Blogs, Syndicated

Harvey Graff’s "Literacy Myth" Review

by  • 

Let me begin by bringing you up to speed on the point of this book. In our society we hold a very high importance on what it means to be literate. The idea is that being literate affects your success and wealth and status in our society. The term “Literacy Myth” comes from Harvey J. Graff in his book, Literacy Myth in which the myth is that literacy translates into economic, social and cultural success. The same ideals we hold in our society. Our idea that success comes from literacy is not true and Graff uses his expertise in the history of literacy to show us that our ways of thinking are actually quite wrong and that literacy is something we use to hold power in our society.
The Literacy Myth was written in 1979, a point I feel forefronts the basis of this book as well as where we have come since the Literacy Myth had been written. To be honest, we have not come far. In fact, this myth is still very much alive and well, even in this digital age we live in. The definition of literacy has changed, but what we do with that power of what it means to be literate is still exactly the same. In fact, Graff does an excellent walk through the history of literacy and the lack of consistency when researching literacy. The book covers excellent topics such as literacy used in society as a moral basis, which also includes its importance in the economy and social order...key components to the importance of literacy in our society, or at least how we view the importance of literacy in society as stated, “...the presumed needs for social learning attracted the attention of many concerned individuals, including those dedicated to the reform of society and the reformation of the masses comprising that society” (25). IN other words, this book is a historical walk-through of our society and how we have used the idea of literacy to continually hold power over those who are “less literate” than others. He gives a break down and walk through of the myth itself.
Some of the best points made are exactly the whole idea behind literacy that, “we have seen, those without the experience of of education and without its badge of literacy, have been perceived as inferior and pathetic, alien to the dominate culture, subversive to social order, unequipped to achieve or produce, and denizens of self-perpetuating cultures of poverty...illiterates are seen as different in attitude and social attributes” (51). With that being said, the book shows both sides of what the literacy myth is how it came about and what truths can be said about it as well as what constitutes literacy as a myth. As stated by M.M. Lewis, “‘Literacy is relative...the level of literacy is the extent to which the individual falls short of the demands of literacy current in his society.’ Conversely, the level of literacy is demanded by society is also relative” (292), a point that I feel aptly points out the flaws surrounding the idea of literacy and how that does, in the end effect a society and those who may be considered “illiterate”.
The book is structured very sound in the sense that it gives a great outline of the history of literacy then goes into how literacy is considered in society, in jobs, in relation to criminal activity as well as a look at both sides using research and studies based on what they knew at the time in literacy. The truth is there isn’t much that has changed in society on the idea of what literacy is and how we react or feel towards those who are not literate. Sure the literacies have changed from paper to screen in a sense, but the myth is still there and still strong. If you imagine it was over 25 years ago that this was written and since then computers have become household staples, the internet was created, and cell phones are in the pocket of just about every single person, at least in America. In America, you would be hard pressed to find a single person or family that doesn’t have some form of digital device that can provide them with an opportunity to become literate in the sense that they have the opportunity to communicate or read communication with some other person. Even with all of this information at fingertips, our definition of literacy changes so frequently that those who may not read Faulkner but can communicate quite aptly are still considered “illiterate”. Our definition of literacy changes frequently, and even though this book was written almost 40 years ago, it still highlights the issues we currently are faced with in a very clear way, the only difference is the type of literacy he mentions.
Based on how much information is in this book and how pertinent it is to teaching reading and writing, I feel like this is a necessary read. Honestly, there have been many things written on this book and about it since, but I think reading this as an original source really lends itself to how important the book and topic really is. I feel this book is a necessary read in and of itself, mostly because I think it is revolutionary in the sense that, they saw a problem, addressed it and yet we are still questioning the same things every day. I would say this book is an excellent choice read for those who have a stigma about being literate or would like to understand more of the history of the literary myth. That and if you read anything else based off this book, it helps to have read it yourself to really get an understanding of any critics or those who praise it.
   Overall, honestly, don’t let the size of this book intimidate you. It is an excellent book that brings up some very important issues. There are pictures included of sample writings and what was considered adequate writing decades ago will almost shake you seeing how far we really have come as a literate society. It also includes great statistics that originally seem overwhelming, but upon reading the book it really puts the information into perspective. This book also opens your eyes to what we do in a society in relation to being illiterate and how, even 35 years later, we are still having the same questions.

