Judy,
Hmm. It seems to me the first act of liberal, "progressive", educational thought is always how to dismantle resistance. I, of course will not argue that much of the resistance one would see is productive - I'm thinking of education mainly -. On the other hand, I think very few educators see or take this resistance as a type of critique of current practice.
I think there are examples - Rethinking Schools - of that resistance being transformed to critique or change to the system. I guess a lot of this would depend on if we see schools as putting forth a particular class viewpoint.
I think we need to stand back and understand what kind of system Willis is addressing. My understanding is it is very much a drill and kill approach to education. In this context maybe one should see it as a beating of sorts in which one resists - hits back, revolts etc. Now this kind of resistance is often not productive, but there exists a sort of value that at least ones not sitting there and taking it. Now, going about and trying to deal with the resistance without larger changes seems to miss the boat - not that anyone was arguing for this.
I have mixed feelings about this Judy. In many ways I fitted one of Willis' children very well, so give it some value. Where I disagree I guess is that the resistance itself is the cause of failure. The system (drill and kill) no matter what its intentions breeds failure, kills the spirit. Resistance, unproductive as it may be, has an element of pleasure - giving it to the man so to speak.
I guess mainly what I am speaking at is the dialectic of not only transforming, but having the willingness to be transformed. Thinking seriously of how schools are organized to force kids to make a false choice. Something as simple as I'm not going to sit in a classroom that is full of jocks and preps.
I just think that there are issues of identity at stake that can be very strong, and the normal educational response is home, friends, class etc is denying individual A the opportunity of educational success, rather than being confronted with how schools themselves facilitate these resistances. The price to not resist is sometimes greater - one loses their soul, or as the son in the movie, The River Niger, that I watched recently yelled to his officers "LET GO OF MY TOE".
Students don't fail because they resist, they resist because they are failed.
09:45 AM 6/19/01, you wrote:
>Nate wrote:
>>I mean if the task is simply to make the boys and girls less resistible
>that does NOT seem to take us far. It seems what would be needed is not the
>lack of resistance but its expansion into something different that does not
>promote failure for the individual but also changes the system somewhat.
>
>This of course is easy to say but not easy to make happen, given the
>intricacies of a real activity system, as Phillip acknowledges when he
>advises resisting individuals to go someplace else.
>
>Nate, yr examples (below) are impressive. How are B & G the newest
>capitalists? I understand how Willis can be accused of supporting
>capitalism by valuing the lads' agency as resistors -- agency complicit
>with the system. You say they
> have no choice, anyway. Why do you suggest that B & G's focus on the
>system itself supports the system....? (forgive me if i've mushed your
>point here)
>
>
>>As far as the ruling class is concerned I am not at all convinced by the
>assertion they do not control schools. Some local examples
>>
>>1) An lower working class school had to wait two extra years to get school
>windows replaced, so middle / upper middleclass schools could get the
>newest computers in their classrooms.
>>
>>2) A lower working class African American community advocated a new
>elementary school in their community. Although 2/3 of the students came
>from this community the school was instead put in an upper middle class
>community in which 2/3 of the students would be bussed everyday. One would
>wonder how one could have community / parental involvement when children
>are bussed 2 plus miles a day.
>>
>>3) An middle/upper class (where the professors kids go) school concerned
>with test scores fights to lessen desegregation policies, so current
>working class and minority students can be bussed to other schools. This
>school later became nationally recognized as a community of learners school".
>>
>>4) As part of a prevention / intervention strategy most schools with a
>substantial working class population had 4 year old kindergartens. A parent
>from an upper middleclass school threatened to sue the district so next
>year 4 year old kindergarten will exist no more.
>>
>>I guess I would be interested in others reading of B&G (our newest
>capitalists) and how it relates to class interests.
>>
>>Nate
>>
>>At 09:03 PM 6/18/01, you wrote:
>>
>>Somehow, Martin, it would seem as if Willis' work does not counter the claims
>>by B&G. The bottom line -- that the working class 'lads' fail -- seems
>>consistent with what B&G claim are the experiences of success and failure
>that
>>become the internalized seives through which classes separate from each
>other.
>>That the boys actively participate -- themselves making the decision to
>fail --
>>is perhaps one the details of the processes through which people enact and
>>constitute society.
>>
>>It's also not to say that these patterns are deterministic -- they are not
>>without exception. The exceptions are throughout us.
>>
>>Perhaps B&G take us part way to a better understanding -- it's not as
>though a
>>"ruling class" controls curriculum and runs schools -- I did not read that
>into
>>SCA at all -- but that everyone makes it happen, and in the processes of
>>separation, what happens benefits some much more than others. This gives the
>>former additional resources which, in turn, feed back to support and sustain
>>the processes of inequality.
>>
>>
>>
>>I have noted a curious twist with the Raymond study, however. I think it has
>>to do with a small town and a real practice and ideology of being a
>community,
>>plus government funding.
>>
>>
>>=====
>>"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
>and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
>>[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]
>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
>>http://buzz.yahoo.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Nate Schmolze
>>http://members.home.net/schmolze1/
>>schmolze1@home.com
>>
>>
>>*****************************************************************************
>>Albert Camus (1957):
>>An execution is not simply death. It is just as different from the
>privation of life as a concentration camp is from prison. It adds to death
>a rule, a public premeditation known to the future victim, an organization
>which is itself a source of moral sufferings more terrible than death.
>Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders, to which no
>criminal's deed, however calculated can be compared. For there to be an
>equivalency, the death penalty would have
>>to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he
>would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had
>confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in
>private life.
>>*****************************************************************************
>>
>>
>>
*****************************************************************************
George Bernard Shaw:
It is the deed that teaches, not the name we give it. Murder and capital punishment are not opposites that cancel one another, but similars that breed their kind
******************************************************************************
Nate Schmolze
http://members.home.net/schmolze1/
schmolze1@home.com
*****************************************************************************
Albert Camus (1957):
An execution is not simply death. It is just as different from the privation of life as a concentration camp is from prison. It adds to death a rule, a public premeditation known to the future victim, an organization which is itself a source of moral sufferings more terrible than death. Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated can be compared. For there to be an equivalency, the death penalty would have
to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life.
*****************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 01 2001 - 01:01:35 PDT