>I fully agree with Jay that our different groups and communities build barriers
>between themselves, barriers that enable these different groups to exist as
>different. Just a glimpse of insight into the other group would in some
>cases (or
>all cases) be subverive to one own's group identity. That may be how the social
>worlds function.
>
>But is it impossible to change it? Is it impossible to build a "coherent
>'master
>narrative'"? Is it impossible to make a step away of our own positions and
>perspectives and to take a look through another person's eyes? Is it impossible
>to build a mutual dialogue in which all will gradually learn more? I think
>it is.
>And I think you don't have to be a minority or an opressed majority to be
>ABLE to
>understand and learn about other's experiences, values, motivations, knowledge.
>The question is whether such a knowledge would threaten your own beliefs,
>judgments, understandings? Or would it enhance you, enrich your repertoire of
>responses and insights?
>
...why would we want a "master" narrative at all?
I mean, to what end does this help is working with change,
as opposed to working aginst change, or resisting change, or
manipulating changes for one's own interests -
change occcurs whether we participate or not; in fact, change occurs
precisely because we participate, or don't participate; or participate
ideologically, or irresponsibly, or unmindfully -
what I see, through history, is changes taking place
in spite of master narratives and dominant regimes,
ongoing acts of resistance and deviance and dissension;
relentless acts of anarchy, and always in the midst of kinds of
regimes which organize particular social rules,
to enforce particular social values. Obviously.
The folks who theorize and research on behalf of change,
... to what end are these people also
acting in their social world as agents of change,
in-relation ot the kinds of changes they theorize and research for/about...?
It is crucial to theorize the complexities of "diversity" and
"difference", and in contexts of social change, "making the world a better
place" for those who suffer the most, etc.;
however, I admit
I perceive these now as so conflictual with insitutional work
that the possibility for "actualizing" change demands more,
I think,
than ideals of "humanism", perhaps, and more locally-focussed
understandings of (oop I've said this before) complicity.
For example, the issue of how feminism can inform cultrual-historical
work - this involves looking at internal structures of
academic production & inclusion/exclusion in CHAT practice,
as well as citing feminist texts.
It involves, i think, the kinds of work one does in their
department towards gender-equity, more inclusive representation in faculty,
more inclusive/complex texts/representations/contradictions
in the graduate courses;
of course this is most likely what we are all
talking about. yes?
diane,
"Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right." Ani Difranco
*********************************************
diane celia hodges
faculty of education, centre for the study of curriculum and
instruction,
university of british columbia
vancouver, bc canada
snailmail: 3519 Hull Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V5N 4R8