RP4: Reflections

Our discussions in class Thursday about our personal research question made me realize something. As my group members each attempted to identify their own obsessions and interests in order to create their own question, I was busy questioning the question. In order to know what my personal research question is, I have to know myself. Who am I? I found the discussion difficult in that there is a paradox that blocks us from receiving a simple answer. We need to know ourselves to establish a question, but how can we possibly know ourselves when we as individuals are constantly changing? We are under a constant barrage of media and educational topics, and the more we explore the more we expand ourselves. The self is indefinite, so how can we, so early in our lives, be expected to establish a question to pursue? It came to me that we can establish a question as long as we do not expect to receive a definite answer. Over time the question will change, as will the answer. It will adjust to our changing selves. It, like us, will be fluid.

Who am I? I feel like most of us in the class were, in one way or another, asking ourselves the same question. In the past few weeks, I have become so focused on Rabasa's concept of Elsewheres, and that every individual person is different, that I had forgotten that we as a collective humanity are still capable of having commonalities. All of us at this point are still on a mission of self-discovery. We are all learning more and more about topics that interest us in hopes that we might better understand ourselves. We share the common journey of self-discovery, searching for a sense of personal enlightenment. What are we here for? What can we do? It seems to me that we in this class are all searching for the answers to these questions. And although it may be frustrating when we cannot find a definite answer, it is only natural to work through that stress and continue on.

I wanted to write this to remind everyone in our class that even as we knock down social binaries, break through borders of race and culture, and establish that every individual is indeed an individual, that we are not alone. We are all on this journey of self-discovery together, and I have been very pleased to have shared my journey with you for the past 9 weeks. I look forward to seeing what answers we do find, and how our questions all change in the future. Thank you, and always remember you do not journey alone.

RP4: Coloniality, Colonialism, and Mignolo

Colonialism saddens me, and in a large scheme Mignolo does not support the idea that coloniality is permanent; however, when applying his theory to our daily lives, I have a hard time understanding the ways in which colonialism can be entirely dismantled.  I understand that there are methods which can be applied to anti-colonialism to render its effectiveness, but on a large scale I think that the demolition of colonialism is impossible.

Unfortunately, I am working from a limited perspective and I do not yet have the scope to conceive of the abolition of colonialism.  Considering the ways in which the land of The People has been historically* misused, it will be difficult to adjust all of the structures which were quickly assembled, but built to last and endure.  To an extent, colonial structures were built with a form of survivance in mind.  Once one group is colonized, it almost seems as though the quickest form of reconciliation or retribution is through the colonization of another group of people.  Now, is this to say that I am assuming colonization can only be dismantled in a matter of years?  No.  It is to say that I believe that coloniality will take decades to erase, and I do not see the lifespan of humanity occupying the same lengthy lifespan.

To reiterate, my perspective is limited.  I began reading with the idea that the lifespan of humanity after 2014 is waning.  This limited view constricted me and did not allow me to completely agree with Mignolo's theory.  Although I agree that colonialism is the the "hated little sister" which the family attempts to disguise as modernization, or progress, or development, and I partially agree that "the decolonization of knowledge and subjectivity through the imagination of alternatives to capitalism and alternatives to the modern state and its reliance on military power... is taking place" (Mignolo, 85); however, I do not believe it has garnered sufficient support to be considered ultimately successful.  I also do not believe there is a way for these movements to be greatly successful until all of colonialism is disbanded.

Now this post is not in any way a means to say that I have the answer to ending colonialism.  It is also not not an attempt to say that Mignolo's theory was not brilliant.  Instead it is to say I do not entirely agree with his theory.

*the use of the term historical is not to confine this text to the European, Greco Abrahamic linearity of time, but merely to contextualize my thoughts through a method that is familiar.

St. John Coltrane

RP4: Question the Question

Being in Intro to Ethnic Studies has encouraged/forced me to take a more active role in my own education and take responsibility for how/what I learn in a way that I am not used to. Something that I think will really stick with me going forward is the mantra "Question the question." Using this concept as a guide, I feel I can have a starting place to engage with some of the complexities that have been on my mind this quarter. I anticipate that this concept will be something I can always return to and rely on to point me in a productive and interesting direction, if not a simple or easy-to-understand-and-communicate one. With "question the question" in mind, I want to briefly discuss one of the questions from the Byrd reading that we talked about in class recently:

How might the terms of the current academic and political debates change if the responsibilities of that very real lived condition of colonialism were prioritized?

