"People working and writing within communities need help, and they know it. But they do not need certain kinds of help" (63).
Reading this, I thought, "Wow. That seems kind of like common sense." But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that this could probably be ignored by people working in communities. To use the example from the book, community member Barbara says that it's helpful when experts present scientific information and facts, but people from universities come out and just want to talk to them (63). What do people hope to accomplish by just talking to community members? Are they trying to give them a voice? Because it seems to me, the people in Harbor already kind of have a voice. They just need more information to make their voice and rhetorical tools more powerful.
This got me thinking about the Cushman piece. What if Cushman had just gone into the community and talked to the residents and then published her findings. I think the piece would've been much less convincing. Instead, the lived in the community and worked with the residents. She helped them navigate the complex social services system. She gave them the kind of help and expertise they needed.
So if experts go into a community like Harbor and interview the residents about the effects of the pollution and then publish their findings, sure it gives the community a voice, in a way. But it also takes their voice away, and makes them less able to write for change.
Dear Jessica, I like the way you think. :)
ReplyDeleteAll too often it seems that academics will come into communities and try to "fix" them because they know what is best for them. Many times they want to help out of the goodness of their heart, but one thing they have to realize is that the place that they are using simply to collect data is someone's home. ... I think that makes sense...
Is this bringing to light more ethical concerns about the field of community literacies? Flower seemed all about change, but a change in what? Jeff's book seemed to raise the idea of change in a much different way.
ReplyDeleteIn what way, John?
ReplyDeleteFlower seemed bent on changing the hierarchical infrastructure that serves as the basis for the community. But this Tech Comm approach for community does not change these meta-structures. It enhances them by creating writing technologies that allows community members to assume necessary roles and accomplish crucial tasks to the survival of that community.
ReplyDelete