Blogs, Syndicated

Harvey Graff’s "Literacy Myth" Review

by  • 

Let me begin by bringing you up to speed on the point of this book. In our society we hold a very high importance on what it means to be literate. The idea is that being literate affects your success and wealth and status in our society. The term “Literacy Myth” comes from Harvey J. Graff in his book, Literacy Myth in which the myth is that literacy translates into economic, social and cultural success. The same ideals we hold in our society. Our idea that success comes from literacy is not true and Graff uses his expertise in the history of literacy to show us that our ways of thinking are actually quite wrong and that literacy is something we use to hold power in our society.
The Literacy Myth was written in 1979, a point I feel forefronts the basis of this book as well as where we have come since the Literacy Myth had been written. To be honest, we have not come far. In fact, this myth is still very much alive and well, even in this digital age we live in. The definition of literacy has changed, but what we do with that power of what it means to be literate is still exactly the same. In fact, Graff does an excellent walk through the history of literacy and the lack of consistency when researching literacy. The book covers excellent topics such as literacy used in society as a moral basis, which also includes its importance in the economy and social order...key components to the importance of literacy in our society, or at least how we view the importance of literacy in society as stated, “...the presumed needs for social learning attracted the attention of many concerned individuals, including those dedicated to the reform of society and the reformation of the masses comprising that society” (25). IN other words, this book is a historical walk-through of our society and how we have used the idea of literacy to continually hold power over those who are “less literate” than others. He gives a break down and walk through of the myth itself.
Some of the best points made are exactly the whole idea behind literacy that, “we have seen, those without the experience of of education and without its badge of literacy, have been perceived as inferior and pathetic, alien to the dominate culture, subversive to social order, unequipped to achieve or produce, and denizens of self-perpetuating cultures of poverty...illiterates are seen as different in attitude and social attributes” (51). With that being said, the book shows both sides of what the literacy myth is how it came about and what truths can be said about it as well as what constitutes literacy as a myth. As stated by M.M. Lewis, “‘Literacy is relative...the level of literacy is the extent to which the individual falls short of the demands of literacy current in his society.’ Conversely, the level of literacy is demanded by society is also relative” (292), a point that I feel aptly points out the flaws surrounding the idea of literacy and how that does, in the end effect a society and those who may be considered “illiterate”.
The book is structured very sound in the sense that it gives a great outline of the history of literacy then goes into how literacy is considered in society, in jobs, in relation to criminal activity as well as a look at both sides using research and studies based on what they knew at the time in literacy. The truth is there isn’t much that has changed in society on the idea of what literacy is and how we react or feel towards those who are not literate. Sure the literacies have changed from paper to screen in a sense, but the myth is still there and still strong. If you imagine it was over 25 years ago that this was written and since then computers have become household staples, the internet was created, and cell phones are in the pocket of just about every single person, at least in America. In America, you would be hard pressed to find a single person or family that doesn’t have some form of digital device that can provide them with an opportunity to become literate in the sense that they have the opportunity to communicate or read communication with some other person. Even with all of this information at fingertips, our definition of literacy changes so frequently that those who may not read Faulkner but can communicate quite aptly are still considered “illiterate”. Our definition of literacy changes frequently, and even though this book was written almost 40 years ago, it still highlights the issues we currently are faced with in a very clear way, the only difference is the type of literacy he mentions.
Based on how much information is in this book and how pertinent it is to teaching reading and writing, I feel like this is a necessary read. Honestly, there have been many things written on this book and about it since, but I think reading this as an original source really lends itself to how important the book and topic really is. I feel this book is a necessary read in and of itself, mostly because I think it is revolutionary in the sense that, they saw a problem, addressed it and yet we are still questioning the same things every day. I would say this book is an excellent choice read for those who have a stigma about being literate or would like to understand more of the history of the literary myth. That and if you read anything else based off this book, it helps to have read it yourself to really get an understanding of any critics or those who praise it.
   Overall, honestly, don’t let the size of this book intimidate you. It is an excellent book that brings up some very important issues. There are pictures included of sample writings and what was considered adequate writing decades ago will almost shake you seeing how far we really have come as a literate society. It also includes great statistics that originally seem overwhelming, but upon reading the book it really puts the information into perspective. This book also opens your eyes to what we do in a society in relation to being illiterate and how, even 35 years later, we are still having the same questions.

