[Previous entry: "Sunday"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "Nvu"]

07/05/2005 Archived Entry: "Public Image Ltd"

Public Image Ltd
In Clancy's post on Fulkerson for the carnival, she asks "So What?". So what indeed. Part of Fulkerson's "so what" is to critique the role of cultural studies (wrong content/not enough writing, etc. argument). Another part of the so what Fulkerson proposes is the public image angle. Who are we? How do we represent ourselves? Here the quest is internal: what is it we do? On the WPA-L listserv, the response is often: how do we represent ourselves to the public sphere?
To the latter position (the public image) - I might ask: so what? So what if yet another national report bemoans the "awful" state of writing today? So what if yet another national commission gets our work wrong? Typically, the response is that we need to correct the image problem. That, I contend, is a battle you cannot win. You cannot win because no one really cares what the correct image is. These reports, as I've noted before, are diversions. They are meant to divert attention from the real problems writing instruction (and education in general) faces:

  • Over abundance of unskilled, poorly paid labor
  • Lack of incentive for innovation and development (especially in the so-called "teaching" schools/ as opposed to the so-called research schools)
  • Inability to deal with complex positions and theoretical proposals (as opposed to the "practice" we hear emphasized everywhere)
  • Heavy teaching loads and over crowded classrooms
  • Fear of technology
  • Obsession with standardized testing
  • Obsession with standardizing assessment
    And the list goes on. As long as you write long-winded, say nothing new, reports, you don’t have to deal with any of these issues. And you distract the members of the profession enough ("How dare they say that about us! Let’s get 'em!") that the profession doesn’t think about the real issues for awhile longer.
    Internally, as well, we don't want to embrace our image as it reflects back on us. Instead, we cling to romantic notions of martyrdom ("no one appreciates us") or heroics ("ah, the pioneers who really set things up for us"). Public critique of our self-image ("Listen, we’re not that great, and we have to deal with all of this…") are typically met with silence or hostility.
    If we must respond to our public image, we should, at least, push the labor issues to the foreground. But that won't happen. We are guilty of keeping the labor problems alive and well. We are all "boss compositionists" to some extent.
    So what? Good question.

    Replies: 2 comments

    Well, my biggest "instead of" for now is to stop worrying about what Time magazine or some national commission thinks and start worrying about what we are not doing right. I don't know if you are on WPA-L, bu that's where some of my response comes from (in addition to the carnival article we are discussing). This all seems to be a question of Sprite logic: Thirst is nothing/image is everything.
    But I say: hey, the field is very thirsty!

    Posted by jeff @ 07/06/2005 03:16 PM EST

    I agree with you about the battle being fought over and over again. What, specifically, can we be doing instead? And who be the" we"? Every English/Language rts teacher in the US? Administrators of writing programs? Can you describe some "instead of" scenarios?

    Posted by joanna @ 07/06/2005 02:30 PM EST

    Powered By Greymatter