Talk:Lawn jockey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

I have put up a photo, and have sent the documentation on to permissions:


I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of WORK [1].

I agree to publish that work under the free license LICENSE [

- for works released into the public domain by non-Wikimedia users)].

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. 3/13/08, John Barker

I hope to put up another photo as soon as I get clearance for it. DavidOaks (talk) 19:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



From the History News Network: http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/29964.html In a Simple Lawn Ornament, Echoes of Slavery, Revolution Source: Wa Po (9-17-06)

Driving along the outskirts of Washington on a late summer afternoon, you sometimes spot a head peeping out of a ragged patch of black-eyed Susans, and you wonder: What is that lawn jockey doing there? Who put him there? Why?

Plaster saints -- we know what those stand for. On a more whimsical note, the same goes for the garden gnome, the stag, the Dutch girl with the fishing rod.

But the lawn jockey? He's a ghost from the days of plantations and magnolias, fox hunts and manorial estates.

To some, particularly African Americans, the lawn jockey is a pint-size monument to repugnant stereotypes, a holdover from the days of slavery and Jim Crow, an artifact of racial prejudice alongside Aunt Jemima.

But others, including some historians and collectors of African American memorabilia, say the lawn jockey has been misunderstood. They say his origins can be traced to a legend of faithful duty during the American Revolution. They say he guided slaves to freedom on the underground railroad. His appearance has evolved over time, reflecting changes in the stature of blacks in U.S. society.

Uncle Sam[edit]

A talking lawn jockey plays a part in the Uncle Sam graphic novel. Should that be here?

Purpose of a lawn jockey?[edit]

Hi. Direct me to another article, please, if it exists, but I'd like to know the purpose of a lawn jockey. Maybe that could be included in the article. Decoration? Do/did the black lawn jockeys serve a different functional purpose than the white ones? Thanks SolitaryThrush 02:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps this is not the right place to point this out, but it seems to me that lawn jockeys are just a novel americana version of venetian blackamoors, which were usually in pairs and represented stylized north african black boys resplendant in silk turbans and sometimes holding candleabras. they were popular in the 18-19 century and it seems to me that the connection is obvious.

Connection to Venice Blackamoors[edit]

I lack the scholerly finesse to document the connection, but i think that somebody should —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.170.76 (talk) 22:34, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The garden dwarves[edit]

Is there any connection between the lawn jockeys and european "garden dwarves"? (For a reference, they appears in the french film "Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain)")

"Yardell"[edit]

Haven't been able to find an instance of this term that didn't seem likely to go back ultimately to this article. It certainly doesn't qualify for "commonly known as" After two years of being tagged, it's time to delete. DavidOaks (talk) 13:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"debunking"[edit]

Anyone else find the information and sources provided in the linked "Article debunking ..." insufficiently supportive? Can the debunked claim be better sourced? Ebenheaven (talk) 20:56, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lawn jockey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removed red/green buoy reference[edit]

I removed the text stating that Blockson's claim is backed up by an 1848 act establishing red and green buoys, for two reasons: (a.) it's original research, which is disallowed, and (b.) it's incorrect - the source that the writer cited to back up that claim actually says clearly that the 1848 act established red and black buoys; green came much later in the 70's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:187:807F:2500:180C:80B1:8A6D:20F1 (talk) 16:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Underground railroad connection?[edit]

Here Snopes says that it is undetermined. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:13, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Needs section on racist history[edit]

for what is so clearly a racist symbol, there is no section on its racist past anywhere in the article. this whole page needs to be re-written. JointCompound (talk) 13:26, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Lawn jockeys, or groomsmen, are mostly a rural phenomenon in an increasingly urban world. But Russell L. Adams, chairman of the Afro-American studies department at Howard University, said their enormous iconic power cuts across time and place.

"The first time you see it, you have a specific reaction — almost like a flashback that you didn't know was a flashback," Adams said. His first encounter with one amazed and angered him — especially the figure's stooped, unmistakably servile posture." 

JointCompound (talk) 13:45, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that not ALL lawn jockeys are black, but their origins were racist, and they were only changed to white in response to backlash from said racism JointCompound (talk) 13:45, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This Isn’t Referential, It’s Preferential[edit]

When these were more prevalent, they weren’t only used by racists … and often weren’t even acknowledged as racist. You cannot apply the thinking process of today’s society to a historical figure and call it a fact or historical reference. While the claims of attachment to the UR were never fully substantiated, they were also never fully debunked.

Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia. This article is written, entirely, with an opinionated slant. Even if it’s the prevailing opinion, it’s still opinion and has no place in a referential setting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Commediallc (talk • contribs) 18:31, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are a great many historic artifacts that, in their heyday, were not considered racist. A lot of children, even black children, loved and played with Black Sambo dolls, for example, but that doesn't make the artifact not racist. The wording of the article may need rephrased (rather than flat-out calling lawn jockeys "racist", it could be said that today they are recognized as items of contention due to their portrayal of black people, or that they have been used in some situations as racist symbols), but if Wikipedia were to be controlled by the context of the past and not the present, then it would be an outdated and useless reference. I don't think it's a matter of question whether or not there were harmless connotations to lawn jockeys alongside any racial connotations. Still, with an applied contextual lens involving pop culture, sociology and the caricature-like design of the lawn jockey throughout history, there is more than enough to support that there are racist ties to the lawn jockey. I would recommend that the article be rephrased to reflect that this is a matter of opinionated contention rather than a fact, but the information presently there should not be removed. There is no possible way to know (obviously) what the intention was behind every person who ever used a black lawn jockey. I'm sure that a century ago, many people thought their use was all in good fun and not offensive at all. Wikipedia is not a place for speculation, though. PetSematary182 (talk) 07:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)PetSematary182[reply]

Why are the depictions of the Underground Railroad depictions of Southern origin?[edit]

If the Underground Railroad depictions are debunked why would the article put up pictures of Southern interpretations of a debunked theory? 2600:1702:44C0:1750:94D7:B499:F7FE:AAA8 (talk) 22:35, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This information is false. The lawn jockey was instrumental during the civil war. People sympathetic to slaves would put a yard jockey in their yard to informal black spaces running away and seeking freedom in the north that the home would provide them with safety, food or needs. 173.207.209.196 (talk) 00:39, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lawn_jockey&oldid=1195377308"