Blogs, Syndicated

Harvey Graff’s "Literacy Myth" Review

by  • 

Let me begin by bringing you up to speed on the point of this book. In our society we hold a very high importance on what it means to be literate. The idea is that being literate affects your success and wealth and status in our society. The term “Literacy Myth” comes from Harvey J. Graff in his book, Literacy Myth in which the myth is that literacy translates into economic, social and cultural success. The same ideals we hold in our society. Our idea that success comes from literacy is not true and Graff uses his expertise in the history of literacy to show us that our ways of thinking are actually quite wrong and that literacy is something we use to hold power in our society.
The Literacy Myth was written in 1979, a point I feel forefronts the basis of this book as well as where we have come since the Literacy Myth had been written. To be honest, we have not come far. In fact, this myth is still very much alive and well, even in this digital age we live in. The definition of literacy has changed, but what we do with that power of what it means to be literate is still exactly the same. In fact, Graff does an excellent walk through the history of literacy and the lack of consistency when researching literacy. The book covers excellent topics such as literacy used in society as a moral basis, which also includes its importance in the economy and social order...key components to the importance of literacy in our society, or at least how we view the importance of literacy in society as stated, “...the presumed needs for social learning attracted the attention of many concerned individuals, including those dedicated to the reform of society and the reformation of the masses comprising that society” (25). IN other words, this book is a historical walk-through of our society and how we have used the idea of literacy to continually hold power over those who are “less literate” than others. He gives a break down and walk through of the myth itself.
Some of the best points made are exactly the whole idea behind literacy that, “we have seen, those without the experience of of education and without its badge of literacy, have been perceived as inferior and pathetic, alien to the dominate culture, subversive to social order, unequipped to achieve or produce, and denizens of self-perpetuating cultures of poverty...illiterates are seen as different in attitude and social attributes” (51). With that being said, the book shows both sides of what the literacy myth is how it came about and what truths can be said about it as well as what constitutes literacy as a myth. As stated by M.M. Lewis, “‘Literacy is relative...the level of literacy is the extent to which the individual falls short of the demands of literacy current in his society.’ Conversely, the level of literacy is demanded by society is also relative” (292), a point that I feel aptly points out the flaws surrounding the idea of literacy and how that does, in the end effect a society and those who may be considered “illiterate”.
The book is structured very sound in the sense that it gives a great outline of the history of literacy then goes into how literacy is considered in society, in jobs, in relation to criminal activity as well as a look at both sides using research and studies based on what they knew at the time in literacy. The truth is there isn’t much that has changed in society on the idea of what literacy is and how we react or feel towards those who are not literate. Sure the literacies have changed from paper to screen in a sense, but the myth is still there and still strong. If you imagine it was over 25 years ago that this was written and since then computers have become household staples, the internet was created, and cell phones are in the pocket of just about every single person, at least in America. In America, you would be hard pressed to find a single person or family that doesn’t have some form of digital device that can provide them with an opportunity to become literate in the sense that they have the opportunity to communicate or read communication with some other person. Even with all of this information at fingertips, our definition of literacy changes so frequently that those who may not read Faulkner but can communicate quite aptly are still considered “illiterate”. Our definition of literacy changes frequently, and even though this book was written almost 40 years ago, it still highlights the issues we currently are faced with in a very clear way, the only difference is the type of literacy he mentions.
Based on how much information is in this book and how pertinent it is to teaching reading and writing, I feel like this is a necessary read. Honestly, there have been many things written on this book and about it since, but I think reading this as an original source really lends itself to how important the book and topic really is. I feel this book is a necessary read in and of itself, mostly because I think it is revolutionary in the sense that, they saw a problem, addressed it and yet we are still questioning the same things every day. I would say this book is an excellent choice read for those who have a stigma about being literate or would like to understand more of the history of the literary myth. That and if you read anything else based off this book, it helps to have read it yourself to really get an understanding of any critics or those who praise it.
   Overall, honestly, don’t let the size of this book intimidate you. It is an excellent book that brings up some very important issues. There are pictures included of sample writings and what was considered adequate writing decades ago will almost shake you seeing how far we really have come as a literate society. It also includes great statistics that originally seem overwhelming, but upon reading the book it really puts the information into perspective. This book also opens your eyes to what we do in a society in relation to being illiterate and how, even 35 years later, we are still having the same questions.

