Blog #5: Kozol, from Shame of the Nation vs. Goldberg, from 100 People

"Amazing Grace- The Lives of Children and the Conscience of a Nation"
Jonathan Kozol

"100 People Who Are Screwing Up America"
Bernard Goldberg

Authors' Arguments:

In "Amazing Grace", Johnathan Kozol seems to assert that America is not always "the beuatiful". He talks about how there are forgotten byproducts of the American dream, like Mott Haven. It seems that it is not only the "red bag" refuse which is burned away in the incinerator down there, but an entire class of people. Reduced like the garbage to human ash, easily looked over by the rest of the nation. Kozol seems to think that this is a natural excrement caused by the SCWAAMPy like system in place in America. It will not change unless the system functions differently. For this degradation is itself also a cyclical system.

In contrast to Kozol's argument, Bernard Goldberg, seems to push that America is not the monster it is made out to be in "Amazing Grace". He claims that writing such as this, while true in some cases, focuses solely on the minority bad while demonizing the majority good. He says that people are being brainwashed into hating America, thinking power does not afford protection and security, but instead is used solely to crush the unfortunate in a grinding class system. Pride in the USA is disappearing, and folks aren't focusing on all the positive things about our, as Americans, nation. He name's Kozol in particular, and claims that his biased accounts of poverty and bleakness of making everyone think things are worse than they are, and that their country is evil for making such conditions exist.

Passages of Interest:

1) Kozol's piece was a real eye opener. There was a line in the first paragraph which made me stop and go "Wow, really?". It pretty much showed a perfect gradient upon which our modern class system exists. It reads:

"When you enter the train, you are in the seventh richest congressional district in the nation. When you leave, you are in the poorest."

2) Kozol exmaines the culture of Mott Haven as related by a young man named David Washington. This kid is amongst all of the horrid, horrid poverty. Amongst the murders, AIDS, violence, amongst stuff most white people such as myself could only imagine in movies. And yet, David doesn't view himself as in the worst possible position, he sees others still beneathe him. That put alot of personal problems I have been through. It is amazing that this kid, who's mother is practically dying, can still have pity for someone other than himself, as seen in this passage: (He relates how drug dealers look at him with hatred, and responds when Kozol asks why)

"I think they hate you because you are not in their condition. 'I am in hell and you are not and so I hate you and I have to try to bring you down to where I am.' I feel pity for them and fear, because they are lost."

Kozol seems to scratch the surface of the ignored plight of Mott Haven by interacting with David, but David shows us that it goes even deeper than Kozol as an outsider can even begin to understand.

3) Bernard Goldberg critiques the liberal education techniques put forth by Johnathan Kozol. He asserts that being American is not something to wear like a sin or shame, that this sort of thinking is perpetuated by the suggestions of the monster American power system. This is apparent when he talks about American youths loosing their national culture, which Kozol influenced educators have branded as evil:

"To be sure, there are a number of ways that the American education system has broken down over the years. Far too many of today's schools are violent, and far too many are filled with kid's who don't care about learning. Yet, what may be even worse, and in the end even more dangerous, is that so many of today's schools are turning out 'smart' kids with little understanding of how precious their heritage is."

Discussion:

The work by Kozol was both eye opening and heart breaking. Goldberg would say that the feelings I had upon reading it are exactly those Kozol had angled to elicit. I can see where both authors are coming from. One of the main points I think this course is moving us towards is balance. I don't think either Kozol or Goldberg are wrong. In chemistry, there is a reaction state known as equilibrium. Different chemical species react with one another, but keep going back and forth from the reagents (starting material) to the products (end materials). A very basic chemical reaction looks like this:

X + Y <---> XY

This means that the product swings back and forth, continually coming undone and reforming. When there is a high concentration of the "X + Y" side, the reaction will compensate and go more towards the "XY". This works both ways.

I think as teachers, we need to be like an equilibrium reaction. 

Kozol is right about society being broken, but Goldberg is also right about it not being all bad. This also can be seen going all the way back to Johnson. If "XY" is white privilege, and we refuse to acknowledge the "X+Y", then nothing is going on. No reaction is going forward and nothing is changing. Further correlation can be drawn to Lisa Delpit's idea of the duality between codes of power and personal identity. While Johnson, Delpit, Kozol and Goldberg all focus on one side of a reaction or the reaction as a whole, it seems that the main idea is to recognize sometimes you need to do all of these. What I mean is, sometimes it is better to focus on "X+Y", the transitition equilibrium, or the "XY" or a combination of the three. Don't settle on one portion, because people and persons are not something that can be nailed down with one answer.

So I think the big picture is starting to be shown that we as teachers must be open, fluid, and recognize that it is unwise to set something in stone. We will need to evolve with our students and the times. To remain stationary would be to become jaded and fail what I feel is the main objective of our calling, to better our world. This is hard though, because as humans we want a definitive answer, we want things codified and ordered. That simply will not work when dealing with human beings on such an important level as student to teacher.

Also, it is hard for me to talk like this without thinking I am being overly dramatic and self righteous. I spent years mocking the deep sensitive types. Not too sure if I am breaking out of my privlege shell, or if I just like hearing talk(or I gess seeing myself type). I genuinely hope though it is the former.