is. From where does government get its power -- its JUST
powers? This is a conversation that is long overdue.
The RBM: How long have you had an interest in writing?
Joseph: I have been interested in writing for a long time. However, being interested and actually doing it are
two different things. The computer and the internet really opened up the world for me. All through high
school, college and after I would write long hand into a notebook. You know sad poetry etc. I even wrote a
few plays and sent them around with no luck. The problem was it took so much effort to edit things and get
them to people to read. Once I began writing weekly I was reaching an audience with the
click of the mouse. I am editing easily. Through email I am in contact with people that perhaps never would
have seen my stuff if it were sitting in an envelope on their desk. And the online publications reach an
enormous amount of people. The thing that actually spurred me to write more was 9/11. Like so many
Americans I was profoundly changed by the events of that day. I began to think bout my family differently,
my country differently and my faith differently. The way I began to write changed. My wife as well as
fraternity brothers that were reading me on line suggested I try to do distribute my stuff to a wider audience.
It has been 5 years now that I have been writing my column.
The RBM: "He Talk Like A White Boy" is a collection of essays that helps the reader get a greater
understanding of who you are and what your feelings are on subjects most of us deal with on some
level at some time. Did you ever feel like you were revealing too much about yourself, or at any
point did you maybe not include an essay you originally intended to because of that fear?
Joseph: Actually it was my wife that thought I was revealing too much about her. I have heard that
criticism from one person. They felt I revealed too much. This came to me second hand so I wasn't able to
get specifically what made them uncomfortable. I suspect, however, it was writing about my mothers
suicide. But here is the thing...I was always told to write about what it is I know best. The funny thing is
that in many ways what I am writing is not very different from what I used to put down in those notebooks.
I still write about being in love only now I write about being in love with my wife and kids...my country. I
still love poetic phrasing...my wife calls it writing in plaid. There were essays that were cut from early drafts
for one reason or another, but none because of being too revealing. I was lucky my publisher gave me quite
a free hand.
The RBM: Are the essays that were included part of a documented, continuous, growth, or more the
result of that growth?
Joseph: I have to think about this...All of them were written over a few year period of time. Some of that
was only because of delays in the publication date. More than likely it is a happy combination of both. With
each new week I am finding more of my voice as a writer. The more I write about these issues of family
with and freedom the more the ideas crystallize in my head. One of the nice things about the book (I think) is
that there is an arc -- a story -- so it does point to a growth. There is an evolution from where we start in
8th grade English class and where the book ends contemplating my sons and how all of that has come
before will shape their identities.
The RBM: For our writers who are or who may be circulating heir self-published book or
manuscript, and for our writers who will want to publish, what would you say your experience has
been with author houses, and what advise would you give to those looking to get into the world of
publishing?
Joseph: You know I have to confess I was very VERY! fortunate. I did not circulate my manuscript all
around and spend months waiting for rejection letters. Briefly: my journey began with a conversation with
Tavis Smiley. Tavis was instrumental in getting my book published if only because he challenged me to write
it, read an early draft and put me in touch with a publisher that guided me and eventually put me in touch
with someone else that put me in touch with the folks that eventually published my book. The lesson I think
for the membership is that relationships are important. Something else I found very helpful was a book on
self publishing. (I am searching my library now for the title. I think I loaned it out.) The information was
priceless. I didn't actually use all of it, but what I did use proved valuable. The advances in technology --
some of which I spoke of earlier -- have made it really easy to self publish. I attacked the project as if I was
going to self publish. For instance, by the time I went to the publisher I had the complete manuscript. (of
course they tossed half of it) More importantly I had 3 pages of endorsements. I also had a column running
in several papers across the country. The bottom line is I made a case to the publisher that they could do
very little work and sell books. The bottom line is important. At the end of the day they want to make
money. What I have learned is that having a publisher does not excuse one from having to sell sell sell. I am
finding that I am constantly trying to sell my book. You have to hustle! Chances are you are not going to get
on Oprah so don't make that part of your plan. You can however, get on local radio, internet, pod casts...on
and on. Write editorials to the local paper...You must hustle and look for ways to market yourself and your
book. Network, build relationships...and write.
