Literature and Arts A-57
Final Study Guide
Week 10: Look and See: Language at Work
Thursday, April 10 - Lecture notes
Using language is like paiting. Language is a tool. It is not a system. We have to talk about things in an
abstract way. That way is language. Language is allegorical.
Language does not reach the object it alludes to  this is the main worry of philosophers and
deconstructionists.
Words undermine or overshoot what I’m looking for. Words are slippery – words are a problem.
Wittgenstein – argues that much depends on context – don’t insist that language is something it is not. Stop
philosophizing! Don’t explain! Language performs, it doesn’t theorize. A grammar is descriptive not
prescriptive – doesn’t explain – needs context.
Wittgenstein was a reformed positivist. Wittgenstein was a brilliant philosopher, architect, painter, musician,
gardener. Born in Austria. Worked as a male nurse for the Austrian Army during WWI. He was captured by
the Italians. Multilingual – every edition of his philosophical works was published in both English and
German
“language
game”  name that he uses to describe what language does.
Jane Austin – talks about how to do things with words. Philosophers see language as true and false.
Language philosophers say that language is supposed to identity things in the world. Wittgenstein refers to
this as the “baptismal notion of language”
Wittgenstein would say, “tell me what you said and in what context you said it. Don’t tell me why you did
it!” We keep wanting to explain things because if we explain them then we can build a hierarchy.
Language is flat – what you see is what you get, according to Wittgenstein. Philosophers look below for deep
meanings and above for abstract meanings. Language is not universal, leave it alone!
Prof. Sommer’s Criticism #1: in a passage she read in class, he is being a universalist.
Application to Bilingual Arts: language is not systemized/explained. The games are variable. There is no
neatness in language.
Prof. Sommer’s Criticism #2: Wittgenstein doesn’t talk about the bilingual question. This is a sign of selfconsciousness. In class, we discussed this interesting absence of the bilingual question.
Prof. Sommer:
It’s like the chicken and the egg – thought and language
Raw and cooked – language and prealanguage.
/English expression, he says, is prelinguistic  Wittgenstein is in denial about his bilingualism. He doesn’t
want to deal with it.
English is not a sensation this contradicts the rest of what he’s saying.
*I highly recommend reading the Falconi Handout on Wittgenstein on the course website.
a. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations
The essence of the human language is individual words that stand for objects and meaning
4. Augustine’s conception of language is over-simplified: limiting letters to stand for sounds only
5. general idea of the meaning of a word prevents us from understanding language clearly
6. ostensive teaching of words = establishing an association between word and thing = but understanding is
contingent on the mode of training
7. “language-game”: primitive language, naming objects, repeating words, language + associated actions
11. Especially in philosophy, we are confused by the uniform appearance of words when we encounter them
15. “Naming something is like attaching a label to a thing”
17. Grouping of words depends on the aim of our classification
23. Different kinds of sentences  multiplicity new language-games, language types are formed as others
are forgotten
Language-game: “the speaking of language is part of an activity, or of a form of life.”
28. “an ostensive definition can be variously interpreted in every case.”
30. when the overall role of the word in a language is clear, its ostensive definition explains its use/meaning
31. “only someone who already knows how to do something with it can significantly ask a name:
34. A listener can still interpret a definition differently depending on how the word is made use of
38. “For philosophical problems arise when language goes on holiday”: trying to bring out the relation
between name and thing
43. “the meaning of a word is its use in the language. And the meaning of a name is sometimes explained
by pointing to its bearer.”
49. “For naming and describing do not stand on the same level: naming is a preparation for description”
54. the roles of a language-game have very different roles in the game
58. “we quite readily say that a particular color exists; and that is as much as to say that something exists that
has that color. And the first expression is no less accurate than the second; particularly where 'what has the
color' is not a physical object”
66. On games: “we see a complicated network of similarities overlapping and criss-crossing: sometimes
overall similarities, sometimes similarities of detail.”
71: Examples are intended to be interpreted a particular way; examples are not an indirect means of
explaining because general definitions can be misunderstood too.
81: we construct ideal languages, but “ideal” in the sense that after we understand the concepts of
understanding, meaning, and thinking, we will understand if someone says a sentence and means and
understands it, he is playing by a definite set of rules
39: analogy between language and games: people start many games and play many games but don’t finish
them, playing by the rules, changing the rules, making up the rules
91-92: our search for the essence of language via elimination of misunderstandings to achieve a state of
complete exactness
98: “every sentence is in order, and that perfect order exists somewhere”  naïve on Wittgenstein’s part?
Could it be interpreted as a universalist claim?
100: even though there is vagueness, it’s still a game. It’s just that we misunderstand the role of the idea and
that blinds us from seeing language as a game
Relation to Bilingualism:
He talks about language as a game, but uses different games, because he doesn’t want to pin it down to one
system
If we continue questioning the meaning of language, as philosophers do, we’ll never get anywhere. Language
is constantly changing, rules are changing as you use language
(100+)
According to Wittgenstein “it is the business of philosophy, not to resolve a contradiction […] but to make it
possible for us to get a clear view […]. It throws light on our concept of meaning something”. Philosopher
must unveil the aspects that are hidden from us just because of their simplicity and familiarity. Through
language-games Wittgenstein is trying to regularize the language, particularly, relate the meanings of the
word/expressions with their practical usage.
The meaning of the word lies in its use!
Example: “a person goes by a sign-post only in so far as there exists a regular use of sign-post, a custom”.
So, understanding a rule/order is only possible when it is applied, it is inseparable from the real
circumstances – otherwise it would have no meaning for us (more clearly, it might have a meaning, but won’t
define anything), since it’s not possible that there should be only one occasion for this rule. And, by
Wittgenstein, “[t]o understand a sentence means to understand a language. To understand a language
means to be master of technique”.
While we are not allowed to disobey the rule, when we apply it to different circumstances, we interpret the
rule according to them. As in his word-game Wittgenstein shows how reading can be interpret differently for
a practiced reader and learning novice. And when we think about these different actions, we can restrict
“interpretation” to the substitution of one expression of the rule (i.e. one meaning) by another. (The example
Wittgenstein gives about reading is that we would say a practiced one reading the text understanding and
reading aloud or for himself a word by detecting its first syllabus, however, for a beginner, learning the
language under guidance of a teacher, pronouncing familiar words is not actual reading them)
So, though we are always “following the rule”, the expression (or interpretation) of a rule in given
circumstance would differ from one another.
Important example: “Suppose you came as an explorer into an unknown country with a language quite
strange to you. In what circumstances would you say that the people there gave orders, understood them,
obeyed them, rebelled against them, and so on?
The common behavior of mankind is the system of reference by means of which we interpret an unknown
language”
Relevance to Bilingualism
Sometimes the interpretation to another language becomes difficult, when we cannot find an appropriate
word (that’s when code-switching occurs in the mind), Wittgenstein suggests that one may “surrender to a
mood and the expression comes”. Wittgenstein compares it with expressing a thought by language, by words
that would have exact meaning in this context, while there might be other interpretations of them in different
situation.
For a fluent bilingual there always exists an expression, which would come (compare it with translating
with a dictionary, when there’s always a need of finding the word and then choosing most suitable from a
few synonyms). Back to Titone’s article, a bilingual is rather a meta-system than a bunch of different
personalities. The code-switching is just moving from one expression of a rule (a suitable word in one
language) to another, always keeping that rule in mind.
Week 11: In and Out, Neither/or: Aesthetics and Cognition
Tuesday, April 15 - Guest lecture notes (Eloise)
Thursday, April 17 - Lecture notes
Lecture Notes from Thursday, April 17th














