Jesse wrote a briliant take on "American Born Chinese" on the other forum. I think that as outsider we will always have only a limitted ability to see the "Other", therefore the only way that one can really make their voice heard is speaking up.
Edward Said (2005), Patricia Hills Collins (1986) and Carol Gilligan (1987) are three examples of scholars who protest the "incorrect" or mistaken way that the academia views their ethnic group or gender. I argue that there is no way to avoid a partial view of the other, even if we try to maintain the highest awareness possible and attempt to be fully attentive to the 'Other'. The only way to engage the other and to espier to more social justice is to be conscious and listen carefully to what the 'Other' is saying, and be open to the content and the format of what she sais, avoiding (as much as possible) preconceived conclusions. Eventually, it seems like the only way that someone who feels her is seen in a distorted way can change it, is to talk about her experience and bring it into the discourse, just as Said voiced his personal experience as an Arab, Gilligan interviewed women in addition to men and Collins brought her voice as a black woman into the scholarly discourse.
Hall (1997) states that Stereotyping is a common signifying practice. Stereotypes take simple memorable characteristics about a person, reduce everything about the person to those traits, exaggerate and simplify it and fix it without change or development to eternity. "Stereotyping reduces, essentialists, naturalizes and fixes 'difference' " (p. 258). Hall states that stereotyping is part of the maintenance of social and symbolic order, it is one of the mechanisms of boundary maintenance, a practice of 'closure' and exclusion. (p. 258) So that stereotyping is unavoidable. It is part of the way we naturally make sense of the world. However, it may lead to social in-justice and become a source of ethical problems. In the same time ignoring the fact the the "Other" is different may also cause social injustice.
This is clearly demonstrated in the case of Gilligan's research. Gilligan (1987), who taught and researched with Erikson and later with Kohlberg, found that the moral development standards that she was teaching did not feet her own thinking. She found that all the research was done exclusively with male subjects therefore the results did not take into account the different voice of women regarding this subject. As a result the evaluation scales developed based on this research advantaged men.
Gilligan's findings should alarm every one who is involved with research. Just like Erikson and Kohlberg, we all do our best to research issues with the most objective attitude possible. Yet, we can only perceive the issues we are studying using our pervious knowledge, thinking processes that we have learned and our system of values and beliefs. Just like Erikson and Kohlberg did not notice they are missing half of the population they are trying to study, we are bound to be blind to numerous aspects of our own research.
In this paper I will try to explore these issues using art work, with the intention of "trusting the process" and let it lead me to a smaller more focused point for discussion.
References:
1. Alcoff, L, (1991). The problem of speaking for others. Cultural Critique.no.20 (pp. 5-32).
2. Collins, P. H. (1986). Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of black feminist thought, Social Problems Vol 33, no 6 pp14-32
3. Collins, P.H. (2000). Black feminist thought. London
4. Foucault, M. (1984). The ethics of concern of the self as a practice of freedom Ethics subjectivity and truth. NY: The new press.
5. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge : Harvard University
6. Gilligan, C. (1987). Moral orientation and moral development. Justice and care, ed. Held V. (1995). Colorado
7. Hall, W.,ed. (1997). Representation. London
8. Said, E. (1978) Orientalism. (Hebrew Translation), Tel Aviv: Am Oved.
No comments:
Post a Comment