Theories of Identity
Identity is socially, contextually, historically situated, as knowledge is(Moya). Knowledge recursively consists of what we think we see, interpret, know, and judge something in contexts. Thus, “identities are fundamental to the process of all knowledge-production” (Moya, p.51). Life itself is the process of all knowledge-production, so identity and life per se are not separable.
I believe that authenticity of living life, viewed by constructivism, emerges when internalizing and externalizing interact. “Ascriptive and subjective identities”(Moya, p.46) are continually reinterpreted in the process of life, and at only the authentic moments, we can exist with our “integrity”(Palmer).
Q) Can teachers really overcome the interstices amongst identities as a person, identities as a woman or man, and identities as a teacher? Should we do so?
-Soojeong
“Man can think of himself without woman.” Following the story line of Adam and Eve, every man born after Adam was born of a woman (or of one who was born with female reproductive organs). Then how can man arrogantly claim that woman is not essential? Without women, man would cease to exist. I find Beauvoir’s Introduction intriguing as she mentions “The Other is posed as such by the One in defining himself as the One.” I take that to mean Otherness is not established until the one claiming dominance finds a difference and declares superiority in some fashion or another. Moving away from the familiarity of my childhood surroundings, I have become aware of being seen as the other for one reason or another, whether it be for gender or ethnicty.
Emerge, interweave, connectedness, wholeness, nexus, creative chaos, converge. Reading through Palmer’s article, I couldn’t help but identify terms related to chaos and complexity theories. Palmer describes a rhizome built from the interwoven paths of intellectual, emotional and spiritual self. Deleuze would describe this relationship as one without beginning or end. In Deleuze’s description of a rhizome, everything is and must be connected to each other. If one’s “inwardness”, “shadows and limits” are all interconnected with ones strengths and potentials, how does one teach without filtering their own shadows and limits? While I agree that we teach who we are, are there not times when our personal opinions and outlooks should not be shared with students?
~Eloise
Palmer speaks of teachers blending their intellectual, emotional, and spiritual elements of self together to find their identity and integrity in teaching. He refers to it as the undivided self (1997). Moving away from teaching technique, he charges educators to project their inner truth, their true selves, on their students. He contends that only by connecting to a student’s inner truth are we able to make formidable relationships or lasting learning connections in the lives of our students. This idea reminds me of Bhabha’s description of the Utopian identity (1994) including social virtues, cultural cohesion, and individual consciousness. As we form our personal identity and reveal those intricacies honestly with students, we allow for connections to be made across diverse cultures. An inwardly integrated self is able to make the outward connections on which good teaching depends (Palmer, 1997). Moya refers to this culturally forward teaching as having an alternative, or non dominant perspective (2006). She reiterates that by analyzing diverse identities we are able to understand objective viewpoints.
I like how each of the ideas this week goes back to our previous readings about the dialogue that is needed for individuals to have a shared since of culture. There is no space for empathy if a conversation is not first taking place. I believe it is de Beauvoir's stance that women and men can also have similar conversations as gender identities continue to be reconstituted. Like Moya, I consider myself a realist in terms of identity construction. The ascriptive and subjective (p.47), or external and internal, aspects of one’s identity are always affecting each other equally. How can teachers with limited cultural experiences effectively teach and inspire empathy among multicultural/multilingual students? Nichelle
This week’s reading by Beauvoir got me thinking about the social and political shift that has taken place over the past 14 years. The conservative movement that has taken place in the political arena has spurned a virtual war on women. This movement has even bled over into today’s literature. No longer are we seeing strong female role models, not that there were many to begin with. Now, as a response to the political climate, we are seeing increasingly weak, indecisive characters (i.e. Bella Swan) being presented to young girls as an icon of what they should strive to be. Even the strongest of them, Katniss Everdeen, is inherently flawed by her constant emotion. In each case, the female hero is all but crippled by her emotion, something rarely seen in books which feature male heroes.
One passage in particular struck me as significant to the events of today. Beauvoir stated that women, “have gained only what men have been willing to grant; they have taken nothing, they have only received.” Gains that have been made through events such as women’s suffrage, and the more recent feminist movement, are being sacrificed in favor of being seen as a conservative Christian. The gains that were made in viewing women as valuable partners and intellectual beings have been replaced by ideal that women are valuable based on their “virtue” or lack thereof. The fact that, according to Beauvoir, “legislators, priests, philosophers, writers, and scientists have striven to show that the subordinate position of woman is willed in heaven and advantageous on earth” is reminiscent of a similar quote originated by Ali ibn Abi Talib, which states, “God created sexual desire in 10 parts; then he gave nine parts to women and one to men.” These types of philosophies have been the basis for the oppression, and many times persecution, of women over the course of history.
The question that I have after this reading is, based on centuries of the thought process that the man is the head of the house, are women ever truly equal, even in the home?
“Discipline and punish” by Michel Foucault and “In defense of performance art” by Guillermo Gomez-Pena both view the body as more than an indispensable part of the human anatomy but in dichotomist ends of the spectrum. While Foucault uses the new equilibrium of the paradigm shift in penal codes of 18th and 19th Century public corporal punishment, Gomez- Pena portrays the human body as a micro chasm of mankind and society at large. Although the human body is spoken of in an abstract form, the soul for Gomez-Pena to be the key component to his representation. The author never defines or specifically mentions the soul, however its importance to his claims is indispensable. One could argue that Gomez-Pena makes inferences that the body is used to convey the message of the soul through the scars and history of marginalization. My connection to Gomez-Pena’s article was during is discussion of the Sanctuary.
Through performance art, Gomez-Pena uses a Matrix likeness metaphor. According to the author the body as moved by the soul is allowed to operate in an anarchic space. Not affected by the social mores of society or the laws that are made to govern anyone who lives within such a place. Through performance art, there are no boarders or boundaries to ever consider because, “there is no authority.”(Gomez-Pena, 2005) The importance of no authority encompasses all, therefore there is not right or wrong, left or right. There just is. - ERL
The struggle for us as humans is to identify who we truly are, beyond simply our ascriptive identities. De Beauvoir assigns great meaning to the ascriptive identity - rightly I feel. So much of what we become is who we are allowed to become. I read one time that in Britain there is less "class warfare" if you will because there they take a weary ownership of their hereditary advantages. Here in America we are mythologized to deny our ascriptive identities and be whoever and whatever we want to be. Whereas in reality these identities dominate our choices to a great extent.
Palmer speaks to the role that we can play in fighting back against ascriptive identities. But in order to do that it requires us to be true to ourselves and to our disciplines. So much of our success as a teacher relies upon our individual strengths. Is the cold facts of the situation that some people do not have the strengths necessary to build a classroom culture? Much of what he was discussing seemed unteachable to me.
Sarah
547