Blogs, Syndicated

Book Review for James Paul Gee

by  • 

In James Paul Gee’s book Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses the reader sees Gee journey through the maze of connections between language and discourse and how we make meaning out of these. At the heart of this argument is an interesting idea surrounding the individual, any understanding that is created through discourse comes from an individual’s experience, culture, and society. It is based upon their exposure to different uses of discourses. And, in reading through this book I began to think of it as our “personal dictionaries” that we keep in our head, a rolodex that we thumb through, that allows us to manipulate language based upon our resources and understandings that we have created through our experience.

Gee starts this discussion by looking at ideology, how the term came about, how it established meaning, and how that meaning has remained with it. “It turns out that this dichotomous contrast between ‘ideas’ and ‘facts’, between ‘theory’ and ‘experience’, has played a major role in the historical development of the meanings of the term ‘ideology’, as it has also in the politics of power.”(1). The term ideology was coined by Antonine Destutt de Tracy and he “rejected both ‘innate ideas’, whether from God or biology, and ‘established authority’, whether religion or the state, as the source and foundation of knowledge. He argued that all the ideas in our heads are based on evidence about the world we have gathered through our physical senses. We can see de Tracy is arguing that we think and how we act is due to our upbringing and environment, to our interaction with the physical and social world.”(2). And, he “…believed that a rational investigation, free from religious or metaphysical prejudice, of how ideas, beliefs, and values are formed on the basis of upbringing and experience could be the foundation for a just and happy society. That is, we could use this knowledge to construct environments that would lead people to have humane, just, and socially useful ideas and behaviors.” (2). After this definition Gee goes on to explain how figure heads such as Napoleon and Marx broke down this idea and morphed it into its meaning today. And, where Gee eventually leads us is to how he is going to use the term ideology through the course of this book in reference to language and discourse. Gee uses ideology as a social theory “which involves generalizations (beliefs, claims) about the way(s) in which goods are distributed in society.” (21). He continues on to explain that “Ideologies are important because, since theories ground beliefs, and beliefs lead to actions, and actions create social worlds (‘reality’), ideologies simultaneously explain, often exonerate, and also partially create, in interaction with history and the materials bases of society, the distribution of goods. And since everything that makes us human in the honorific sense of the term- the ability to freely think, believe, desire, feel, and create with others in a material world whose resources we share- are ‘goods’ in probably all, but at least some, societies, then ideologies are what construct not only human worlds, but humans.” (21). Once Gee establishes this understanding and ground work for ideology we begin to explore the sociocultural nature of meaning and communication.

