E367: Writing and Diversity

Class, Wed, 9/11

Barbara Mellix, “From Outside, In”

Fastwrite

If you wrote one of the first responses to Mellix, read through the comments on your post. Post a comment replying to what one or more of your readers have had to say.
If you wrote comments, pick a response that you didn’t get a chance to comment on, read through what your classmates have had to say about it, and continue the conversation.
In either case, find a passage in Mellix’s essay that you’d like us to talk some more about (whether you write about this passage in your comment or not).

To Do

Wed, 9/11, 4:00 pm: Group B posts responses to Lu’s “From Silence to Words”.
Thurs, 9/12, 4:00 pm: Everyone else reads Group B’s responses and posts comments on at least two.
Fri, 9/13, class: We will use those responses and comments to structure our class discussion of Lu.
Mon, 9/16, class: Read James Paul Gee’s “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics”. I will lead our discussion.

“From Outside, In” is a honest discourse about language’s relationship with identity. Mellix tells the story of her evolution from child to full-fledged academic through literal excerpts of her past writing. During her youth, she became privy to a distinct dichotomy of language in her culture, which she defined as “black English” and “standard English”. She recalls an experience visiting relatives where she observed her parents operate under the unspoken prerequisite of using “standard English”. She describes her parents as “looking small and anxious during those occasions.” Because, as she would go on to reveal later, “The language was not ours, it was something from outside us, something we used for special occasions.” Mellix’ concern about this idea is reiterated during her recollection of her first college class. She wished only to belong, and to understand, but was left with similar feelings as her younger self. She said, “My concern was to sound as if I belonged in a college classroom. But I felt separate from the language – as if it did not and count not belong to me.”

This piece is also a statement on the relationship between language and power. It was disheartening to learn her language caused her feelings on inferiority. She understood her father’s success was somewhat contingent upon his ability to use “standard English”. Furthermore, she understood that if she was to make in an academia, she was going to have to overhaul her understanding of language, and somewhat, part of her identity. The reshaping of her identity caused her feelings of imbalance. In her last paragraph, she says, “To recover balance I had to take on the language of the academy. The language of “others”. And to do that, I had to learn to imagine myself a part of the culture of that language.”

I found this publication to be very worthwhile, it’s a fantastic insight for those who didn’t experience this problem growing up. Personally, I make small shifts in the content of my speech depending on the individual, and these become more obvious in group settings. However, the idea of reorienting my language to the degree she spoke of is foreign to me. This article raised several questions, and ideas for further thought…. How does language infer identity? Can you infer identity from language? Do I lose myself if I assimilate to “their” language? Or is thinking of it as “their” language a deeper issue? How can we measure quality of language when it’s not objective?

From Outside, In; Barbara Mellix (A Response)

Through the perspective of a young girl of color acclimating herself to ordinary life within the systems that “organize” America, Barbara Mellix invites us to apprehend the inner controversy that regularly takes place in the minds of people who are underrepresented and ironically, misunderstood. In this excerpt she compromises the “ordinary everyday speech of “country” coloreds” to acknowledge the language gap that exists between corporate America and common folk, she also captures her experience chronologically so that we may understand the confusion one might suffer through each milestone being raised surrounded by English rules that oppose “proper” English as well as the misconceptions that occur because of this style of upbringing.

I can relate to this confusion myself, also coming from an area where “proper” English is frowned upon. I can say from experience that when you are accustomed to these “other” forms of speech from where ever and whenever you were raised it becomes difficult to see the world from the perspective of regular “proper” English users. I know that language is a way to communicate with each other what we can give and can get from our environment, therefore it is sometimes inevitable that your understanding of the world is a result of how you communicate with it. I believe it is unfair to say that one form of speech is more or less optimal than the other but,I do think it is fair to agree that it would be easier to interact with a more narrow basis of dialect and language. Either way, as convenient as it may be to ignore each other and water our differences it should not be so much to ask that we seed the common ground that is apparent in every interaction and grow to understand one another from there.