The RBM: Finally, what has the response been for your book from those who have read it? Will you
share an experience you've encountered from a positive and negative standpoint?
Joseph: The wonderful thing is that the response to my book has been overwhelmingly positive. I have
heard so many wonderful things from both black and white readers, old and young liberal and conservative.
I have sold more books than I could have hoped. (Though not nearly as many as I would have wished.)
I am sure there are those that felt less than warm and cuddly about my book, but I have not heard from
them. I think one of the most humbling experiences is when I receive an email from someone that has read
my book and they tell me they read it in 2 days. They couldn't put it down. They share with me how they
laughed out loud in places, were moved in others and sucked their teeth while reading some other section.
But it is the fact that they took their hard earned money and purchased my book, then read it and were
touched. I touched them. Form miles away and years or gender or race I was able to touch them with
words. Wow! And then they took time to find my email and write me and share with me their feelings about
the book and perhaps a small something about their lives. Man I can't tell you how incredible that is.
To find out more about Joseph Phillips, please visit his website: JosephCPhillips.com
By The RBM
The RBM: The title of your book "He Talk Like A White Boy" stems from an experience you had as
a junior high school student when a black girl said you spoke like a white boy. All too often young
black children who use the English language correctly hear this from their peers. How do you think
that mindset shapes generations of black children and honestly, how did that statement affect you?
Joseph: I have traveled all over the country and I have heard from people young and old that tell me that
either they have experienced this or that someone in their family is currently experiencing it. There is always
a sense of pain that accompanies the stories, particularly when they speak of children currently enduring the
taunts. I know from their stories that many of the children struggle with questions of identity. They are
intimidated into particular dress and behaviors in order to fit in. I was not immune to this when I was in
school. Honestly the statement didn't affect me as much as everything that followed. From that moment on I
as treated differently, or at least I began to really notice the difference in how I was treated by both black
and white students. I was physically and verbally assaulted by some of my black classmates and ignored by
white classmates. I can laugh about it now, but it was perhaps the most horrible period of my youth. What is
important, however, and what I talk about in my book is that this notion of authenticity in black behavior
morphs into a rigorous authenticity of black thought in adulthood. And it is just as silly, just as destructive
and the rules are enforced just as harshly in adulthood as they were when we were children. If you do not
toe the line you are cast off. Oh the names I have been called by folks that disagree with me! To me it is a
very narrow and limiting definition of blackness. Not to mention arbitrary. I am Black, this is how I roll so it
must fall within the parameters of authentic Black thought.
The RBM: You are a self proclaimed "conservative". When I heard you speak, you talked about
moving beyond labels, rather, just be a person and who you are. But is there a difference between
being a conservative and a Republican? A liberal and a Democrat?
Joseph: I do not admit to being a conservative unless I get to define what that means. To some folks
conservative means what they scrape from the bottom of their shoe and I am certainly not a self proclaimed
whatever that is. I do believe in the founding principles. I believe in the natural rights of all men to life, liberty
and private property. I believe the duty of government is to secure these rights and they receive their just
powers from the consent of the governed. I believe in the traditional family as the primary source of moral
education, I believe in God...I could go on, but, you see, this is what I mean by labels. What does
conservative tell you about what it is I believe? Actually very little. What does democrat tell anyone about
what it is you actually believe? We know a great deal more once we begin talking and sharing thoughts and
ideas. All Republicans are not conservatives and all Democrats are not liberals. It is one of those things
that drives political folks crazy. There are in fact two wings of the California Republican party and they do
not always like each other. The same is true I think of the Democrat party. It isn't until we begin talking
to each other and then we discover that we have a lot in common. Those labels and the baggage that comes
with them -- Conservative! Liberal! -- tend to end conversation rather than begin them.
The RBM: That being asked, your book discusses very thought provoking subjects, such as values,
being accountable and responsible, Spirituality, patriotism, and race. Yet at the same time you hope
to, again, remove labels from the conversation. How much of a hindrance does labels create when it
comes to the before-mentioned, and are those hindrances all that separate people from being united
on those issues?