After taking this class, I don't feel qualified to answer this question -- I mean, that's part of the point; knowledge demands are everywhere, and no single person's experience will enable them to meet them all -- but I do feel like I can "question the question" (though in a slightly different sense than that in which we've been using the language for most of the quarter) and ask what many of the words used in the question mean: "academic," "political," "debate," "responsibilities," and of course "colonialism" need to be unpacked in order to understand what this question is actually asking. To me, "question the question" means doing this unpacking and, through that, gaining a better understanding of the big picture(s)-- of the framing of the question and the position(ality) of the person/institution/group asking it.

RP$: Mignolo and Modernity

Language is so important. Words carry a weight and a history that cannot be ignored for mere convenience. Mignolo explores the difference between “discovered” and “invented” that brings to light some of the many issues presented by colonization. By using the word “discovered” in reference to colonization, one invalidates the entire peoples that are being colonized. How can a land with multiple peoples, cultures, and systems be discovered when the intention of said “discovery” is to eliminate and change all those things which were already there? “America” was not “discovered”, the idea of America was invented and thrust upon a preexisting land which had not been and had not wanted to be America.

However, this word and many others, such as modernity, are still commonly used, because of their constructed positive connotations and the persisting and underlying belief that Europeans did in fact “earn” or “deserve” to essentially overtake and run the newly named Americas. This is what truly interests me. The persistence of our word usage and general understandings of history show the true and deeply rooted problem: that many Europeans and now Americans do not see colonization as the violent and devastating intrusion that it was and is. From the European perspective, “modernity refers to a period in world history that has been traced back either to the European Renaissance and the ‘discovery’ of America” (Mignolo 8) and is seen as, “the direction of history that had Europe as a model and goal.” What is not seen, what refuses to be seen, from the European perspective, is that “the achievements of modernity go hand in hand with the violence of coloniality” (Mignolo 8). The reluctance here, I think, comes from an inability to admit that the system is dirty. The system that one was born into and participates in every single day, the system that very possibly has created a seemingly wonderful, fulfilling, and satisfying life for someone, was built upon the destruction of another system, another people, by one’s own people.

I’m going to take a little leap here, and tie this into the idea behind my final project. This ^^^ what I just described as reluctance, but is truly so much more complex, is exactly what dying looks like. What Mignolo thinks our society needs to do and what we have been attempting to do in this class is to STRETCH. To not simply succumb to the ignorance of colonization, modernity, or discovery that is far too easy to obtain in our current educational and political structures. Having now read and analyzed Mignolo, we have more than enough tools that can enable us to stretch. More completely, we have the tools to help others who are on their death beds to begin stretching. Stretch or Die. It is a choice that everyone makes, but it is never too late to start reaching, to change one’s language, or to watch and truly understand one’s word choice. 

RP4: Real or Imagined?

