Devyn Johnson: Devyn, Curious, but Reticent.

"It amazes me how you can see so deep into me. Most people don't understand me, and because of that I can never trully express myself. By the time they do understand me, I have so much to say I sometimes feel like its useless to get my point across."

jeanne: No, Devyn, I can't see deep into you. It's hard to get to know people; we have to work at it. It wasn't shamanistic magic that told me how hungry you were to learn, and the extent to which you had written us off as a viable source for that learning. It was lots of little statements and behaviors over the whole course of our discourse sessions in old SBS-J246. It was hearing how much you were struggling for Frantz Fanon's ideas, and then realizing that no one had ever introduced you to his writing. It was hearing your bitter conclusion that your vote didn't count, and realizing that we need to teach you the legal and philosophical positions that dictated that frustrating result. (See Moot Court next semester!)

You're right about the difficulty of "having so much to say." That's what happens after a long period of silencing. Everything seems to tumble out at once. Again, Moot Court next semester, where we learn how to pull out the essential bits of the argument and present them to their best advantage. We can teach you, Devyn. We've just forgotten how much we have to trust you to do that.

Tyron Turner:

"It is rare nowadays to have so much fun in a classroom setting because of all of its discourse. I have to admit to you that when you first told me that you didn't give any test or exams in your classes, I thought that learning was something that I would not have to do this semester. . . .You gave me the freedom for the first time in my life to study what I wanted to study and how I studied it through the Habermas site."

jeanne: And Tyron, you took good advantage of that. I will never forget your hurling back at me that it was structurally violent to demand respect for learning. You're right, you know. I would never have thought of that. But Edward Said does. He points out that this one of the difficulties in post-colonial studies, recognizing the extent to which the dominant discourse of imperialism pervades our imaginary. I've read his work. I think I even understood it. But I'll never forget it again after your remark.

Brian Morris:

Brian, you have taught me so much over the three semesters that you have been with me. I remember Tamisha and Cira taking care of you in Agencies. They protected you when I fussed and caught you up where you were behind. It wasn't until Juvenile Delinquency that I watched the tables turn when you and Wesley took responsibility for moving the group along to new heights. As we talked about Rose's Black Homicide and Oliver's Violent Social World of Black Men, it became clear that we had connected and that you were both able to place these readings in the context of your own lives. Then you came back and helped negotiate peace within the classroom. I began to see the friendship with Tamisha and Cira as much less one-sided than I had believed it to be in Agencies.

And then this semester, the ultimate blow. You went off to buy your lunch and proceeded to eat it right smack in the middle of a lecture on Frantz Fanon! I wanted Marine Boot Camp discipline! I wanted intense, scholarly production! And then Tryon reminded me of the structural violence inherent in demanding respect for learning. I still don't think it's fair that you all laughed at me. It's part of my culture to insist on high scale productivity and self-sacrifice in the interest of that market product. And I'm sure that you're supposed to suffer as you achieve - it's part of the whole corporate theme that you won't work unless we make you do so. The humiliation of being hoisted on my own petard! I forgot that turning us all into fungible commodities may not be at all what some of us want, and how much that need reflects the imperialism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Kind of hard to free your imaginary of the dominant discourse, isn't it?

Leslie Hendricks: Leslie, fascinated by the potential she finds in discourse.

Leslie, yours was one of the first forays into academic discourse as you began to describe your reactions to Beatty's White Boy Shuffle. Your review was the stimulus for a number of discussions in several classes on the pervasion of elitism in the dominant discourse. Beatty's response of opting out of the whole world expresses the rage that Fanon describes when we recognize the extent to which the dominant discourse describes us as 'Other" and inferior. I think you expressed that well when you said, "Once you get past some of the harsh language you come to realize that there really aren't any other words that could possibly express the feelings and power behind Beatty's writing."

I was also impressed by the power with which you were willing to express your feelings at our Forum Discussion: "I wanted to say so much, but I didn't know what I wanted to say." That is so very true when we begin shared discourse. We were very lucky to have had several weeks for the Forum, and the time to go into the issues more deeply. It helped that you knew your classmates by name, and recognized them in your narrative. You show an excellent spontaneity in your writing. I hope you will continue to write.

Mary Hobson: Mary, alert, interested, a force quietly determined to set the story straight.

Mary, I lost. You're not going to rely on the computer; you're going to rely on hardcopy. I am amazed. I have no idea how you and Bobbie Martin can manage to find anything in that mass of papers from the site. I worried that you were both relying on hardcopy. Then I realized that Bobbie is using the computer screen to surf the site for what she wants, then using hardcopy for backup. Once again, I am learning that in some cases it is structurally violent to demand moves until we're ready to make them. Certainly, your ability to find the most diverse pieces of information from the site impressed me, as did your adding continually to our database with other pieces you brought from other classes.

I'm sorry we didn't have more time for review sessions in the early evening, but I was pleased when you were able to join us. That was one of the difficult transformative pieces: getting us used to the idea that we needed discourse time together. I have a feeling you'll be able to add a lot to that, because there was still a gap where you and I were trying to find a comfortable arena in which to actually work. I hope we'll get to do that next semester, perhaps in Moot Court. The exchanges in my office certainly led us to understand the degree of interdependence we'll need to embrace to find the best working environment.

Marlene Veliz: Marlene: "But what about us?"

Marlene, I cannot tell you how much I admired your courage in hanging in through that entire noisy evening of discourse on racism. As you saw, when we actually move into discourse, many transformations occur simultaneously. Those who have been silenced, by either similar or different oppression, sometimes react by noisy proclamations, testing, as it were, the promised security of the forum. Others, who have simply given up silence are likely to be quite vocal in their encouragement of noisy proclamations. Much of the noise comes of the affect, which has been bottled up so long. Edward T. Hall reminds us that out-of-awareness experiences will produce the most affect. And Frantz Fanon and Edward Said remind us that colonization and oppression produce a rage that must be expressed, if not acted upon. Fanon was particularly concerned that the rage might produce mere revolution to nationalism or tribalism without a corresponding growth toward the recognition of the rights of all without subordination.

I think we saw two processes comingled on that first night of our Forum. The rage came out. Also came the confusion we face when we try to understand the unstated assumptions and the extent to which they have permeated our imaginary. You described well what it felt like to be an "Other" in turn excluded from the plaint of the "Others." It is precisely that dilemma that Fanon sees the need to avoid in simple natinalism or fundamentalism. Counternorms often produce the exact same straight jacket as the exclusionary norms we sought to displace. It was astute of you to see that, and wise and courageous of you to voice that for all of us who felt it, but didn't quite now how to voice it.