Joseph: I answered some of this in the previous question. Let me go back and try to clarify a few things.
There is nothing that bothers me more than for someone to assume things about me because I am black.
Most Black folks hate when White folks do that. The truth is, however, we do it to ourselves all the time.
"Black" tells you nothing about what I think, in short it is a poor definition for who I am. I am in fact so
much more. Being fully realized means moving beyond race. Let me be clear I am not talking about
being invisible. The idea of being color blind has never been attractive to me because I think that it is a denial
of a certain very important part of us...of me. To behave as if my skin were not this rich, chocolate brown
is to deny an essential part of me. The key is that the color of my skin should not convey worth! That is
what we are struggling to move past. It is a struggle to realize the value of our characters, our virtue.
Similarly, the idea that a word like Republican can adequately define who one is and what they think is
absurd. Yet we do it all the time and again it prevents conversation rather than encourage conversation.
Does that mean we will agree on the issues? No! We will disagree, we will disagree sometimes vehemently!
But it is my belief that we will be better able to find solutions because we will finally be speaking from a
common foundation of values. This is something that I find attractive about Barak Obama. I disagree with
him on quite a few issues, but he does not take the tack that conservatives are evil. Or that Black
conservative (or conservatives that happen to be black) are sell out Uncle Toms etc. That is refreshing and
can't help but begin to create an environment that will nurture solutions.
The RBM: Are race, conservatism, and liberalism really labels or more adjectives, describing a way
someone lives his or her life?
Joseph: What is a Black way to live ones life? I know there are folks that believe this exists...Harry
Belafonte for instance. These are folks however that set themselves up as race police -- guardians checking
ideological credentials and ripping up membership cards. They are playing a variation on the race game and
the authenticity game is just as rigged as is the race game. The guardians are always changing the rules on
the fly. They are the kids we knew growing up that ripped up your membership card for listening to rock
and roll. "What's wrong with you Brother? Black folks don't listen to rock and roll!" Two years later they try
to get you to go to a Rolling Stones concert with them. Silly example, but this is exactly how the game is
played. A better example might be the interracial marriage card. You would be amazed at how often I am
asked if my wife is black. Naturally the fact that I am a "conservative" means I must be married to a white
woman. Forget for the moment the numerous great black men that have had white wives -- Fred Douglass,
Jack Johnson, Julian Bond etc. Also put aside the fact that many of these same critics have had liaisons with
white women. My in-authenticity is proven by the fact that I am married to a white woman. Oh but wait a
moment. I am NOT married to a white woman. My wife is in fact Black. The gate keepers are not deterred.
They respond: "I bet she's light skinned!" True story! It absolutely happens! It happened once during a
speech in Columbus Ohio it happened AS I was telling the story. There is no greater proof than when folks
see it with their own eyes. The audience roared!
The RBM: A lot of our readers will remember your from "The Cosby Show" so I've gotta ask at
least one question referencing that experience. Obviously times have changed since the show, but
with your foundation and beliefs, how influential was the show for African Americans from a values
perspective? How refreshing was it for you to work on a project like "The Cosby Show" (from that
same perspective)? How has television changed since then when talking about "black" television
shows (or shows geared toward black audiences)?
Joseph: The Cosby show was incredibly influential. If nothing else the program portrayed a side of Black
life seldom seen before. I am not only talking about the fact the Huxtables were middle-class...upper middle
class. There were other things: two parents that ran the home with love and a strong hand. Children that got
into trouble but were not smarter than their parents, didn't talk back; the presence of generations of family.