Collision of Language

While reading Mellix’s From Outside, In, I couldn’t help but notice the irony in it. Throughout the whole piece, Mellix was explaining the frustration that she felt when trying to learn “standard English.” However, that article was extremely well written; there was no trace of the lack of understanding of “standard English” that she explained in the article.

Mellix talks about many of the issues she felt towards learning standard English when she grew up understanding, and speaking in, what she refers to as, “black English.” One of the main issues that she addressed multiple times in her writing, is that she felt that she had to adjust her language depending on the situation that she was in. She explains that she would use standard English when she was in the presence of “other” people. She uses the term “other” frequently in this article. What she means when she refers to “others” are “‘proper’ blacks, transplanted relatives and one-time friends who came home from the city for weddings, funerals, and vacations. And the whites.” Referring to the people who spoke standard English as “other” seemed very isolating to me. It seemed like she was purposely separating herself from the “others”. Maybe this was a way for her to understand the two languages better. There seemed to be a divide to those who spoke black English and those who spoke standard English. The only way to cross this divide was to learn standard English. Although it doesn’t seem fair to deem one vernacular more correct than another.

I was particularly interested in Mellix’s struggle in learning how to write in standard English. It’s not a simple as translating one to another; things (and feelings) weren’t being represented correctly. She often felt that she was at war with herself. There was a part of her that wanted to advance further in society by learning how to write in standard English, but there was the other part of her that felt like she was betraying the side of her that identified with black English. “It was the voice of my desire to prosper, but at the same time it spoke of what I had to relinquish and could not regain.”

Language can be a big part of our personality. I’ve heard of cases where bilingual people tend to have different personalities depending on which language they are speaking. It seems like Mallix is experiencing a similar situation. She felt less confident when she was speaking in standard English, and saw a similar feeling reflected in her parents whenever they went out and were in the presence of “other” people. Growing up speaking black English has prevented her from feeling free to express herself creatively through writing in standard English. Even when she showed improvement in her writing, she still expressed how it felt forced. I wonder if she feels the same way about this article? Will she forever be critical over her ability to express herself in standard English?

Same Animal, Different Beast, One Language

Barbara Mellix’s “From Outside, In” was what I thought to be a very interesting response to a cultural difference that has been taking place in America since the very first slave traders began to bring men and women over to the colonies. She begins immediately by describing the difference between “Black English” and “Standard English.” Mellix explains that how when she is around her immediate nucleic family she feels comfortable to speak in what she considers her native tongue of Black English. When she is at an event involving more distant family members or people that she does not know, she tries her best to speak in Standard English. Interestingly, she notes that her immediate family is always uncomfortable when it comes to speaking Standard English. She goes in to detail about her father speaking when she writes,

“My father was more articulate, more aggressive. He spoke quickly, his words sharp and clear. But he held his proud head higher, a signal that he, too, was uncomfortable.” (Mellix, 259, p 3)

I found this to be a fascinating description because of how uncomfortable and how distinct she believed the difference in the dialects to be. Both parties involved are speaking English and, yet, Mellix and the rest of her family, all of whom know how to use Standard English, seem to be almost wildly uncomfortable when they are not using their “native tongue.” This still goes on today. I have many friends who live in more urban areas than myself and when I visit them, the dialect is different – different words, words being used in other fashions. It is striking how distinct the differences are.

To continue, Mellix goes on to discuss her journey with Standard English in a college classroom when she found herself in an entry-level composition class at the University of Pittsburgh. Barbara Mellix initially describes her experiences in the class as,

“Each experience of writing was like standing naked and revealing my imperfection, my ‘otherness’.” (Mellix 264, p 2)

Quite obviously, Mellix is very comfortable with Standard English and she writes with incredible talent, however, she is very uncomfortable being able to utilize her ability to go back and forth between using Black and Standard English with ease in the early stages of her writing. I believe this to be intriguing because of mastery of the English language in which she writes with. She demonstrates her elite writing talent but has come so far from an entirely different dialect of the English language being able to write and speak as well as she does.