To understand the tangible aspects of this book it was important to have an explanation of ideology and Gee’s definition of the term. I am now going to begin with Chapter 4, in chapter 2 and 3 Gee lays the groundwork for where literacy studies began and where it is now. In chapter 4 “Meaning: Choosing, Guessing, and Cultural Models” Gee explains the nature of language and the ways in which we analyze and interact with it. In this chapter Gee’s first stepping stone in this idea of discourse ideology through the development of social languages. “English, for example- is not a monolithic thing. Rather, each and every language is composed of many sub-languages, which I [Gee] will call social languages. Social languages stem from the fact that any time we act or speak, we must accomplish two things: we must make clear who we are, and we must make clear what we are doing.” (66). Through this idea Gee explains how we as communicators negotiate the world around us, in this negotiation we are speaking English but often times the place and context of the English spoken comes out as different forms of language. And, this idea of different languages constitutes the idea of social language. “Different social languages (and there are, for any one language, like English, a great many) make visible and recognizable two different social identities, two different versions of who one is.” (67). By understanding how a social language works a person can begin to understand the ideology of that social culture and/or context. This becomes tangible in spaces like the classroom because each student is their own person that comes from a place that is different than the social context of the school, and learning how to understand and appreciate each student respective social language will allow for more opportunity in the classroom.

Lastly I am going to discuss the final chapter in Gee’s book, chapter 7. In chapters 5 and 6 Gee develops the ideas surrounding discourse and identity, how certain discourses contribute to how an individual views themselves and how that progresses into how they function in society. He also discusses how discourses and literacy help to establish aspects of culture and how in turn culture allows for these literacies and discourses to develop, that they require each other in order to be sustained. In chapter 7, “Language, Individuals and Discourses”, where Gee discusses language in relationship to a discourse framework. In this chapter I loved Gee’s use of playing card as an example, “A text, or even a single sentence, is something like a playing card. A specific card has no value (meaning) apart from the patterns (hands) into which it can enter. And a specific hand of cards itself has no value (meaning) apart from the game it is part of. So, too, for language. A text is meaningful only within the pattern (or social configuration) it forms at a specific time and place with other pieces of language, as well as with specific thoughts, words, deeds, bodies, tools, and objects. And this pattern or configuration- this specific social action- is itself meaningful only within a specific Discourse or at the intersection of several Discourses. Pieces of language, as well as other symbols, bodies, deeds, and so forth, are cards; social practices are hands; and Discourses are games. None of these- cards, hands, or games- exist without the other.” (149). Gee shows how our language, discourse and ideology are often times completely contextual. What we say and why we say it based upon our experience, a child often speaks their mind wherever they are because they do not have the experience to understand a change in the discourse. However, in most cases an adult has been afforded the opportunity to learn how to manipulate language based upon their varying settings. That said, what this chapter offers as well is a reminder that these discourses are continually changing and that each one comes with its own set of rules that needs to be established and understood in order for it to be able to make meaning to the individual.

This text surrounds that idea of the individual and that is because ultimately the collective understanding of individuals is what allows for these social contexts and discourses to exist.  If a deck of cards is short a card then a game cannot be played.

 

Gee, James Paul. Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourse. Bristol; Taylor & Francis Inc. 1996. Book.


Blogs, Syndicated

Frame Work and Humanity in Unaccustomed Earth

by  • 

When we look at writer like Jhumpa Lahiri and her novel Unaccustomed Earth the reader sees an interesting frame work being built one that walks the fine line of the floating world. By looking at Lahiri’s use of short stories the reader beings to see how she plays with narrative structure, voice, race and gender. Through these different themes Lahiri challenges the idea of the “other” voices to make her self heard. One interesting aspect that can be learned from her short stories is the over arching idea and themes of humanity. Lahiri writes her stories mostly based on first generation Indian-American experiences and perhaps that can typecast her novels and the cultures that they are set in. Nonetheless, the interesting thing she does in her stories is she creates a level human-ness that everyone can relate to. The emotional struggles of identity are surrounded by relational struggles, whether that be with parents or lovers, and regardless of culture these are struggles every human can relate to and understand. Through her use of narrative structure, particularly the way she ends her stories, the reader another aspect of this human-ness. While endings of her stories clearly mark and ending, they also seem to just stop these stories are just a small part of these characters lives. They are defining moments and memorable moments but it is left to the reader to determine where these characters will go and what they will do with this new found identity at the end of these short stories. And, that is often so reflective of our own lives, we rarely fully comprehend how an event has affected our lives until we have spent enough time away form that event to look back and see who we have become. Defining moments help make us into who we are but until after we move on from that moment, what we do with our lives after the fact is what helps to define us and Lahiri leaves that destiny in the readers hands. This also leads us to look at the way that Lahiri switches voices between her stories also sets her aside, the reader has the opportunity not only to experience different genders perspectives throughout the novel but also different races. The insider and the out sider perspectives and understandings. How we has people, or how the characters, work and navigate in a multicultural world.