There was also the art on the walls, the music...this program set the standard and all the "black" programs
that have followed have emulated it in some way. For me the most refreshing thing about working on that
show was that I had a job. As Harold Melvin says, "Regular J.O.B. baby!" I was 27 years old, single and
very heterosexual. The last thing on my mind was family values. C'mon! I will say, however, that the Cosby
Show proves something I am saying. This program was the most popular program on television. It was
watched and adored by white and black families. It was a program about a Black family, but it was not a
program about being black. The audiences identified with the values. It is the mistake so many writers and
producers make. They try to write a show about black people and what you get is a completely unbelievable
assemblage of gospel music and Kente Cloth wearing characters etc. Just write a good story about some
people with values the audience can identify with and the audience will come.
The most disturbing thing I recall hearing during those days was that this was not an accurate portrayal of
black life. How sad that there were folks only able to see us -- black folk-- through the lens of poverty and
despair...drug addiction and welfare. Our women are not as sophisticated and beautiful as Phylicia Rashad.
They chicken neck and put their hands on their hips! Thankfully these folks were in the minority.
The RBM: You and Tavis Smiley are friends, you've worked on his radio show, and he wrote the
foreward of your book. You two also have different political views, yet share the same founding
principles, faith, morals, and goals for not just black families but families in general. At the same
time there have been and currently are wars fought between nations who, like the two of you,share
political differences but the same fundamental principles. So then what is the triggering point for
these international conflicts? Is it when the politics outweigh beliefs, vice versa, or do they become
so integrated with one another that there is no difference? Should there be a difference?
Joseph: Honestly the answer to this may be a bit outside my comfort zone. However, that has never stopped
me before so I will dive in with both feet. First I think that obviously what happens is that people stop talking
to one another and stop listening. They get to a point that the label does all the speaking for them;
conversations end rather than begin. That said I also believe that war is on the continuum of diplomacy.
There are in other words times when it is necessary to flex a little muscle. I do not say this lightly or
flippantly. The founders put it very well in the declaration: "prudence, indeed, will dictate..." These conflicts
should not be entered into over "light and transient reasons." In my mind and in the minds of the founders
the denial of the natural rights to life liberty and property are reasons to fight and if need be die. Interestingly,
I think it is time for this nation to have a real conversation about those principles on which we agree. I was
in Denver, my home town and trying to connect with an old family friend. I told her my talk was being
sponsored by the Claremont Institute. "Who are they?" she asked. I answered, "a Think tank dedicated to
re-establishing the founding principles in the American politic." "Oh," She responded. "Ultra conservative."
Now, in fairness the Claremont is described as a "right" think tank. But what in my description is ultra
conservative? More importantly as a liberal, which of the founding principles does she disagree with? Just
briefly let's examine what they are: A belief that every man is born with a God given right to life liberty and
private property; that the job of government is to secure those rights and that government derives its just
powers from the consent of the governed...MMnn sounds awfully subversive to me. Unfortunately, she is
not alone. How many self described liberals would agree with her that anyone that promotes the founding
principles is an ultra conservative? AND how many of them on that basis would curb their involvement with
you based on that? Having had it happen to me more than once I can tell you the answer is more folk than
you think. So you see the beginnings of civil strife planted. Do we as Americans agree in a natural right to
private property or not?
Do we agree on what constitutes liberty or not? Do we agree on a God given right to life? We clearly
disagree on what the purpose of government is. From where does government get its power -- its JUST
powers? This is a conversation that is long overdue.
The RBM: How long have you had an interest in writing?
Joseph: I have been interested in writing for a long time. However, being interested and actually doing it are
two different things. The computer and the internet really opened up the world for me. All through high
school, college and after I would write long hand into a notebook. You know sad poetry etc. I even wrote a
few plays and sent them around with no luck. The problem was it took so much effort to edit things and get
them to people to read. Once I began writing weekly I was reaching an audience with the
click of the mouse. I am editing easily. Through email I am in contact with people that perhaps never would
have seen my stuff if it were sitting in an envelope on their desk. And the online publications reach an
enormous amount of people. The thing that actually spurred me to write more was 9/11. Like so many
Americans I was profoundly changed by the events of that day. I began to think bout my family differently,
my country differently and my faith differently. The way I began to write changed. My wife as well as
fraternity brothers that were reading me on line suggested I try to do distribute my stuff to a wider audience.
It has been 5 years now that I have been writing my column.