            Imagination. Imagined. Real. My relationship to Greece is my real home. My relationship to my imagined home is my family. My family’s love is my imagined home, no matter where they move, there love is always home. She says I need to address Greece as real and imagined. Especially with Greco-Abrahamic thought: Greek Philosophy and language. She says local knowledges of Greece are used for design. In essence, how is our own work, in relation to racism and colonization, affected by Greek civilization and philosophy? These questions almost remind me of the movie, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, where the dad constantly says that everything came from the Greeks and that this civilization was founded on Greek principles. We must ask ourselves then…since we know that the Greeks only contributed to some modern day advancements…what ideas did the Greeks contribute that are affected by or affect our work as Ethnic Studies scholars? Democracy. Democracy was originally implemented by the ancient Greeks: the idea of voting directly in order to shape a city’s politics under a unanimously decided idea. The question about democracy, however, is who is in and who is out. Who is a citizen and who is not. Who counts as a citizen and who does not. This idea of inclusion and exclusion always has been and currently is a part of our modern day societal systems. In ancient Greece, those that were allowed to vote were Greek citizens. Well what was considered a citizen? A Greek, upper class, male, citizen. No one else. No women, no foreigners, no slaves. This system sounds extremely similar to that of the early United States. Back when this land of the great patriotic U S A was “founded” (some might say by civilized people) it was only AMERICAN (meaning British immigrants), upper class, white, male citizens that were allowed to vote. This basically only qualified American, upper class, white, male citizens as human beings in the “elsewhere” of United States America. This same idea of who is a human, who is a citizen, who belongs, who is included and who is excluded has continued with the practice of colonialism, coloniality, and imperialism. This whole idea of a direct democracy turned into that of a representative democracy. One in which the beloved people elect an official to decide their own important issues. And who are the elected officials? Majority white. Majority men. All citizens. These systems continue to push down those of a different race from the “all supreme” white race. It oppresses those of black, red, yellow…not to forget, brown. BUT, we have all decided that race is an arbitrary thing. So then the question is, what can we do to deconstruct this system that oppresses something that is so arbitrary as the color of your skin? Agency. Use the agency that you have in order to speak up and speak out. Use your own rights in order to better the lives of someone else. Represent someone to give them their own rights one day. Agency. Real? Or Imagined? I say…real.

RP4: Where'd I Come From?

In our small group discussions in Thursday’s class, Thania, Sam, Yaneli and I ended up discussing our family histories. Specifically, we talked about how our families got to the US. It got me thinking about the Roots and Routes assignment we did at the beginning of the quarter. I titled it “I Feel Like I Should Know More About Where I Came From” and now that’s shifted to “I Wish I Knew About Where I Came From And How They Got Here”.

My mom’s dad’s (Grandpa) family came to the US from Ireland in the 1840s or 1850s during the potato famine. From what I understand, they were in New England for awhile before they settled in Traverse City, MI and started a cherry orchard. The orchard was in the family for over a century, but it was sold off a few years ago. I don’t know very much about my mom’s mom’s (Grandma) family, only that they came over from the Netherlands around the same time. Both of my mom’s parents came from strictly Catholic households, but they ended up breaking away from that and went in a more Protestant direction, which apparently caused some tension for quite some time. 

My dad’s dad’s (Grandpa Robert) family came from Rochlitz, Germany in the 1860s (I think) and were some of the first European settlers in Nebraska. I don’t know too much beyond that. Our family still owns the property Grandpa Robert was born on and I think that had been the family farm for awhile before that. My dad’s mom’s (Grandma Ople) family came from Norway. Beyond that, I really don’t know too much. We do go to the Rochlitz reunion, but I don’t think I ever met anyone from Granma Ople’s family.

I don’t really know as much about either of my grandma’s families, to be honest. Grandma didn’t talk about her family much and once I was old enough to get more curious, she had gotten Alzheimer’s. Grandma Ople talked about her family sometimes, but I always got the feeling that there were some unresolved tensions there. So I ended up knowing more about Grandpa and Grandpa Robert.

Something I’m grappling with is how assimilated the different branches of my family are. I mean that in the sense that I don’t know Gaelic, Dutch, German, or Norwegian and that we don’t practice any traditions from Ireland, the Netherlands, Germany, or Norway. I wonder what it must’ve been like for the Irish branch of the family dealing with the social stigma towards the Irish and the German branch during the World Wars. Like, that must’ve been hard. But we don’t really have much to go on from back then, in stories or in journals and whatnot. I wish we did though.

RP4: Tense Matters

"Although critical theory has focused much attention on the role of frontiers and Manifest Destiny in the creation and rise of U.S. empire, American Indians and other indigenous peoples have often been evoked in such theorizations as past tense presences. Indians are typically spectral, implied and felt, but remain as lamentable casualties of national progress who haunt the United States on the cusp of empire and are destined to disappear with the frontier itself. Or American Indians are rendered as melancholic citizens dissatisfied with the conditions of inclusion" (Byrd xx).

