Phillips: English 540 Week Two Response

In the spirit of reflexivity and experimentation, I have posted some key points for consideration that I engaged with during my reading. Following the syllabus guidelines, I attempt below to consider points that are interesting to me and points that I hope others will find interesting.

Point for consideration generated by Bolton:

How much room is there for creativity in our classrooms when students have been indoctrinated to have very little creative engagement in prior educational settings that teach to standardized tests?

While Bolton is discussing bilingual (or multilingual) creativity, that is not the only form of creativity curtailed by dominant ideologies. Fear of the Other can be extended to include fear of other disciplinary domains and ways of thinking.

Points for consideration generated by Gee:

Gee defines "theory" as “a set of generalizations about an area (in [his] case language and language acquisition) in terms of which descriptions of phenomena in that area can be couched and explanation can be offered. Theories, in this sense, ground beliefs and claims to know things" (13).  How do our "tacit theories" –those theories not grounded in careful analysis and explication—collide with "socially contested terms" in useful ways (13: 15)? That is, can we find ways to deconstruct certain kinds of confirmation bias by juxtaposing tacit theories with socially constructed terms, and, if so, what would that look like in terms of practical research methodology? Can you envision a project in which you do such research that deploys Gee's two guidelines for "ethical human discourse" (19)?

Points for consideration generated by Pennycook:

How do so-called "subversive" genres like hip hop, graffiti, and the like influence peoples' uptake of English across cultural contexts? Pennycook offers his own analysis of this, but I wonder what transnational feminist perspective on this subject would have to contribute, or how that perspective might alter Pennycook's project in terms of topical choices and source of information. Would a transnational feminist investigate Malaysian nightclubs...perhaps? However, I imagine an investigation of a more mundane everyday activity might prove interesting. For example, how does a hairstylist working in an international airport use English or gesture to understand a client's request? Is that a part of Pennycook's "global Englishes" or is it something else? I think it works in terms of "translocal and transcultural flows" because in the scenario I suggest, one "local" necessarily grooms in a "transcultural" environment (6). The intimate act of grooming coalesces with outward appearance and cultural communication in ways I find compelling.

Points from outside for synthesis:

In Digital Griots: African American Rhetoric in a Multimedia Age, Adam J. Banks takes issue with the appropriation of African American musical and oral traditions by folks that don't belong to the communities of color historically invested in hip hop (38; 74-5; 112-13; 154-55; 165). I wonder what his take would be on Alastair Pennycook's understanding of hip hop in other contexts. Pennycook writes: "[T]he focus is not so much on how music works culturally in a specific location but on the effects of the many encounters and hybrid co-production of languages of and cultures" (6).  Here, I can only speculate about a debate, but as I read Pennycook I did not get a sense of the historicity of the African American art form. Should I? Did I miss a step, or is it irrelevant to the task at hand. I suggest this not to be overly critical of Pennycook, but I wonder if the two stances (Banks’s and Pennycook's) on hip hop and musical traditions are at odds. Banks, for example, indicated that African American students need to have something that sets them apart as being special and as having certain language varieties that are historically their own (111-13). Hip hop is used for specific rhetorical and cultural purposes in some African American communities. Banks ideas resist mainstream uptake or cultural appropriations of hip hop. Pennycook suggests the opposite: that hip hop belongs to global Englishes and that the message of resistance to hegemonic so-called "white" culture is the property of outer-tier communities (4).

My reading is filtered through decolonial methodology and through my affinity for transnational feminisms, but I wonder what I have missed in the conversation. Reflexive feedback is useful to develop the scenario I offer, and I encourage refutation of my initial response here. What do you think? Does hip hop belong to African American communities in some unique way as Adam Banks seems to suggest? If it is globally adopted as a kind of standard non-standard English, what does that do to the original messages of resistance to Standard English in the United States? Clearly, language shift happens and Banks would not have a significant influence in that context. Nevertheless, as ethical agents how do we, as Gee suggests, do "no harm" and "explicate" a "tacit theory…when there is reason to believe that the theory advantages oneself or one's group over [another]" (Gee 19)? Is Banks exposing a tacit theory or is he complicit in creating one.

Works Cited:

Banks, Adam J. Digital Griots: African American Rhetoric in a Multimedia Age. Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. 2011. Print.

Bolton, Kindsley. “Creativity and World Englishes.” World Englishes. 20.4, (2010): 455-466. Print.

Gee, James P. Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses 4^th Edition. London and New York: Routledge. 2011. Print.

Pennycook, Alastair. Global Englishes and Transcultural Flows. London and New York: Routledge. 2007. Print.