The RBM: "He Talk Like A White Boy" is a collection of essays that helps the reader get a greater
understanding of who you are and what your feelings are on subjects most of us deal with on some
level at some time. Did you ever feel like you were revealing too much about yourself, or at any
point did you maybe not include an essay you originally intended to because of that fear?
Joseph: Actually it was my wife that thought I was revealing too much about her. I have heard that
criticism from one person. They felt I revealed too much. This came to me second hand so I wasn't able to
get specifically what made them uncomfortable. I suspect, however, it was writing about my mothers
suicide. But here is the thing...I was always told to write about what it is I know best. The funny thing is
that in many ways what I am writing is not very different from what I used to put down in those notebooks.
I still write about being in love only now I write about being in love with my wife and kids...my country. I
still love poetic phrasing...my wife calls it writing in plaid. There were essays that were cut from early drafts
for one reason or another, but none because of being too revealing. I was lucky my publisher gave me quite
a free hand.
The RBM: Are the essays that were included part of a documented, continuous, growth, or more the
result of that growth?
Joseph: I have to think about this...All of them were written over a few year period of time. Some of that
was only because of delays in the publication date. More than likely it is a happy combination of both. With
each new week I am finding more of my voice as a writer. The more I write about these issues of family
with and freedom the more the ideas crystallize in my head. One of the nice things about the book (I think) is
that there is an arc -- a story -- so it does point to a growth. There is an evolution from where we start in
8th grade English class and where the book ends contemplating my sons and how all of that has come
before will shape their identities.
The RBM: For our writers who are or who may be circulating heir self-published book or
manuscript, and for our writers who will want to publish, what would you say your experience has
been with author houses, and what advise would you give to those looking to get into the world of
publishing?
Joseph: You know I have to confess I was very VERY! fortunate. I did not circulate my manuscript all
around and spend months waiting for rejection letters. Briefly: my journey began with a conversation with
Tavis Smiley. Tavis was instrumental in getting my book published if only because he challenged me to write
it, read an early draft and put me in touch with a publisher that guided me and eventually put me in touch
with someone else that put me in touch with the folks that eventually published my book. The lesson I think
for the membership is that relationships are important. Something else I found very helpful was a book on
self publishing. (I am searching my library now for the title. I think I loaned it out.) The information was
priceless. I didn't actually use all of it, but what I did use proved valuable. The advances in technology --
some of which I spoke of earlier -- have made it really easy to self publish. I attacked the project as if I was
going to self publish. For instance, by the time I went to the publisher I had the complete manuscript. (of
course they tossed half of it) More importantly I had 3 pages of endorsements. I also had a column running
in several papers across the country. The bottom line is I made a case to the publisher that they could do
very little work and sell books. The bottom line is important. At the end of the day they want to make
money. What I have learned is that having a publisher does not excuse one from having to sell sell sell. I am
finding that I am constantly trying to sell my book. You have to hustle! Chances are you are not going to get
on Oprah so don't make that part of your plan. You can however, get on local radio, internet, pod casts...on
and on. Write editorials to the local paper...You must hustle and look for ways to market yourself and your
book. Network, build relationships...and write.
The RBM: Finally, what has the response been for your book from those who have read it? Will you
share an experience you've encountered from a positive and negative standpoint?
Joseph: The wonderful thing is that the response to my book has been overwhelmingly positive. I have
heard so many wonderful things from both black and white readers, old and young liberal and conservative.
I have sold more books than I could have hoped. (Though not nearly as many as I would have wished.)
I am sure there are those that felt less than warm and cuddly about my book, but I have not heard from
them. I think one of the most humbling experiences is when I receive an email from someone that has read
my book and they tell me they read it in 2 days. They couldn't put it down. They share with me how they
laughed out loud in places, were moved in others and sucked their teeth while reading some other section.
But it is the fact that they took their hard earned money and purchased my book, then read it and were
touched. I touched them. Form miles away and years or gender or race I was able to touch them with
words. Wow! And then they took time to find my email and write me and share with me their feelings about
the book and perhaps a small something about their lives. Man I can't tell you how incredible that is.
