Academia Is Not The Only Fruit!

“No pedagogy which is truly liberating can remain distant from the oppressed by treating them as unfortunates and by presenting for their emulation models from among the oppressors. The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their redemption (Freire, 1970, p. 54).”

― Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed

Whilst sitting in an exam (art teachers have to sit in exams in case a child needs technical assistance) I received an email from one our deputy head teachers (he is both a colleague and a friend).We share many opposing views; he is trained in philosophy as well as being steeped in the various narratives constructed and taught delivered as history (with a capital HE). He loves an argument and will interrogate even the most unconscious and banal pronouncements made in the pub in the manner of an Ancient Grecian. He can be difficult to love but his intention is to provoke thought and I do love to tease him.

The e- mail that he sent was concerning the organisation of small focused reading groups from the pool of children regarded as the ' More Able'. The premise of which is to stimulate our pupils abilities to reason, speak out, debate and argue. The groupings came about from lists generated by subject teachers of those individuals the teacher thought may be classed as 'Gifted and Talented' and the suggestion of an Oxford don who had visited the school to talk to pupils about what Oxford University looks for in the profile of an applicant. I never met him wasn’t even introduced- I am only the art teacher after all.

I sent him the above quote from Freire (a book from which I admit I pick cherries and throw them on Twitter- and at reactionaries) to which some minutes later he replied electronically:

‘This will actually not work. Unfortunately there are no examples of the oppressed generating high culture - it always comes from the elite. I notice you quote Freire using the conventional academic procedures of the elite oppressors rather than just smashing my face in. Redemption, there's a thing!’

No examples of the oppressed generating high culture - it always comes from the elite? So what is Street art, Outsider Art, Cave Painting? I believe Da Vinci was completely self -taught -he’d preferred hawking to art initially.* My reply was this:

‘Dearie Me,

Can I quote you in my Blog?

A bald admission of  the fact that the elite holding the gates closed or open as they see fit or until the oppressed or normalised to serve the Patrician classes or enhance the power, prestige and status of the said elite.  ‘High Art/ Culture are adopted/adapted at will by this class who control the canon of ‘taste’. They patronise those who create - fashioning and prolonging certain modes, methods of thinking and their products as commodities of ‘truth’.   An unabashed complicity that protects the status quo sustained by the products of a workforce that administers and serves own oppression. The patricians use the aspirant and their efforts as a magician might use smoke and mirrors to demonstrate an illusion of social mobility. Allow five in shut ninety five out; as even that gene pool needs fresh thought and meat but nothing that smells too radical or thought provoking.’

I was in such a mood! –admit that I have reviewed and edited my statement as I posted it back without review and have omitted the typos and grammar that came up in a subsequent spell and grammar check of this post. Embarrassing!

 Is he right? What is ‘High Culture’ and who decides it is so? Who are the arbiters? Am I a Socratic fool?

I’ll quote from writing about Socrates sent to me and prepared by the same friend for discussion in these focus groups (I think it’s probably his own I’ll have to ask him):

‘The problem with Socrates is that he made anyone wishing to argue with him look foolish. He wallowed in his paradoxical greatness (he was wise because he understood his ignorance) and kept antagonizing people even when he knew his methods were ineffective.

Too many people are like Socrates. And I don’t mean in a good way. Their way of winning arguments is counter-productive. They put people on the defensive and invite them to strike back. They assume bad faith on the part of others. Quite often, they end up shunned by others and not achieving what they wanted.’

Does this sum me up? But, then it’s not all about me is it and I know he means well and has the best interest of others at heart. Again to recycle Freire:

‘At times we may need to fight side by side with the unions; at other times we may need to fight against them, if their leadership is sectarian, whether right of left. At other times we also need to fight as a progressive administration against the devilish anger of the obsolete; the traditionalists, some of whom judge themselves progressive ;and of the neoliberals who see themselves, who see themselves as the culmination of history.'

 Onward!

*Thanks Caleb!