Isn't this the same question we've been asking all along? But within culture, this time.
It's all about connecting the dots. As we do this, here's what happens:
First, we become so practised in listening for a theory that we begin to see it and hear it in everything. (Raymond Williams- culture is created and changed.) An example of this is how, after I met H, I found references to Tunisia everywhere, including in grammar exercises I'd been teaching for years. It had been there all along, but once the country was made real to me, I recognized it.
Second, we become so grounded we can find the theory anywhere. (This is why people memorize their holy scriptures. They want to be grounded in it so that they can find what they need when they need it.)
Third, the theories begin to use you. (This is Marx- the site of production becomes you. And this is also the idea of hegemony. We don't even recognize established power hierarchies, so we are controlled by them. Or we do recognize them and allow the control.) An example of this for me is when I became aware of inclusive language and then recognized that I was excluded when people used exclusive language. I don't know if I had ever felt excluded before, but I was aware of feeling excluded after. The first step was a concious awareness, but this has now been internalized in me.
The exercise of trying to identify which theorist or school of theory relates to each level was challenging. I need to be able to identify easily and quickly:
Who the theory person is, and what their school of thought is. ____ is known for ________ theory. What is s/he reacting to? What is her/his contribution to the field?
This then helps me recognize what direction a speaker is coming from, or where their grounding is.
Lacan- language and emotion
Rorty- Truth is social commendation
Leavis- culture created in community
Structuralism- Building up of hierarchies
How can you use the theory through methodology of storytelling to create reality?
Personal point: My inquiry comes across as competitive and therefore agressive, instead of questing. I need to word my questions as creators rather than destroyers. Also, I need to avoid extraneous detail.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm not sure I understand the inclusive and exclusive language meanings. Tell me more when we meet.
When people use "he" or "man" to refer to people in general, it excludes me as a woman. I don't know if I was affected subconciously before I became conciously aware of this, but once I was aware it definitely did begin to affect me. I heard it a lot in religious contexts. The language of the church has historically excluded women. Once I began to notice this, I began to seek out communities that used inclusive language.
That's an interesting point of view. Shall reflect on it some more...
Post a Comment