To find out more about Joseph Phillips, please visit his website: JosephCPhillips.com
Check out our other
exclusive Spotlighted
Author interviews!!
June '06
Vincent Alexandria
July '06
Mary Monroe
August '06
Cold August
September '06
L.R. Hatcher
October '06
Various
November '06
Melanie C. Jordan
December '06
Mark Goggins
January '07
San Culberson
February '07
Rhyme Cypha
March '07
Lesley S Munyuki
April '07
Joseph Phillips
May '07
Hannah Drake
June '07
Kateb Nuri Shunnar
exclusive Spotlighted
Author interviews!!
June '06
Vincent Alexandria
July '06
Mary Monroe
August '06
Cold August
September '06
L.R. Hatcher
October '06
Various
November '06
Melanie C. Jordan
December '06
Mark Goggins
January '07
San Culberson
February '07
Rhyme Cypha
March '07
Lesley S Munyuki
April '07
Joseph Phillips
May '07
Hannah Drake
June '07
Kateb Nuri Shunnar
THEMECCALOUNGE.COM
The Community FOR Writers BY Writers
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
One of the many great things about being associated with TheMeccaLounge.com
and more specifically, conducting these interviews, is the process of seeking the
authors out. Mecca itself is still relatively new to the online writing scene compared
to other writing sites/Communities out there (having become a .com site a little over a
year ago), so of course we don't have the name recognition as some other domains.
Part of (and proud to be I might add) the "underground", it's often difficult to get
some of the higher profile authors to take the time out to sit down with us and
answer some our questions, for I'm sure, a variety of different legitimate reasons.
What's great about that however, is it allows us here to continually focus on the "up
and comers", the "what's next" in publishing, and since our registered Community
Members and visitors are "up and comers" and "what's next" in publishing themselves,
and more specifically, conducting these interviews, is the process of seeking the
authors out. Mecca itself is still relatively new to the online writing scene compared
to other writing sites/Communities out there (having become a .com site a little over a
year ago), so of course we don't have the name recognition as some other domains.
Part of (and proud to be I might add) the "underground", it's often difficult to get
some of the higher profile authors to take the time out to sit down with us and
answer some our questions, for I'm sure, a variety of different legitimate reasons.
What's great about that however, is it allows us here to continually focus on the "up
and comers", the "what's next" in publishing, and since our registered Community
Members and visitors are "up and comers" and "what's next" in publishing themselves,
we are able to produce more relaxed, open, and honest interviews than you'll generally read. How does that
relate to the "process" itself? Well since our very first "Spotlighted Author" back in June of last year, I've
noticed that there are two types of authors: one who loves to write, and one who writes for the love they
get back. One has something to say through his or her words, a message, a point. The other looks at writing
as a way to make money, to exploit meaningful conversations or situations, and cheapen them. Not too long
ago, one of our Community Members asked the question if poetry has lost it's way, it's meaning, and it's
legitimacy because of spoken word artists and authors who are motivated by the potential monetary gain
that can result. And while the overwhelming majority of respondents wrote that "no, poetry is safe", it's
safe only because the ones who write and perform purely for the love and make money as a result,
outnumber the former. Does passion have a face or a look? No. However, it does have a way, it has a
sound, and it has a aura. Passion is defined as someone or something that is linked with the words
"intensity", "infatuation", "desire", and "emotional", unlike passive, which is associated with words like
"quiet", "unstirred", "unemotional", and "indifferent". Which brings me to this months Spotlighted Author,
Joseph Phillips.
One of the outlets that I use in the before-mentioned "process" is television and a series called "BookTV".
The design of the show is to expose new and established authors to an wider audience and exposing that
same audience to a variety of different authors who write on a variety of different issues. When I initially
saw Joseph, I thought to myself "hey, that's that guy from the 'Cosby Show', I wonder what he has to
write about". One of the next things I noticed while I was watching was that Joseph was speaking to a
group of young Men and Women as a guest of the Young Americans Foundation, an outreach organization
for the "conservative movement". Define "conservative" as you like, but when I saw an African American
Man who is also a Hollywood actor (who have the reputation of being on the "left") speaking to a
conservative organization geared to the youth, needless to write, my interest was peaked at that point.