Language and Assimilation

Assimilation is the concept of homogenizing a minority group or culture with the dominant culture. An Immigrant is supposed to, over time, become like those in the society they move to. This could also extend to those who are born into a society and are pressured to stay within the perimeters of the culture that is most rewarded in that society. Assimilation can be debated as a something unifying and natural, or as something culturally genocidal and forced—a means to erase differences and multiculturalism. These arguments can be seen within the use of language as a means of assimilating.

On one hand, language can be unifying—a means for communication and understanding. Language is what connects us to each other—verbal or nonverbal. People who live millions of miles apart can still connect with each other through a shared language. However, a dominant language can be used to weed out minority languages as a means of acculturation. Language and how someone speaks that language is highly tied to someone’s culture and background. In the 19^th and 20^th centuries, the Canadian government forcibly assimilated the indigenous people that lived in the country. Alongside measures to stop traditional marriage practices and spiritual ceremonies, the government also enacted an extensive residential school system to target indigenous children. They were abused, forced into arranged marriages after graduation, and prohibited from speaking their native language. Once a language is targeted and erased, the minority culture can no longer communicate with each other the way they used to and thus cannot relate to their past culture the way they used to.

Today in the United States, there aren’t horror stories of such proportions—hopefully—anymore, but there is an effort and pressure for efficacy in speaking the dominant language—English. This pressure is not directed or dictated formally, but as a means of advancement and “fitting in.” Think of it like joining a new friend group and having to learn what type of humor they have or how they all talk to each other—except on a more communal or national scale. The U.S. doesn’t have an official language, but the dominant language is English and without learning and proficiently speaking or writing can keep many from advancing within the society—either socially, economically, or academically. In Barbara Mellix’s From Outside, In, she spoke about her experience of growing up in a Southern black community and how her family and neighbors spoke “black English”, but when moving out of this community or encountering white Americans—even if they spoke similar to her—steered her away from the vernacular she grew up speaking. She moved to Pittsburgh and had to conform to how that community spoke because she felt she would have been ostracized or possibly punished for her “improper English.” She also makes a points within her piece about how “proper English” is pushed in education.

In America’s education system, the main language that is being taught in classrooms is English—“proper English.” There are Language Immersion programs where children can learn another language aside from English, but the learning revolves around English. Usually math is the secondary language while English is reading and writing. Because of this tie to English and education, there is a subconscious link to believing more proficiency in English, knowing large words and understanding grammatical rules, means someone is more intelligent and educated. Of course, knowing many of languages, being bilingual, could also provide a sense of intelligence and education, but these extra languages are not “useful” in the sense of a dominant culture.

Thinking about education and language led to thinking about the language that dominates Academia and many academic papers. Can language assimilation happen within this sphere as well? Can this concept be applied to this community? Academia is not a dominant culture, but say someone is trying to write a research paper and have it published in a prestigious journal. This person has never written a research paper before on such a level. What would they have to change about their language to be accepted into this culture? Would even a paper written in a language similar to or in “black English” be accepted or taken as seriously as a paper that was bloated with three syllable vocabulary and convoluted grammatical techniques—even if one was more understandable than the more traditional and accepted language? Would you have taken this essay seriously if I wrote in “improper English?”

Class, Mon, 9/09

Questions About Responding and Commenting

Arlie Hochschild, “Empathy Maps”

Fastwrite

I’m interested in thinking about Hochschild’s piece in relation to Pratt’s, especially since where Pratt talks about “contact zones”, Hochschild talks about “empathy zones”. What’s at stake in this difference? Or might “mapping empathy” possibly be considered another one of the “arts of the contact zone”?

