The "You Suck!" Chorus Causes Irritability

I was a little more than dismayed at Brodkey’s use of extracurricular written correspondence in order to judge the power structure within educational discourse. Perhaps her intention was to illustrate that, even though teachers and students are capable of interaction outside of the academic environment, they are still incapable of transcending the teacher-preferenced and student-subjugated discursive relationship. However, both groups are operating as students in this case. One group is Broadkey’s own students and the other is the group in the ABE class. Not only is this ignored, but the form of the communication between these two groups does not seem to factor into Broadkey’s analysis of the discursive choices made by the writers either. She comments that the letters were “initiated” by the “white middle-class” group enrolled in her course. This would, at least, partially explain the initiation of subject selection by the graduate students, as is seen in the excerpt from Don’s introductory letter. Broadkey does not present an example of correspondence that began with an introductory letter from a member of the ABE class; and therefore, we have no comparison as to the affect initiation of conversation has on subject selection.

Continuing along these lines, Broadkey seems overly critical of the choices made by the grad students, for she believes them to be incapable of “divest(ing) themselves of those vestiges of authority that strike them as unproductive by ignoring the institutional arrangements that unequally empower teachers and students.” Later she criticizes their inability to empathize with situations they have never experienced due to economic and perhaps cultural differences. In fact, Broadkey determines that such awkward exchanges are “most explicable as a professional class narcissism that sees itself everywhere it looks”. If such class narcissism exists everywhere, and it does, is not the teacher/student relationship within educational discourse an effect of other differences among the groups besides professional affiliations?

Is not Broadkey herself exercising the same class narcissism in her one-sided critique of these exchanges? She fails to grant the grad students the same privilege she allows the ABE students, which is that they are also constituted as subjects in the discourse of their cultures. Often different classes and cultures communicate using different coding. Her treatment of the grad students, as if they should be more aware of, sensitive of, or versed in the codes of class and cultural differences, because of their level of education, when enacting the roles to which they have become subjects in their class discourse, and her carte blanche attitude towards the ABE students who do the same, is an example of privileged discourse all its own. Brodkey’s harsh judgments of subjects like Don do not allow them the same freedom to be a product of class structure and the discourse it produces.

For instance, perhaps Don’s penchant for telling all his stories as though they were naturally imbued with humor is an acquired defense mechanism from living in a culture that rejects a straight forward discussion of feelings as a breech of manners. If this would be the case, it is Dora who is insensitive to Don’s values, by so bluntly referring to human feelings. And instead of Don’s reply being “discursively inadequate”, it may instead be his most honest expression of attempting to sympathize. But we cannot know which perspective is correct based on the limited background and excerpts that are provided.

Though Broadkey does seem determined to privilege the ABE students, she is the one that does not empower Dora with the possibility that she is able to assert herself in the discourse with Don.