Spain spent 800 years in convivencia (means coexistence, living together, in Spanish)
Very different situation that Professor Owen would talk about
 Would say the process of linguistic amalgamation was natural
 Speaking 2 languages yields a third
 Changes keep folding in
 Languages unstable because of this folding
Sir Walter Scot called his English “mongrel”
 Transculturation through loss, war, pain etc.
 Create something new from all sources & create a coherent but flexible whole
Hiron: different approach to languages living together
 800 years without amalgamation – no problem
 Languages influence one another but don’t amalgamate
Owens: North American subject
 Experienced multi-lingual setting but is N. American subject
 Finally imagines resolution of multiple languages is hybridization
Hiron: from Puerto Rico: some cultural friction – interesting dynamic
 Don’t lose English or Spanish – no resolution; live with it
 Tense, uncomfortable but don’t want to resolve
2 sensibilities – the thoughts of Owens and Hiron express a mirror of their own contexts
Puerto Rican movement in NY in 70’s
 Defending being a real piece of New York – legitimization
 Neither succumbing to melting pot nor just dreaming of returning to Puerto Rico
 Defending spanglish
 Trying to make new language out of pieces
Romains tries to be very objective
 Link between bilingualism and intelligence is complex but worth exploring
 We see research is driven by politics
 1890-1930’s – a lot of incoming poor immigrants
 Bilingualism presented as negative
 Americans wanted to establish their superiority
 IQ tests developed for immigration quota purposes
 Researchers said it didn’t matter if the immigrants wrote the test in English (a
language they presumably did not know)
 Intelligence: not just how many facts you know
 Some hereditary component, some environmental, stimulation component.
 Results spun to create desired conclusions
1960’s Canada: undeniable bilingual identity
 Wanted to show that bilingualism was a benefit and made the country better/stronger
 Experiments dealt with children
 Different approach to testing
 IQ tests measured convergent intelligence – started measuring divergent thinking
Hard for monolinguals to have metalinguistic consciousness.
Only clean message we can take away:
 The coordination between political will and research results
If bilinguals are more intelligent, does that make all of W. Africa smarter than France?
Peal & Lambert’s results questioned: were kids smart because they were bilingual or were they
bilingual because they were smart?
a. Suzanne Romaine, “Bilingualism and Intelligence”



