In a message dated 11/29/98 1:39:51 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << I do not take the essentialist position of advocating that only people of color should teach ethnic studies or that only women (and feminists at that) should teach women studies courses. However, to give one example, when a male professor ventures into the terrain of women, international, or ethnic studies and does so without regard for the voices of women, people of color, or other marginal groups, then the issue of power and ethics must be invoked! I wonder hos this discussion group views these issues -- >> Dear Devon, You have raised such extremely important issues, and I thank you for it. I have also observed (as a ph.d student in English) the lack of regard for ethnic voices in the context of such courses, but perhaps not as often as appears to be the case at your university. What I did notice was that professors who were not themselves marginilized often seemed to feel threatened by demands or requests to broaden the curriculum or reading list. I observed that the word, "essentialism," became their defensive rallying cry whenever this topic arose, and that it was usually employed in a manner meant to silence others. As if they had finally found the "magic word" that would make them not lose face, or with which they could parry any and all opposition. This led me to contemplate the well-known axiom that no one (or very few anyway) ever willingly gives up power; that it must be wrested from them. Now, this can be done subversively, confrontationally, or even lovingly (with the recognition that we might act similarly in a similar situation), but it still sometimes must be done. A note of hope here is that student bodies sometimes effect such changes in a systemic way; they just stop attending classes by professors who won't engage in meaningful dialogue. Not maybe the BEST way, but it's an honest indicator, I think. I think an important aspect of gender studies, multi-cultural studies, etc., is that as "new" disciplines in the university (they are of course not really new concerns, just "newish" to academia) everyone who teaches, positively or negatively, is not just teaching information, but also teaching how to teach these subjects. Thus, if an instructor "teaches" women's studies, but includes few women writers, they are, in effect, giving a negative example that at least some students will be hip to and able to learn from. They will say to themselves and their peers, "I would never teach this course this way." As educators, we sometimes forget this aspect of our teaching. I myself do have hope for a more open curriculum evolving, if perhaps more slowly in some institutions than others. We could, on the other hand, become like Berkeley, in which it is strongly discouraged to teach or write any "dominant" authors. I heard a woman there give a paper on Charlotte Bronte once, which she prefaced by saying she was hoping to "redeem" Bronte for us, by showing that because Bronte was of Irish descent she was marginilized by ethnicity as well as gender. I found it laughable, but sad. I asked her later why she thought she had to make this gesture of redemption, and she said only the truly marginilized were worth studying or discussing. Well.....it's a different notion, and maybe not without SOME merit, but still seemed fake to me. Sincerely, Jane (Jellking)
