Podcast Summary: Ian Smith, "Black Shakespeare: Reading and Misreading Race"

New Books Network | Literary Studies | Host: John Yargo | Guest: Ian Smith
Release Date: February 7, 2026

Overview

In this episode, John Yargo interviews Ian Smith, Professor of English at USC and president of the Shakespeare Association of America, about his book Black Shakespeare: Reading and Misreading Race (Cambridge UP, 2022). Smith explores how the conditioning and training of readers—both professional scholars and public audiences—has led to the persistent overlooking or denial of race in Shakespeare's works. The conversation examines the concept of "systemic whiteness," the role of racial literacy, and how modern events and historical laws inform our understanding of early modern texts. Smith also offers new readings of Shakespeare's plays (The Merchant of Venice, Hamlet, and Othello) through a racial lens, arguing for ethical self-inquiry and transformation in both scholarship and the classroom.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Systemic Whiteness and Racial Literacy in Shakespearean Studies

• Defining Systemic Whiteness:
  Smith contextualizes his analysis within the long history of academic resistance to acknowledging race in Shakespeare:

  • "Systemic whiteness speaks to the way societies develop and perpetuate this kind of white preference or bias through their institutions and systems, whether it's an educational system or the legal system or the economic system..." (Ian Smith, 07:39)
  • He invokes Toni Morrison's idea of American readers being "positioned as white," emphasizing how intellectual conditioning predisposes readers to overlook racial evidence in texts.

• The "Blind Spot" Phenomenon:
  Smith references experimental psychology indicating that about 75% of American subjects exhibit unconscious white preference. This persists even among those who consciously reject racism, underscoring the pervasiveness and subtlety of conditioning.

• Impact on Literary Interpretation:
  The discussion critiques how traditional Shakespearean criticism "explains away" race, with systemic whiteness producing "racial blind spots" in scholarship and teaching.

2. Anecdotes of Racial Denial in Shakespeare Criticism (10:23)

• Smith recounts a moment at a Shakespeare Association of America panel where a participant claimed, without elaboration, “Othello is not a play about race.”
  • “That is an example of…racial denial and racial sort of resistance.” (Ian Smith, 10:23)
  • Rather than dismiss this as mere malice or ignorance, Smith’s book investigates causes rooted in systemic training and cultural resistance.

3. The Intended Reader and Ethical Transformation (12:16)

• Smith distinguishes between institutional/systemic and individual responses to race:

  • "Systemic whiteness affects all of us. The question is to varying degrees..." (Ian Smith, 12:56)
  • He cites W.E.B. Du Bois’s notion of "whiteness as possession" and outlines a hope for dynamic, positive transformation in readers—a reimagining of whiteness not as possession, but as ethical openness.

• Classroom Transformations:
  Smith uses the analogy of the Reticular Activating System (RAS) in the brain—foregrounding certain features or themes through deliberate attention—to encourage a foregrounding of race and critical inquiry in educational settings.

4. Methodological Approach: Connecting Premodern Texts with US Case Studies (22:45)

• Smith structures his book by framing readings of Shakespeare with US American history (e.g., anti-literacy laws, January 6th insurrection, narratives of enslaved people):
  • "In critical race studies, it just…is always speaking in this sort of dialogic way." (Ian Smith, 23:01)
  • This historic framing illuminates systemic whiteness as both transhistorical and evolving, making the relevance and violence of race explicit in literary analysis.

5. Reading, Anti-Literacy Laws, and Body Politics (26:32)

• Smith explains the paradox in 19th-century US law:
  • Laws prohibited Black people, both enslaved and free, from reading texts, while simultaneously empowering whites to "read" Black bodies in legal and social contexts.
  • "So you have this shift from reading texts to reading bodies. And in a way, that should alert us and alarm us." (Ian Smith, 29:34)
• This history foregrounds how acts of “reading” can be volatile and deeply implicated in systems of disenfranchisement and discrimination.

6. The Racial Theater of the Audience’s Mind (31:58)

• Smith describes how Shakespeare plays with audience expectations and their “blind spots” regarding race:
  • “The argument I made there is that Shakespeare in effect writes a play in which he lures the audience...to play around with their sort of social, intellectual blind spot…” (Ian Smith, 32:19)
  • The theatrical space becomes a site for reckoning with racial assumptions, sometimes confirming and sometimes destabilizing them for the audience.

7. Revisiting Merchant of Venice: The “Pound of Fair Flesh” (35:16)

• Smith challenges conventional, often de-racialized readings of Merchant of Venice:
  • He draws attention to the legal language specifying “a pound of fair flesh,” asserting that whiteness is explicitly at stake in the bond.
  • “When Shylock demands that white flesh…he’s calling attention to the racial conflict of the play.” (Ian Smith, 38:01)
  • He links Shylock’s inability to own land (as a Jew) with his claim on Antonio’s body, arguing that Shylock’s bond is an assertion of power over whiteness itself.