Tests on middle class groups in Canada show intellectual advantages of bilingualism
Does familiarity with two languages limit command of both?
 Some say, brain effort required to master the two languages instead of one diminishes child’s
power of learning other things
Pre 1960’s - widespread view that bilingualism could impair intelligence of ethnic groups and
individuals
 Some say more prone to stuttering due to syntactic overload

Research Supporting Negative Effects of Bilingualism

Early 1900’s changing patterns of immigration from Europe to the US raised interest in negative
aspects of bilingualism (tests used to restrict flow)
1917 intelligence test, Goddard found 25/30 adult Jews to be “feeble minded”
 However, didn’t question the validity of the test
Some thought intelligence was hereditary
One of the most widely sited tests was Saer’s study of 1,400 Welsh/English bilingual children (7-14
yrs)
 Critique: monolingual and bilingual urban students similar IQ
Smith concluded that it would be unwise to start on second language during pre-school years unless
they were of superior linguistic ability
Anastasia and Corodova (1953) concluded that tests in both languages made no difference, bilingual
kids were still behind
 Other factors like socioeconomic status were factors
1960’s viewed monolingual kids as 3 years ahead of bilingual kids
Malherbe (1946) 18,000 pupils in South Africa (found superiority in bilingual schools, achieved
highest level of bilingualism)








Research Supporting Positive Effects of Bilingualism

Lambert’s study of French/English in Canada
Peal and Lambert (1962)
 10 year bilingual and monolingual children in Montreal, parents same social class (middle
class)
 the distinguished between “true, balanced bilinguals” and “pseudo bilinguals”
 used wider view of cognitive abilities than those found on an IQ test
 found that bilingual (B) children performed better than monolinguals on both verbal and nonverbal
 better at reorganizing verbal patterns and mental manipulation
 it is not possible to state whether the more intelligent child became bilingual or if
bilingualism aided his intellectual development
 no doubt that student was superior intellectually
Hamers and Blanc 1989 concluded Africans/English bilinguals in South Africa (4-9) yrs were able to
analyze language as an abstract system earlier than monolingual peers
 Bilinguals understood that a cow could be called a dog for example (small minority of
monolinguals agreed with this)