He spoke for over an hour, answering questions these young Men and Women had on issues that included
politics, family, morals, values, affirmative action, and more. He himself touched on these subjects,
explaining what his beliefs are, why he believes the way that he does, and substance to back up his views.
For over an hour, I was impressed at how emotional he was, how intense he spoke, and the desire he
demonstrated. He was passionate. So, I decided to do a background check on him. I wanted to know more
about his book, why the book was written, and what was the result he was hoping for by writing it. I found
that the title of the book "He Talk Like A White Boy" had little to do with race at all, but it was an overall
assessment of the types of things that plague not just a specific group of people, but a nation. It was a
metaphor and at the same time an example for/of a way of thinking, a box that most people limit themselves
to. And while watching Joseph, he discussed race, he defined and discussed the role that is has in his life
while not letting if define him.
There is a quote that I recently read that says "Two types of writers possess genius: One who thinks, and
another that forces the reader to think", and as you read the conversation I had with Mr. Phillips, you'll
understand why he definitely is a part of that exclusive club.
relate to the "process" itself? Well since our very first "Spotlighted Author" back in June of last year, I've
noticed that there are two types of authors: one who loves to write, and one who writes for the love they
get back. One has something to say through his or her words, a message, a point. The other looks at writing
as a way to make money, to exploit meaningful conversations or situations, and cheapen them. Not too long
ago, one of our Community Members asked the question if poetry has lost it's way, it's meaning, and it's
legitimacy because of spoken word artists and authors who are motivated by the potential monetary gain
that can result. And while the overwhelming majority of respondents wrote that "no, poetry is safe", it's
safe only because the ones who write and perform purely for the love and make money as a result,
outnumber the former. Does passion have a face or a look? No. However, it does have a way, it has a
sound, and it has a aura. Passion is defined as someone or something that is linked with the words
"intensity", "infatuation", "desire", and "emotional", unlike passive, which is associated with words like
"quiet", "unstirred", "unemotional", and "indifferent". Which brings me to this months Spotlighted Author,
Joseph Phillips.
One of the outlets that I use in the before-mentioned "process" is television and a series called "BookTV".
The design of the show is to expose new and established authors to an wider audience and exposing that
same audience to a variety of different authors who write on a variety of different issues. When I initially
saw Joseph, I thought to myself "hey, that's that guy from the 'Cosby Show', I wonder what he has to
write about". One of the next things I noticed while I was watching was that Joseph was speaking to a
group of young Men and Women as a guest of the Young Americans Foundation, an outreach organization
for the "conservative movement". Define "conservative" as you like, but when I saw an African American
Man who is also a Hollywood actor (who have the reputation of being on the "left") speaking to a
conservative organization geared to the youth, needless to write, my interest was peaked at that point.
He spoke for over an hour, answering questions these young Men and Women had on issues that included
politics, family, morals, values, affirmative action, and more. He himself touched on these subjects,
explaining what his beliefs are, why he believes the way that he does, and substance to back up his views.
For over an hour, I was impressed at how emotional he was, how intense he spoke, and the desire he
demonstrated. He was passionate. So, I decided to do a background check on him. I wanted to know more
about his book, why the book was written, and what was the result he was hoping for by writing it. I found
that the title of the book "He Talk Like A White Boy" had little to do with race at all, but it was an overall
assessment of the types of things that plague not just a specific group of people, but a nation. It was a
metaphor and at the same time an example for/of a way of thinking, a box that most people limit themselves
to. And while watching Joseph, he discussed race, he defined and discussed the role that is has in his life
while not letting if define him.
There is a quote that I recently read that says "Two types of writers possess genius: One who thinks, and
another that forces the reader to think", and as you read the conversation I had with Mr. Phillips, you'll
understand why he definitely is a part of that exclusive club.