I’ve been thinking about this quote a lot this week—especially in conjunction with what Dr. Gómez asked us to talk about on Tuesday: How might the terms of the current academic and political debates change  if the responsibilities of the very real, lived conditions of colonialism was prioritized? To help me think about this question, I had to think about the ways in which the real and lived conditions of colonialism are not prioritized—a clear, succinct, direct idea was necessary, not just rhetorical and broad statements of frustration. This idea was well described in the quote above.  The lived conditions of colonialism have been so pushed aside, not prioritized, that the groups who have lived and live in those conditions are evoked in the past tense and as “lamentable casualties of national progress.” The most common reference to indigenous communities is though stereotype—specifically a historical stereotype: The ‘Noble Savage” with long dark hair, acting as one with the universe, the image of the stoic yet dangerous man wearing little clothing, a feathered headdress , and war paint. These are dominant images of a group of people lumped into the easy title of Native Americans. These images are everywhere from advertisement to children’s entertainment.

The popular Disney movie, Peter Pan, begins in the orderly, civilized, real world that seems to include only wealthy white people. It then moves into a fantasy world that includes boys who have no parents, pirates, and Indians who sing “What makes the Red man Red.” The characters enjoy their stay in this fantasy world, but in the end, the children have to return to the real world…where apparently these groups don’t exist? No, actually orphans, piracy, and Indians do exist in the real world—they simply do not have the same levity as portrayed in Peter Pan’s Neverland. The simplification of what is means to be Indian, both in the film and in the broader portrayal of Indians, is firmly placed in a historical stereotype and as a past tense presence. It relies on the already-stereotypical and simplifying image of how Europeans viewed Indians when white man first “discovered” the Americas. It does not recognize the current presence of indigenous communities and how they might be different from that historical image. It does not acknowledge the history of genocide and imperialism of indigenous communities and how that might have forced them to change and adapt in order to survive.

Maintaining a single narrative and image that originated six hundred years ago removes the effects of colonialism on this country and the people who have lived here and been subjected to this coloniality. What does recognizing this lived condition look like? Because for me, before I can think about what effects that might have on academia and politics, I need to think about what form prioritizing the lived conditions of colonialism would take. I think it would take changing norms; it would take changing what we see as standard and normal for “Indian.” The best way to do this is through art and media. Change the way we talk about Indian-ness and the way indigenous people are portrayed and talked about. Distinguish between different groups, recognize the land we stand on, strive to understand the current condition of colonialism rather than naming it as past lamentable casualties. Stop talking about people in the past tense when they are here. Speak in present tense.

RP4: Tongues

On Tuesday, Dr. Reid Gomez brought up the idea of language and its role in colonization. I can't stop thinking about it.

For years I've been into languages, not just the spoken ones, but that's where I've been living for the last few years.

I grew up speaking both Spanish and English and started learning German about five years ago.

For years, I've admired the power of language, of words. How much little scribbles can mean and how much  can convey -- everything from love to hate and desire and even who has power.

I'm breaking from the "don't bring in too much outside knowledge to the class" thing we sometimes have going.

I'm used to making connections from class to class and bringing in everything together and I gained a lot from sticking to single texts but I was in another class where the role of language was brought up. I guess I've been trying to link language to ethnic studies in a more direct way than what we have kind of touched up on in class, as evidenced in my last post also being about language.

In this other class, we discuseed the role of language in society and identity formation.

I line up closest with the idea that the original telos of language is to facilitate communication -- but that it has been used in it's parasitic forms to facilitate subjugation.

I'm bilingual. Two tongues. Both brought to this land chunk centuries ago by colonizers.

I can't speak either language "properly." I have an accent when speaking English, when speaking Spanish.

Which tongue holds more power? I have no idea. I don't know if that is a valid question, at least I wish for it to not be. But I guess that is why I'm so interested in this and have made it a point to read Mignolo again and to get my hands on some Jose Medina books and understand language more.

RP4: Challenge all that is given...

The work does not end here. The process of decolonizing our thinking does not cease with the termination of a course, nor does it cease with the end of a school year. We have been conditioned to believe so, but we must look beyond the confines of the grade and search outside of our comfort levels to find true exaltation. This past week has left me to reflect on the class and where I have come as an intro to ethnic studies student. Here is what I have found.