Bilingual kids thought cap was closer to hat than to can (semantic preference)
 Critique : Alleged advantage may come from a sensitivity to the more formal aspects of
language rather than from any cognitive insights
 Scott 1973 argued that B's were better at divergent thinking tasks
Some see Divergent thinking as index of creativity
 IQ tests measure Convergent thinking – find one correct answer rather than number of
outcomes to open ended problem or question
 Carringer 1974 – B's have greater cognitive flexibility, able to separate form from content
 Liedtke and Nelson 1968 – B's better at concept formation (major part of intellectual
development)
 Tucker and Lambert 1975 found B's to be more sensitive to the communicative needs of
blindfolded listeners, multiple languages might help people de-center themselves from
egocentric stages of early childhood
 Selective attention to words, central to cognitive performance
 Ability to manipulate language as a formal system = ‘metalinguistic skill, taking a step back to
analyze form of a language
 Separating word from meaning is the key
 Can help create metaphorical links
 Translation
 Children of immigrants often have parents whose language is stigmatized 115
 importance of sampling must be considered, affects results to a large extent
 It could be that more intelligent individuals are the ones who become bilingual either by
chance or encouragement
 Lambert and Tucker (1972) found no difference, Barik and Swain 1976 also didn't find
difference in intelligence
 Bain and Yu 1980 convinced parents with newborns, 30 sets of parents to raise their children
bilingually and 60 monolingually
 First test no difference, second test B's perform better
Critique: middle class families show advantage for Bilingualism, at least one parent had a university
degree, parents chose immersion program (important factor)
Hakuta and diaz 1984 examined 300 Puerto Rican school children, poor backgrounds, found
bilingualism and non-verbal intelligence advantageously related
Cummins 1976 believed the threshold of competence in both languages is needed for positive effects
to occur
Supported by Galambos and Hakut 1988
 Subtractive bilingualism takes away from first language, additive bilingualism does not take
place at the expense of acquiring threshold skills in first language
 United States educational system is transitional, as soon as students know enough English,
they get mainstreamed into monolingual English classes 117
Important variables to think about
 Socioeconomic status (students from lower social class were often compared to monolingual
middle class students, which resulted in favoring monolingual programs)
 Middle class students saw positive effects when put in bilingual programs
 Poor development in first language can result in second language impeding the development
of the first
 Semilingual- students with poor skills in both languages
 Minorities not given the chance to develop their bilingualism to the fullest degree
 Immigrant children discouraged to continue bilingualism while elite dominant group is
encouraged
 Bilingualism is not one dimensional, and the environment affects how the child is raised (is it
a cognitive advantage to be bilingual in ones specific environment? Think borderlands)
 Different kinds of bilingualisms also complicate the relationship between bilingualism and
intelligence (Spanish/English and German/Turkish for example)







b. Alejandro Portes and Lingxin Hao, “The Price of Uniformity,”

















Main Idea: Plurality of second generation linguistic adaptation types exist; among them, fluent
bilingualism is consistently preferable
Chance to come to America and start a new life has always demanded full assimilation, and as such,
the loss of one’s native tongue
Loss of mother tongue by third generation has ensured that English remains the language of the US
When parents remain foreign language monolinguals and their children shift to English, conditions
are created for family conflict and loss of parental authority
Gender cultural norms of immigrants can affect how well their kids do in school, particularly how
girls do in school and what they think about their future education
Limited bilinguals have different results than fluent bilinguals, with the latter group being able to use
bilingualism more effectively
Immigrants and their children are flocking to urban areas  in coming years, their presence will be
even more marked; the second generation will play an important role in the future ethnic communities
of today’s immigrants
Fluent bilingualism rather than English monolingualism are associated with positive results in family
relations and psycho-social adjustment
Children who have remained attached to their parents’ language without learning English display high
levels of family solidarity, but have much lower self-esteem and ambition.
Main conclusion: At transition towards English monolingualism is not ideal for immigrant families
or their offspring; family relations and personal development can suffer as a result of shifting to
English monolingualism
Data comes from Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS)
Thesis: plurality of second generation linguistic adaptation types exist, and that fluent bilingualism is
consistently preferable
 Fluent bilingualism may be preferable in terms of its family and social consequences to either
form of monolingualism (foreign or English)
No other country has seen such a fast transition towards monolingualism
 Third generation loses grandparents mother tongue this has kept US monolingualism alive
1960’s linguists and psychologists believed bilingualism and cognitive development were negatively
associated
 Pearl and Lambert 1962 found that bilinguals outperformed monolingual students on almost
all cognitive tests
 Important: they differentiated between fluent bilinguals and limited bilinguals
The danger is that youths who advance further in only one language, becoming entirely monolingual
in English, increasingly find the cultural world of their immigrant families and communities irrelevant
 This estrangement also leads to less family solidarity and greater conflict with parents
 However, if parents acquire fluency in English, there is less of an impact on these
relationships
Gender factor
 Differentiation of sex roles and distinct socialization patterns for males and females also affect
social and family relationships
Four propositions
 Linguistic adaptation has distinct alternatives, each of which is empirically identifiable
 Fluent bilingualism has a positive effect on family solidarity, personal adjustment, cultural



