Outside of Your Own Literacy Box

Literacy and Language mean something different to every person. The two are not synonymous and do not share a cohesive meaning. In Anzaluda’s essay “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, for example, she discusses how music and cultural tradition mean just as much to her as language does. When talking about “Petra: Learning to Read at 45”, Rigg offers ways in which her ideas of literacy differed from Petra’s.

Lets jump into “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”. Throughout the whole essay, Gloria Anzaluda shows us how language has caused her to feel left out and shameful. Anzaluda hesitates when speaking the Spanish language to other perceived Chicana or Latina women and finds herself “afraid of their censure” of he skills in dialect. This occurs because language and vernacular are important and can come under attack (80). But a “low estimation of my native tongue [is] a low estimation of me”, claims Anzaluda (80). Often times us Anglo Americans don’t think of how our language will represent us as a being, other than embarrassing ourselves in front of our professors or bosses. But to people of other languages it is personal; it is a way of identification. Language can create unity or separation. It can be spoken in code or be diminished in validity based on biases. Individuals who speak two languages often experience “dual identity” and never really feel a sense of belonging. In ways I’ve never thought about, language can be such a determining factor for so many elements of life.

Now for Pat Rigg. Her article focuses on the differences in purpose and importance of literacy. The author carried a psycholinguistic view of reading, whereas the student, Petra, was mostly concerned with the letters of what she was reading. To the student new to reading and writing, “literacy meant drawing clear letters” (7). This goes to show that people’s perceptions of literacy and language differ, as do their goals for reading and writing. If Rigg was to enforce her own view of literacy on Petra, literacy would not have a personal meaning to her and she most likely would not even grasp the beginning concepts of reading and writing.

Petra claims early in the essay that she has a “right to literacy”; and I think she’s onto something (2). Aren’t we all entitled to literacy? Shouldn’t everyone have the chance to read and write at an early age? If it is a fundamental part of survival in this world, why doesn’t everyone have access to learning resources? But I digress…

At our site there is a basic knowledge of literacy amongst the women – they all can read and write sufficiently. Which, by the way, came as a big surprise to me on week 1…but then again I didn’t know what to expect. But I’m sure literacy means something different to each of us. Personally I like to write about things that are personal to me; writing in such a way helps me keep in touch with the side of me I do not speak aloud. But when I bring exercises and prompts intended for self-reflection and self-interpretation the women easily reject them. Sometimes our writing is fruitful and explores deep topics of the self, and sometimes our pens just can’t do our selves justice. And there isn’t a thing wrong with that. This example just shows how literacy means different things to each person. I think it is important as a facilitator to cater to all kinds of literacy interpretations and, in turn, that flexibility helps us grow as writers, facilitators, and interpreters of literacy.

Gee, Plato, and Literacy

“Across history and across various cultures, literacy has seemed to many people to be what distinguishes one kind of person from another kind of person. Literate people are, it is widely believed, more intelligent, more modern, more moral. Countries with high literacy rates are better developed, more modern, better behaved. Literacy, it is felt, freed some of humanity from a primitive state, from an earlier stage of human development. If language is what makes us human, literacy, it seems, is what makes us civilized” (26). We strive, in our workshops, to introduce our writers to writing that will enhance their literate capacities and strive also for them to create writing that shows discursive thought. We are a melting pot of writers with different levels of “literacy”, but that does not, in the least, hinder our ability to appreciate writing and even to write cohesively. Writing is something that is universal and spans among all types of individuals.

For Plato, literacy was “authentic uses of language…always educational in the root sense of drawing out of oneself and others what was good, beautiful, and true” (29). The writing that we do in the jail is without a doubt a beautiful, genuine extraction of the self through paper and pen. But Plato also saw literacy as both a “liberator” and as a “weapon” (30). While writing is a personal and very moving experience, he argues that a piece of writing can get into the wrong hands and cannot, therefore, defend itself against wrongful interpretations. Free interpretation was thought by Plato to be the worst case scenario; all writing should have a definitive, authoritarian voice, guiding its reader to arrive at the proper conclusions. However it is seen in our workshops that there can be many interpretations of a single piece of work, and none of them wrong. We do not abide by Plato’s model for literacy in the context of these workshops. I think Plato’s specific purpose for literacy (being interpreted “correctly” by means of the author) is an idea that is outdated and left behind.

So then Gee begs the questions: “what are the capacities of literacy?” and “what good does (could) literacy do?” (33). In response to those questions, this article addresses that literacy gives rise to “higher-order cognitive abilities, more analytic and logical thought [processes]”, and I could not agree with these responses more (33). Within our workshops, I can definitely see these qualities being displayed in the writers. The writing prompts and exercises that we bring often makes the writers stop and think. Whether it is to think about qualities about oneself personified through characteristics of a house, or to think about life in the context of another human being, literacy stretches the minds of these writers. That being said, literacy is definitely a much broader concept than simply being able to read and write. Gee says that “literacy leads to logical, analytical, critical, and rational thinking, general and abstract uses of language, skeptical and questioning attitudes, a distinction between myth and history, [and] a recognition of the importance of time and space” (26).

This article starts to focus on literacy by means of education. While what we do in these workshops is not tied to any sort of educational curriculum, fortunately – education does not directly correlate with personal growth and development. So that means that what we do through these workshops actually do promote personal growth and development, since they are not centered on state standards or vocational training. We are promoting personal growth and development through enhancement of one’s writing and writing process as well as providing exposure to other types of writing and poems that the writers might not otherwise gain access too.

In most contexts literacy is taught in different ways according to the different classes of society, and those class requirements. For example, the article claims that individuals belonging to lower classes are typically taught “docility, discipline, time-management, honesty”, and other facets of literacy that would enhance their productivity in low-wage jobs; while higher classes were generally taught “analytical skills, critical thinking, discursive thought and writing” to suit their position in management-type positions (34). This is quite the range of skill sets, and results in unequal learning and notions of literacy. What I love about our program is that we promote all of these types of skills. In our workshops we practice time-management, honesty, analytical and critical thinking skills amongst others as well. It might seem trivial to say that we promote analytical skills and critical thinking through a simple writing workshop, but what immediately comes to my mind is that through reading, hearing, understanding, and reflecting on the poems that are presented in the workshop (whether from peer writers or well-known authors), these writers are forced to understand these poems contextually and discursively – perhaps in ways and perspectives that they are not particularly familiar with. To put it simply, we provide means of furthering these writer’s ideas of and capacities of literacy on a personal level. We are giving these writers an opportunity that perhaps they have never been given before. Giving them goals that they themselves may not have considered themselves capable of accomplishing. Through our program, we are promoting literacy.