Do not give up. Because so many times I wanted to in this course. I wanted to pull my hair out actually because I did not have the proper understanding of what it means to argue with the given in certain ways. I reside in a hegemonic understanding that what knowledge is given to me is right and to question it is questioning its authenticity and its validity. But what I have understood in this class it that in order to fully understand the knowledge of something, we must questions its authenticity and its validity in order to perfect our own work as scholars. In order to solidify our own knowledge we must challenge everything and think critically about what is believed to be self-evident and true.

Mignolo’s understanding of “Latin” America helped me grasp this and ground my understanding in the questioning of all that is given and believed true, obviously prior to me taking this course. I understand the implications that come out of labeling me as a “Latina.” And how simply changing the label, which are created arbitrarily by hegemonic colonial forces, is simply changing a name on a subject that is a product of a racial project, but its implications do not change. Just like changing multicultural to intercultural, as Mignolo states, does nothing so as much to change the name and label of the same work that is being done. This class has taught me to question why things are labeled as they are and why we believe them to be true. Question the authority that makes these labels powerful and who has the agency to shift a name and create racial projects that will be followed by imperial forces for years and years to come.

My frustration comes from an unwillingness to face that so much in my realm of knowledge has been given to me by colonial thinkers that now to decolonize my ways of thinking seems daunting, but it will happen. I have to make strides to make that happen, outside of academia and beyond the classroom. I am so very ready for this challenge. I only question where this will continue. 

RP4

Thursday, May 22, 2014
Post-class diary entry

(post-post class. Turns out my post was not published on the day I wrote it, rather it remained as a draft for the blog. Oops.)

I am very enthralled with the way class went today. Not only were we engaged physically in the lesson but also mentally, as we were able to draw conclusions based on our readings and apply them to our present life here at K.
Upon reading Mignolo's Indigenous People are Not Necessarily "Latin" and Perhaps not Entirely "Americans" Either, I was captivated by the points that he made regarding western education systems, and the imperial power that they hold. In his critique of corporate universities and their aim to teach "expertise and efficiency", Mignolo reminded me of our education received here at K (pg 121). The supposed "expertise and efficiency" obtained through our college education, though, is completely within the Western paradigm of understanding, perpetuated through curriculum, professors, and even classmates. I would argue that the concept of "interculturalidad"is barely present here at K, as much as we believe we promote diversity and inclusion. My experience of notions of 'interculturalidad' are primarily in this Ethnic Studies class, where Dr. G includes words from other languages and circles of thought into our lessons.
I am particularly stuck on a comment that Anya made in class today, regarding her parent's reaction to her switch of majors. I experienced similar reactions from my own parents when I told them that I am a prospective Art History major. Seeing as they are both liberal school teachers, one would think that they would be accepting and understanding of my decision, yet my mother's first reaction was a gasp and an exclamation of "Where do you plan on working?". The majority of beliefs here at K seem to be paralleled with that of my parents, an they are that if you aren't studying science, you aren't studying anything substantial enough to gain you a job. These perspectives seem aligned with the coloniality experienced in education: that not only is our system geared toward the greco-abrahamic curriculum style, but the studies that are most valued and revered are those that are in line with these methods of thought, as well as those that contain 'promises' of employment, thus perpetuating instances of capitalism in education.

Interculturalidad

As this will be my last response paper for this class, I began thinking a lot about the class as a whole.  I was thinking about everything we have learned so far this quarter, and there was definitely a lot to think about.  Not just in the content of all the readings and other literature that we experienced, but how we looked at them.  I know that for me personally, at least, this class teaches and requires a completely different way of thinking and analyzing than what I’m used to.  That, however, doesn’t mean that it’s the wrong way to look at things.  Far from it!  As I was thinking about this, one word came to my mind: Interculturalidad.  I realized that a lot of Mignolo’s concepts and explanations about Interculturalidad are actually very similar to what we have been learning in this class.  