continuity and mutual understanding across generations; limited bilingualism and English
monolingualism will have the opposite effects
 The greater the English fluency of parents, the weaker the influence of children’s own
linguistic adaptation on family relations and psycho-social adjustment
 Sex differences will have significant effects both on types of language adaptation and psychosocial adjustment of the second generation
Sample and Method
 Tests done in San Diego and Miami
 Large immigrant populations
 8th and 9th graders followed until graduation
 Everyone had lived in the US since the age of 12
 5,262 respondents from 77 different nationalities
 Knowledge of English is measured on the basis of self-reported ability to speak, understand,
read and write the language (standard measure used by U.S. Census and other large surveys)
 Fishman and Terry 1969 and Lieberson 1981 show these as reliable measures of
language ability
 It also Measured self esteem and educational aspirations
Model coefficients show that fluent bilinguals and foreign monolinguals are significantly less likely to
experience frequent conflict with their parents and consequently more likely to report solidary family
relations
 By and large, Latin American families are more solidary, results indicate that early acquisition
of fluent bilingual skills is linked to maintenance of positive inter-generational outcomes
Summary and conclusion
 15 million children of immigrants in the US, 1 in 5 are under 18
 chances for successful adaptation of this young population depends on sorting out the dangers
of leading kids to downward assimilation and achieving minimum educational credentials
(Zhou and Bankston 1998)
 Linguistic adaptation is not an either/or process, but features instead a plurality of empirically
identifiable types; among the latter, it is fluent bilingualism rather than English
monolingualism that is associated with the more desirable results in terms of family relations
and psycho-social adjustment
 mastery of two languages broadens cultural awareness, sensitivity to parental backgrounds
 the complete transition towards English monolingualism does not represent the most desirable
outcome for immigrant families or their offspring
 popular educational policies that promote complete linguistic assimilation contain
hidden costs, depriving students of a key social resource at a critical juncture in their
lives, family relations and personality development suffer accordingly
Week 12: Queering Language
Tuesday, April 22 - Lecture notes
Lecture Notes from Tuesday, April 22



















