|
|
6/10/2004
Everything I Ever Learned Was Wrong...Well, Some of It At Least
Sometimes you forget, people really are that ignorant. La Shawn Barber has an interesting discussion going on in her comments section about afroscentricism; a philosophy whereby black people are put at the center and root of all things; a philosophy with which I also happen to disagree. But that's not really my issue. What prompted me to write was not the post (which was good by the way), but the comments. Mike wrote:Yes, white people made this country. There are many reasons for that, not the least of which was slavery. Blacks were not allowed to get an education. Therefore, they had little impact.
Those that did were always celebrated. Frederick Douglass, Booker T. Washington, and MLK. But there is no reason to celebrate someone simply because they were black and did something notable. Many people of all races did something notable, and there is little room in textbooks to discuss everyone. Often those who are covered are granted space simply because they were "the first black" or "the first woman" to do something.
Let's celebrate accomplishment, not skin color. Oh yes he did. Go. There. I can't give this any more energy than it's worth, but I thought I'd post it so I can go back into my archives and read it one of these days when I need some motivation. I will say this: as pagan as they were, there were some other folks here before the white man. We don't really talk about them too often. But enough about that. What did catch my interest was the proposition of another commenter going by the name of "Frank" who wrote: Afrocentrism? Give me a break.
What Black American child really gives a d**n about "African Culture?" They are Americans. This stuff is only for the self-indulgence of the teachers.
More useful would be teaching Classical literature, with an elective on Black Americans who have "made it" in spite of Jim Crow etc..These are some of the finest Americans and should be role models - not preachers who can only bleat out loud about "social justice" but not get much done. Someone was kind enough to step in and gently correct dear Frank with facts proving that indeed black kids do give a hoot about African Culture. But this whole thing of Classical Literature is what got me. We should only be teaching kids classical literature? Yeah, okay.
When I recall my days of history and english classes, most of the books we read that were classified as "Classical Literature" were usually dry, circular arguments written by crusty, old, white men. This doesn't discount the fact that there are dry, circular arguments written by crusty, old, black men too; we were just never forced to read those books. Lord knows it would have been a nice change, but I digress. I do assume that said individual realizes "Classical Literature" is actually a very narrow group of elite books, many of which will always conjure up the sensation of dry heaving by former high school english students everywhere. I don't discount all Classical Literature, as the philosophies of many classical writers have shaped our culture today. My problem is less with the "category" and more with the fact that a good half of classical authors were raving lunatics while the rest were mostly strung out on some form of narcotics, namely, cocaine. And these are the people from whom we gain "great insight"? I remember being the only one in my class to even remotely find fault in the teachings of Freud. What was that he wrote about Man/Boy/Mother/Lovers? Everyone else seemed fine with the fact that this guy should have been committed from day one.
Some of the absolute worst books I've read in my entire life would fit into the category of "Classical Literature". I never quite understood it, but at some point in history, many classical authors were proverbially "knighted" and now we think the sun shines out of their rotting backsides. How many countless students must we torture by dragging them through Charles Dickens' Great Expectations? It's just not right I tell you. But back to this required reading thing. Throughout most of my history classes, I drudged my way through Calvin, Hobbs, Marx, Hamilton, Tolstoy, and later Zinn to name a few. It was all ghastly boring, and much of it didn't make sense. Life only got more confusing. Around my senior year in high school, I was introduced to existentialist thought or existentialism via 75% of the authors we were forced to read in english class. If you're not familiar with existentialism, I suggest you become so since it has infiltrated much of how people think today including but not limited to the morally relativistic creed. By definition, existentialism is "A 20th-century philosophy which holds that humans must live their lives without any absolute values or divine laws. Many existentialists believe that since there is no guarantee of human worth or dignity, and no such thing as "human nature," humans have complete freedom to define humanity and a painful ethical responsibility to do so." Or translated into my modern-day terms: foolishness. But I like this definition better:"Existentialism is the title of the set of philosophical ideals that emphasizes the existence of the human being, the lack of meaning and purpose in life, and the solitude of human existence. Existentialism maintains existence precedes essence: This implies that the human being has no essence, no essential self, and is no more that what he is. He is only the sum of life is so far he has created and achieved for himself. Existentialism acquires its name from insisting that existence precedes essence. " Or in other words: foolishness.
There were classical authors who wrote entirely from the premise that life lacked meaning and purpose. You mean to tell me that these people have something great to offer the next generation? Kafka, Camus, Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, & Barth were all famous existentialist thinkers and they birthed many more after them. We've got some re-examining to do on how and what we teach in this country, because I don't think we've got it right yet. Before we start assigning electives, can we recognize that the foundation still needs some ironing out?
posted by ambra at 6/10/2004 02:26:18 PM | link to this entry |
|
|
|
|
|
