For Research Methods (On Critically Conscious Research: Approaches to Language and Literacy Research)

The Hyphenated African

             This week’s reading really inspired me to be creative. This concept of critically conscious narrative/counternarrative made me think about how to use narration to “de-Other” by allowing someone to “imagine the mind of the oppressed and to see, and perhaps vicariously experience, the world through their eyes” (Willis et.al 112). My friend and I were brainstorming when she came up with the idea of writing a narrative about racial identity, but exchanging our narratives with one another in order to get both the experience of being “the other” as well as getting to see the world through someone else’s eyes (I think I said that right). Basically, the idea is that each person starts to write their own story, you trade papers with one another, and then you add on to the other person’s story from your own perspective. Once we made sense of it, we decided to add my mother and my niece to the equation.

                

            We chose to write about the different perspectives in the racial identity of being African-American, and whether or not the “hyphen” is the absence or presence of identity. We call it: The Hyphenated African. My friend is east African, and she wrote about identifying as “African”. I wrote about identifying as just “American”. We had my mother write about identifying as both African and American—hence the need for hyphenation (mainly because she was around for the all the name changes, movements, and racist stuff). Then I had my niece write about how she identifies herself, because she is mixed and requires more hyphens to define who she is (pretty perceptive for a 10 year old). Here’s what we came up with:

Zam Zam: Growing up I was told to be proud about my heritage. I was told not to forget my history. To do so would disgrace all those who died protecting it in the civil war in Somalia. My mother even took it so far as to check the "other" slot when filling out documents asking about race. Even though we were naturalized as US citizens, she refused to check African-American. She refused to consider she was hyphenated in any manner. Eventually this rubbed off on me. You see I'm not a first generation--- I'm an immigrant like my mother from Somalia. I came here at the young age of 5, at times I'm so Americanized that I relate more to the American culture than my African one. However, in the end, I can tell I don't fit in the African-American culture. The label doesn't capture the collective experiences I've had in my lifetime. I may look African-American but I identify myself as African who is American. I am not hyphenated nor will I accept that label.

Me: I am not African. I am not from Africa. I am from America. I was born on American soil, to American parents, and many of my ancestors were Native American. I am more than just the descendant of former slaves. Although it is a part of my history, I refuse to allow slavery to define my identity. You cannot “hyphenate” me. You cannot “Other” me, create a separate label for me, but still allow me to be an “—American”. I was an American before there was an America.  

Mom: Our ancestors were brought from Africa as slaves to America. Our people helped to build this country, and because they were slaves they never got any pay for their work. Without the work of slaves there wouldn’t be an America. Our ancestors earned the title of American. The best way to describe Black people is African American. Black is an acceptable way to refer to us, or Negro if you know how to pronounce it correctly.

Ladybug: (Note: because of her age I had her answer questions rather than write a paragraph)…

            Q: What are you? (Name all).

                        A: German, Irish, French, Indian, Black, White, Black-Frenchman

Q: Are you African? Why?

A: No, I don’t think I’m African because out of all the parts I’m made of that’s not on my list.    

            Q: Are you American? Why?

A: Yes. Because I am free. An American is someone that was born and raised in America.

            Q: Are you African-American? Why?

                        A: No. Because I’m only American which is halfway not fully African American.

For Research Methods (On Critically Conscious Research: Approaches to Language and Literacy Research)

CDA, Critical Ethnography, and some other stuff...


Where to begin? There is so much information covered in this section 500 words just isn't enough to cover it all. There were a couple of parts that stood out to me the most. First, was the part about CDA--mainly because Dr. P. had us write one about a movie for class last year. Thinking critically about a movie takes all of the fun out of it--you develop this critical consciousness and have a heightened sense of awareness to everything. Next thing you know, every movie, every TV show, every commercial is racist and sexist and homophobic, and you're walking around in awe of how much of this stuff you were completely oblivious to. For example, Dr. P. had us read an article he wrote about the movie Shrek. I wasn't really interested in the movie before, but I never thought about it beyond it being a kid's movie with Eddie Murphy playing a stupid donkey.  After reading his article, I was amazed at how much racism I missed and had to go back and watch the movie. You can check out the article here.

Critical ethnography also got my attention. I wish there was more information on it, but the little overview made me want to do some more research into it. I liked Quartz's idea that critical ethnography "attempts to re-present the 'culture', the 'consciousness', or the 'lived experiences' of people living in asymmetrical power relations" (Willis et. al 55). In particular, I like the use of the word "re-present" instead of represent. Instead of trying to speak for that group of people, you are using their own words to present their culture, consciousness, and experiences. Big difference to me. The one thing that does bother me about this is how women and non-whites keep getting left out of the equation. How is it possible to focus on oppression, or oppressed people and not take their contributions into consideration?

The critically conscious study of whiteness and sexual orientation both interested me as well. I am a huge fan of Tim Wise (which is why I will post his video below), and for some reason language and sexual orientation both confuse and interest me. I think this is largely due to the fact that this is still new to me, but I am also realizing that I am at a disadvantage when talking to homosexual and transsexual people. It's has more to do with identity and language, but I've found that the lines aren't as clear to me as when I am dealing with something like race. Anyway, since I love visuals I wanted to add the Tim Wise video on whiteness. Hope you like it.

For Research Methods (On Critically Conscious Research: Approaches to Language and Literacy Research)

Hegel's Master/Slave Relationship...


For some reason, Hegel's Master/Slave relationship example stuck in my mind while I was reading. Immediately, my mind went to chattel slavery and colonialism. It amazes me that Hegel could make this association with consciousness, but still believe that black people "had not historically or  intellectually evolved to consciousness and, at best, could only seek to imitate White males" (Willis et al. 9). How can Hegel acknowledge that consciousness comes from this type of relationship, and the desire for freedom, but not acknowledge the consciousness of black people who were slaves, or victims of colonial oppression? I particularly appreciated Fanon's response that basically argues black people have their own consciousness that is unique (not universal) to their experience of oppression, and not merely an imitation of white people: "I am wholly what I am. I do not have to look for the universal...My Negro consciousness does not hold itself out as a lack. It is. It is its own follower." (qtd. in Willis et al. 21).

His misunderstandings of Black consciousness (while understandable), do seem to reflect his own racism--if only in his concept of Universality. However, the book does point out that there is a "universalistic position" in the Master/Slave relationship where "slaves become conscious of their masters' dependency on the slaves' labor and obedience" (Willis et al. 10). Of course, when you add chattel slavery and good ole Willie Lynch to the equation, it seems rather difficult to make this position universalistic. In fact, it makes Hegel's idea of imitation a tad bit more palatable in the sense that American slaves didn't fully "develop a personal sense of reality based on new understandings" (Willis et al. 10). In other words, the Master used language as a tool of oppression in order to "inculcate dominant ideologies through speech and literature in the lives of the less powerful" (Willis et al. 22), and it is this dominant ideology that would be the foundation of the American slaves' understanding. The American slave, in particular, would have his/her reality shaped by, based on, the understanding of white people from the moment they were brought to this country and stripped of their own culture, language, etc., and given the language/literature of their oppressors. This is another reason I love Fanon :-).

So, seeing as how I'm a visual person, I'm really tired, and I haven't had the opportunity to throw a video in on these posts as of yet.  I found a video on Fanon. It talks about some of this stuff in there. Hope you like it.