Blogs, Syndicated

Nature and Morality in Jhumpa Lahiri’s Unaccustomed Earth

by  • 

Jhumpa Lahiri Unaccustomed Earth

Jhumpa Lahiri short stories in Unaccustomed Earth give off the feeling of a morality tale however with a realist twist. These tales are not necessarily a fairy tale or have a happy ending, in fact most of them end with some kind of cliff hanger. However the interesting part to me in these tales is that there always seems to be a lesson that can be learned. A new life perspective that either the characters adopt or is offered up by the end of the story. And, generally what parallels with moral anecdotes in some connection to nature. For example in the first story that bares the same title of the book “Unaccustomed Earth” the reader sees the main character Ruma take and emotional journey of the coping with the loss of her mother, building a relationship with her father, and attempting to establish a life unfamiliar territory. What the reader sees is Ruma struggle to break free of or to find a balance between the traditions of her culture and mother and being in America raising her own family and establishing her own home. In the process of this Ruma’s father who has not seen their new home is coming to visit for the first time since her mothers death, Ruma is nervous because she has never had to be one on one with her father since she was young. And, as this visit begins to unfold the reader begins to see both Ruma and her father build and change traditions which is in many ways symbolized in the garden he plants for her. Where the garden keeps with his tradition and is something of value to him, now that his wife gone he feels he no longer has a need for a garden. Nonetheless, in this unaccustomed earth, in this new home he creates a tradition. Her father is able to bring a piece of the old, a piece of Ruma’s past, and put it into her future. And, in the end it is up to Ruma if she is going to allow this replanted tradition to grow or die. It allows pieces of her past to come through in a new light in her future.


Blogs, Syndicated

Frame of Reference and Happy Endings in Bessie Heads “A Question of Power”

by  • 

“Framing” is something I think we often take for granted. It is difficult to reconstruct a frame without intentionality, but the interesting thing for Elizabeth in Bessie Heads novel A Question of Power is that she is constructing this frame throughout the novel. When I look at this novel in one perspective I see a frame already formed for Elizabeth, I think that her lack of a frame of reference is just as evident of frame as the one she creates by the end of the novel. I think that for people to rebuild their frames of reference they need to experience great change, they need to have a pivotal moment in their life where their current frame of reference fails them and they are forced to find another way to understand who and what they are. This is what the reader experiences with Elizabeth her not knowing who she is and not having a citizenship in South Africa had been her structured frame of reference since her birth, when she ends up in Botswana there is new kind of displacement experienced. She is now exiled from what she understood, and she now experiences a new kind of racism and is forced to learn how reconstruct her frame of reference, regardless of how weak her prior frame may have been this huge life change forces her to reconsider what she understood. And, it is in this idea that we see her journey through madness lead to a new frame construction. I think that it is important to note as well that I don’t disagree that Elizabeth is searching for a frame of reference or an identity in all its forms. I just think that it is impossible to not have a frame of reference no matter how small or weak it may be, but I believe that we experience and understand our world based off of our prior experiences which establish some basic construction of a frame of reference. However, what Bessie Head successfully accomplishes in this novel is showing a journey of the mind.

The other aspect of this novel that I found interesting was the hopefulness that the novel ends on. While Bessie Head did not appear to experience the strength of a frame reference that Elizabeth does I think it is interesting that she chose to write her novel in a fashion that gave Elizabeth her “happy ending”. Elizabeth experience the opportunity to belong to community at the end of the novel, and I think on some basic level it reminds me of a Jane Austen novel. Where all her characters, despite some trials, all end up with “happy ending” and each author knowing full well that the “happy endings” they wrote don’t happen in reality.