First, Jay is correct that Bakhtin is referring to Rabelais but he is
also referring to Dostoevsky--although his carnival undoubtedly has a
different sense than that of Rabelais. There is an amazing scene in
Demons where, among other things, the son of a former serf slaps the son
of his father's former landlord. Bakhtin relates this scene to the
carnival--both in the sense of role reversal and with the sense of danger
inherent in that role reversal. The secret behind that slap isn't
revealed until the end of the book some 500 pages later.
SEcond, the value in carnival is not just in its role reversals but also
in the risk involved which enables both genuine interaction and perhaps
genuine and profound learning. Fred Erickson has written about the risk
involved in learning in the zpd. Carnival exaggerates that risk but
maybe the exaggeration is helpful in understanding the process.
Third, Bakhtin makes a distinction (which I don't fully understand)
between carnvial as an ancient, medieval, and Renaissance practice and
the modern practice of masquerade. So, I guess, its not merely about
masks and unmasking.
The reason I raised the issue of carnival is not to get us side-tracked
into discussion of food fights but to raise the possibility that teaching
at its best may need to transcend the differences between us (as well as
acknowledge them as Jay and others continue to remind us). Transcending
differences is very risky, may be even more dangerous than a food fight
or a slap.
Ellice Forman