8. Hamlet as Racial Theater (42:04)

• Smith brings a novel racial reading to Hamlet, focusing on references like the “Black Peeress” and Hamlet’s contrasting of Claudius (“the Moor”) with his father (“fair mountain”), both theatrically and genealogically:
  • "Editors have done us a disservice by not calling sufficient attention to the significance of the word 'Moor.'" (Ian Smith, 46:34)
  • He suggests that Hamlet participates in a timeline of race plays and that its resistance to being read racially represents yet another “blind spot” in criticism.

9. Othello: Ethical Self-Inquiry and Contemporary Relevance (51:23)

• Smith reads from his book, highlighting Othello as a challenge to modern audiences to wrestle with their own perceptions of Blackness:

  “Othello, the noble Moor, is often regarded as the exception to the violent black man type. Yet the full unfolding of the story produces a complicated human picture to which the audience is expressly set up to respond. This is a challenge Shakespeare poses in Othello, and it represents a profound ethical self inquiry that far surpasses mere scholarly production, dutiful analysis or skillful performance…” (51:23)

10. Writing, Rhythm, and the Classroom as Laboratory (53:18; 58:02)

• On Writing:
  Smith composes with a sense of rhythm ("rhetorical rhythm") akin to reading aloud, ensuring his prose is both engaging and clear. He is a “solitary” writer, revising slowly and meticulously as he goes.
• On Teaching:
  Smith frames the classroom as a laboratory for testing arguments:
  • “If undergraduates get it, then it means that readers beyond their levels can get it also.” (Ian Smith, 58:02)
  • He encourages active intellectual play, demonstrates the immediate relevance of critical race readings, and observes that students are receptive—even eager—for rigorous inquiry into race in Shakespeare.

11. The Shakespeare Association of America: Institutional Openness and the Future (62:28)

• Smith lauds the SAA’s openness to newer approaches (pre-modern critical race studies, environmental studies, gender and sexuality) and reflects on the importance of institutional support in shaping scholarly fields.
• He champions the organization’s commitment to egalitarianism and inclusivity for new and established scholars alike.

12. Next Projects: Early Modern Blackface (66:12)

• Smith is currently working on a project about early modern blackface (including Love’s Labour’s Lost and Merchant of Venice), promising new perspectives distinct from recent scholarship.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Systemic Whiteness:
  "Systemic whiteness speaks to the way societies develop and perpetuate this kind of white preference or bias through their institutions and systems..." (Ian Smith, 07:39)

• On Audience Expectations:
  “Shakespeare in effect writes a play in which he lures the audience...to play around with their sort of social, intellectual blind spot.” (Ian Smith, 32:19)

• On Merchant of Venice:
  “He’s calling attention to the racial conflict of the play. And again, I know that this play is often read in terms of religious conflict, but I think that we limit the reading of the play too narrowly if we refuse to see and listen to Shylock’s ongoing discussions about race and blackness and whiteness in the play…” (Ian Smith, 38:01)

• On Hamlet and Racial Theater:
  “Editors have done us a disservice by not calling sufficient attention to the significance of the word ‘Moor.’” (Ian Smith, 46:34)

• On Othello and Ethical Inquiry:
  “This is a challenge Shakespeare poses in Othello, and it represents a profound ethical self inquiry…” (Ian Smith, 51:23)

• On the Classroom:
  “If undergraduates get it, then it means that readers beyond their levels can get it also.” (Ian Smith, 58:02)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [02:09] Defining systemic whiteness and intellectual formation
• [10:23] Anecdote: denial of race in Othello
• [12:16] On the ideal reader, Morrison, and W.E.B. Du Bois
• [22:45] Method: Framing Shakespeare with US history
• [26:32] Anti-literacy laws, reading texts versus bodies
• [31:58] Audience blind spots and racial theater
• [35:16] The “pound of fair flesh” in Merchant of Venice
• [42:04] Racial readings of Hamlet and the “Moor”
• [51:23] Reading from Black Shakespeare on Othello
• [53:18] Smith on writing and revision techniques
• [58:02] Classroom as a laboratory for testing ideas
• [62:28] The Shakespeare Association of America’s role and future
• [66:12] New project: early modern blackface

Tone and Language

The episode features in-depth, reflective, and nuanced discussions, with Smith’s language blending analytical rigor and personal motivation. Smith is methodical and candid, foregrounding both scholarly argument and ethical stakes, while Yargo’s questions are thoughtful, supportive, and intellectually curious.

This episode is essential listening for scholars of Shakespeare, literary studies, critical race theory, and anyone interested in how historic texts—and their reading practices—shape contemporary understanding of race and culture.