Please try to locate a particular point or passage in Hochschild’s piece that you’d like to relate to a passage from Pratt.

Keywords in the Early Readings

keywords-in-early-readings Download

Grades

To Do

Mon, 9/09, 4:00 pm: Group A posts responses to Mellix’s “Outside, In”.
Tues, 9/10, 4:00 pm: Everyone else reads Group A’s responses (along with Mellix, of course) and posts comments on at least two.
Wed, 9/11, class: We will use those responses and comments to structure our class discussion of Mellix.
Wed, 9/11, 4:00 pm: Group B posts responses to Lu’s “From Silence to Words”.
Thurs, 9/12, 4:00 pm: Everyone else reads Group B’s responses and posts comments on at least two.
Fri, 9/13, class: We will use those responses and comments to structure our class discussion of Lu.

Class, Fri, 9/06

Lambeth and Pratt

In groups

Asymmetry is a keyword for both Lambeth and Pratt. Please spend a few minutes thinking and talking about how their uses of this term/concept align and how they differ.

Contact Zones, and their Arts

Fastwrite

According to Pratt, what distinguishes a contact zone from other social spaces? And what distinguishes its “arts” from other those of other social spaces?

Groups, Responses, and Comments

To Do

Mon, 9/09, class: Please read Arlie Hochschild’s “Empathy Maps”. I’m interested in thinking about her work in relation to Pratt’s, especially since where Pratt talks about “contact zones”, Hochschild talks about “empathy zones”. What’s at stake in this difference? Or might “empathy” and “mapping” somehow also be considered “arts of the contact zone”?
Mon, 9/09, 4:00 pm: Group A posts responses to Mellix’s “Outside, In”.
Tues, 9/10, 4:00 pm: Everyone else reads Group A’s responses (along with Mellix, of course) and posts comments on at least two.
Wed, 9/11, class: We will use those responses and comments to structure our class discussion of Mellix.
Wed, 9/11, 4:00 pm: Group B posts responses to Lu’s “From Silence to Words”.
Thurs, 9/12, 4:00 pm: Everyone else reads Group B’s responses and posts comments on at least two.
Fri, 9/13, class: We will use those responses and comments to structure our class discussion of Lu.

Keepsake Chest

An object near and dear to my heart happens to be a tattered keepsake chest that I was given as a child. I’ve had it in all of my bedrooms since I can remember. When I first moved from the city to the suburbs I was only three years old and barely remember the transition. But as I got older the chest became the thing that stored my baby blankets, my favorite shirts, (to hide from my sister), and anything that I just didn’t want to share. It was the most personal thing to me. It was the most tangible constant. Through the years I’ve moved about three times, not included a shift from one bedroom in my current house to a larger bedroom.

The old damaged chest has always felt like a necessity. I find that Lambeth’s mindset of beauty within asymmetry or understanding “everything that persists is whole” is incredibly honest and accurately explained. It is also relatable in terms of bond, connection and values. Japanese philosophy known as Wabi Sabi “considers that fallen leaves carry more meaning than those still on the tree” which is why my chest could never be replaced in any way other than a practical sense. It is a reminder that even imperfect things have purpose.

Wabi Sabi as it applies to my life

It’s a simple example, however in all aspects of my life I like to keep a balance of organization and disorganization. My room, for example, will probably appear as a disorganized mess to the outsider looking in, however I like to live life by the moto, “A place for everything and everything in its place.” Just because there is a lot of stuff (everything I own in one small box I call a bedroom) it is cluttered, but it remains organized. My backpack is another good example of this. All of the books are organized by size and everything has a specific place for itself, but once you open up the notebooks it is difficult for the outsider to sort through and understand all the scribbled notes.

I enjoyed the insertion of “wabi sabi” in the article because I had not heard of it before. I enjoy the concept because it “insists upon asymmetry and imperfection,” as Lambeth stated in her article. I consider many things throughout my daily life to have a bit of wabi sabi in them.