According to Mignolo, Interculturalidad “means that there are two distinct cosmologies at work” (118).  In contrast with his idea of multiculturalism, which is essentially one idea being “right” and the others merely being tolerated, Interculturalidad recognizes the complete coexistence of two truths.  One doesn’t have to be wrong for the other to be right.  This idea is relatively foreign to most people, or at least to Americans.  We are brought up taught that there is an absolute truth or fact to all things, and that every other answer or method is wrong.  As it relates to teaching and thinking, this class has in itself showcased the concept of Interculturalidad.  In many respects, the education I have received thus far in my life has not been wrong.  I am what most people would consider smart, and I am “good” at school (for lack of a better word.)  In addition to this, there are many other ways that I could have been taught, and infinite different ways of thinking that I haven’t been exposed to.  The way I’ve experienced is certainly not the only way, nor is it necessarily the best.  It’s just one form, or cosmology, or result of a certain world-- however you want to put it.

RP4:MIgnolo

Reading “The Americas, Christian Expansion, and the Modern/Colonial Foundation of Racism” an excerpt from The Idea of Latin America written by Walter Mignolo, it helped me get into more depth about colonialism and how its definition, or should I say, its change and concealment of the word by renaming it through another word: modernity. Modernity and what is now called democracy are the new terms that are now more recently used and constantly referred to but some people that use those terms are not familiar that they are actually using the definition of coloniality.

Colonialism is based off of inventions that are covered up as “discoveries” in order to make it seem that these colonists are superior to any other people since they were able to “discover”, or should I say, invent something that basically was already there. However, the only reason that they were able to get away with that was because they did the most horrific solution of destroying and reconstructing cultures and histories of those that they colonize.

Coloniality “enforces control, domination, and exploitation disguised in the language of salvation, progress, modernization, and being good for everyone.” (pg. 6) For me this definition is based on the similar concept of democracy and how democracy is seen as the only solution that is able to “save” everyone and able to make a country progress and develop further through peace, but is that really the case when it is enforcing control and domination disguised as modernization and salvation for the greater of everyone? How can a country be trying to fight colonialism when they are still embedded in the idea that the majority defines the future of everyone else? Democracy is the new colonialism.

The U.S. government is based on colonialism, although they fought against it in the American revolution, the colonialist mentality was still in practice although the colonizers were not present, their ideas were still deeply embedded into the political system of the government. The majority is still in power and the people that are seen as inferior are still being oppressed yet throughout the years the oppression has evolved. Just by looking back into U.S. history will you find evidence on how colonialism is still in effect and how the government makes excuses and lies and destroys only to escape the fact that what they were doing wrong was actually to just benefit the people when the contrary was in effect.

The word colonialism has evolved from modernity to democracy only to just make people blind on how colonialism is still in effect by disguising it through lies and excuses on how the decisions that are being made will only benefit the people, not oppress them.  Will we ever be able to end colonialism or is it a never-ending factor of life that may never be escaped?

RP4: Mignolo

I really enjoy reading Mignolo. The pieces we have read so far have are straightforward, readable and informative. In “Indigenous People are Not Necessarily ‘Latin’ and Perhaps Not Entirely ‘Americans Either,” Walter D. Mignolo contends that “knowledge is produced, accumulated, and critically used everywhere” in the world; however, since many countries do not have the resources to validate their knowledge the “imperial power knowledge” is the most endorsed which causes the most dominant body of knowledge to silence the less credible knowledge (115). He asserts the notion and use of “Latin America” points towards the silenced histories and knowledge of “Indigenous knowledge” that is not the same as German or French knowledge (116). Notably, Mignolo argues that an Indigenous intellectual has to be knowledgeable of the philosophers: Kant and Waman Puma- an intellectual he categorized alongside Kant, and further suggests that a German or French intellectual does not have to be informed oh Waman Puma and only of Kant (117).

Furthermore Mignolo describes the history of “interculturalidad” and the difference between those notions and “multicultural” notions. In order to assess how “decolonial delinking” works Mignolo describes that “interculturalidad” is two co-existing bodies (Western and Indigenous) where a reciprocal relationship allows, “collaborate conversation” for both sides. In contrast, “multicultural” suggests the principal knowledge acknowledged and controlled is held by the state; therefore people could have their “cultures” as long as they do not argue with that validated state knowledge. Leaning towards “interculturalidad” he writes, “Instead, “interculturalidad” would lead to a pluri-cultural state with more than one valid cosmology,” where he follows through to describe a world where people’s cultures co-exist and are all considered valid (120). Mignolo then describes the creation and transformation of “Latin America” going from the time where philosophy dominated over theology and culture within universities. Then towards the “corporate university” where people “purchase education” for “promotional” purposes, which emphasizes that “Latin America” was brought up within a Western world. He uses the knowledge to present how the use of “Latin America” has and will continue to be used as a way to show the silencing of the Indigenous people who were not part of “Latin America’s” creation.

I think Mignolo works towards suggesting a more incorporating form of system where all worlds’ part of the whole are validated, voiced, and considered which follows a very utopian ideal. How would his view of an all-encompassing body apply to the United States (considering specificities of the “country”)? Is implementation possible? Beneficial? Do I want it? I really enjoy reading Mignolo because the abstract ideas we have discussed and presented are more tangible now.

Basquiat

During our Maury Show, at K, I screened a slide show.  Here is the link:  http://www.wikiart.org/en/jean-michel-basquiat/obnoxious-liberals#supersized-artistPaintings-203890

I encourage you to view the work of Jean-Michel Basquiat—as it speaks to our project and your lives.

Week Nine: The Transit of Empire: Jodi A. Byrd

 

1.     Transit:  “to be in motion, to exist liminally n the ungrievable spaces of suspicion and unintelligibility. . .to be made to move.”  p. xv

2.     “might be more suited to diaspora studies and border-crossing than to a notion such as indigeneity that is often taken as rooted and static, located in a discrete place.” p. xvi

3.     Chickasaw sovereignty and movement p. xvi

4.     “To be in transit is to be active presence in a world of relational movements and countermovements.  To be in transit is to exist relationally, multiply.”  p. xvii

5.     What are our ongoing conversations about sovereignty, power and indigeneity?  NB:  p. xvii

6.     “consider how ideas of “Indianness” have created conditions of possibility for U.S. empire to manifest its intent.”  p.  xvii

7.     the coercion of struggles for social justice…into complicity with colonization p. xvii (i.e., Occupy Wall Street)

8.     What are alternatives to the entanglements of race and colonialism?  p. xviii

9.     “the Derealization of the ‘Other’” p. xviii

10. NB p. xix and what happens when “diaspora collides with settler colonialism”

11. “How might the terms of current academic and political debates change if the responsibilities of that very real lived condition of colonialism were prioritized as a condition of possibility?”  p. xx

12. How racialization and colonization work:  p. xxiii

13. Impossible choices for social justice activists:  p. xxiv

14. How do we engage in a “critical reevaluation of the elaboration of these historical processes of oppression…”? p. xxv-xxvi

15. What is the alternative to “a historical aphasia of the conquest of indigenous peoples?” p. xxvi

16.  What would it mean to see the colonization of the Americas as unresolved? p. xxvi

17.   How do we read the cacophonies of colonialism?  p. xxvii

18. Haksuba:  p. xxvii-xxviii

19. “Being Indigenous”  Alfred and Corntassel p. xxix-xxx

20. Manichean allegories:  foreign/native, colonizer/colonized p. xxix

21. Centering indigenous epistemologies p. xxix

22. What does transformative accountability look like?  p. xxx

23. “Indigenous critical theory might, then, provide a diagnostic way of reading and interpreting the colonial logics that underpin cultural, intellectual, and political discourses.  But is asks that settler, native and arrivant each acknowledge their own positions within empire and then reconceptualize space and history to make visible what imperialism and its resultant settler colonialisms and diasporas have sought to obscure.”  p. xxx

24.  How people view the field (think back on your view of ES, and our discussions of alternative models of teaching ES): p. xxxi

25. “the dialectics of genocide” p. xxxiv

26. moving from vertical to horizontal interactions:  p. xxxiv

27. “transform how we approach these issues, in ways that reflect the best of our governance and diplomatic traditions.”  p. xxxv

28. binary colonial logics:  p. xxxvi

29. dynamics of colonial discourses:  p. xxxvi

30. “I also want to imagine cacophonously, to understand that the historical processes that have created our contemporary moment have affected everyone at various points along their transits with and against empire.”  p. xxxix

31. “provide possible entry points into critical theories that do not sacrifice indigenous worlds and futures in the pursuit of the now of the everyday.”  p. xxxix

St. John Coltrane