What do the film “Paris is Burning” and Judith Butler’s essay have to do with bilingualism?
 According to Butler, what’s different between being male and female? – just conforming to
one social norm or another
 Get used to role and make it look normal
 Heteroglossia
 Code-switching between gender identities
Nietze: truth & lies in extra-moral sense
 Truth: accumulation of performance
 Like dead metaphor (one you don’t really notice anymore because you’re so used to it; you’ve
seen it so many times)
 Butler pulls from Nietze
First question Butler poses: Which bodies matter and why?
Opening scenes set up the film – see people out in the streets
 3 strikes: black, male, gay – father’s voice speaking = voice of society
Situate Butler in queer theory
 Queer: different, odd, abnormal, suspicious, deranged (past meanings)
 Most recent: homosexual
 Early 1990’s – queer theory
 Language is unstable
 Sexuality is historically contingent on context
 Queer theory sees itself as critique: brings these issues to the forefront
 Get away from seeing everything as “either, or”
 Judith Butler trained in philosophy
 Now works in literary criticism
1. Becoming a subject
2. Drag
3. Concept of “realness:
Major concept: performativity
Butler says we’re part of a pre-existing hierarchy of social relations
 Have some agency but participating in social construction
 Can’t oppose construction from the outside
Paris is Burning: people no just refusing and not just following
Butler talks about world we shouldn’t look at solely through heterosexual lens
 Understanding of other sexualities lends to redefinition of ideas of relationships
 No necessary relationship between drag and subversion
What does it mean to say “all gender is drag?”
 Even when in the “norm,” you are performing what is expected of you – it’s a shared
standard/ideal
Anxiety of not living up to ideal can never be overcome
Butler talks about feminist & homophobic position on drag
Difference between performance (single act) and performativity (beyond performer; cannot be done
just by choice of performer)
How does this film place us in looking at gender?
 Camera often functions as disembodies gaze
 Camera responding to Willi Ninja’s desire to be filmed
 He is the success story of the film
 Venus is the tragedy of the film
 Camera: “white lens”
 Not really getting a sense of who the filmmaker is
 It’s a white, educated lesbian woman – info not given up front
Where does the film work to break boundaries between message and art
Compare languages to drag: performance, put it on
 Or gender: somewhat scripted
Language predates us – we become part of the system and make it our own
See drag: startling
Contradiction to what you expect
 Makes you think about your expectations
We are the privileged spectators
 Can only see world through the eyes of the camera
Ball: you are completely yourself and practice fitting into the real world
 Neither reality nor complete fiction – not either or
 Live together
 In tension





a. Jeannie Livingston’s Paris is Burning (1990)
available on wikipedia, in a lot of parts, starting here:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qCp99A2Cni0
also check wiki for some background info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_is_Burning_%28film%29
Overview:
Livingston explores the underground ball culture of lower class black and Latino gay/transgender
community in the Bronx in the late 80s and early 90s. There are also a few veterans who reminisce on
the "first balls." The balls are competitive fashion shows which feature as the main social gathering for
the gay and cross-dressing community. The scene is explored through candid interviews in apartments
or parks, and shots of the actual balls. The community is organized into "houses," alternately described
as "families" and "gay street gangs," who fight it out on the ballroom floor through fashion and a
distinctive style of dance called "voguing." A "walker" is anyone who appears (or "walks") in one of the
many categories of a ball. Categories range from "luscious body" to "executive" to "high fashion
evening wear" to "schoolgirl/schoolboy." The factor of "realness" is important in the judging, and
basically is a measure of how likely a person is to pass for a "real man" or "real woman" - "real" in this
sense meaning straight and part of the upper-middle class white world, as seen on TV and in the
magazines. This paradox is a basic theme of the culture and the balls - the main celebration of their
own culture is a competition for the realistic emulation of a culture drastically different and removed
from theirs. Quote: "If you have captured the great white way of living or looking or dressing or
speaking - you is a marvel." Throughout the film, "ball" culture kind of makes it to mainstream, notably
inspiring the dance styles of Madonna's famous video Vogue.
"Queering language" in Paris is Burning
The "ball culture" has its own slang, which serves to bind the community together and must be learned
to operate with the ball culture. The reappropriation of some commonplace terms and their
incorporation in the this culture is also an important theme in the documentary. Various ballroom
personalities are asked to define these terms as best they can. Paraphrase: "When you're gay... you
monitor how you talk."
balls: the competitive fashion and dance shows for the gay/transgender culture. "Walkers" or
contestants are judged on fashion, dance, and "realness." Also seen as a path to free expression as a
gay man/cross-dresser/transgender. Quotes: "Whatever you want to be, you be." "You can be
anything you want... I can look like one [a woman]."
voguing: A dance style used on the ballroom floors, inspired by the poses in Vogue magazine,
breakdancing and gymnastics. Willi Ninja of Ninja House is considered the best and the pioneer. It is
described as "throwing shade," or "a safe form of fighting that came from shade." Emphasizes, as in
modeling, perfect lines in the body.
legendary: A certain high-ranking status houses and walkers gain after consistently winning many
grand prizes at many balls. Described as: if you're legendary, "you have an Oscar."
children: The young and up-and-coming "walkers" in a house, as opposed to the established, high
status and more influential "mothers" and "fathers."
mothers/father
house - A well-established and close-knit group in the ball culture, originally named after and started
the first, most famous, and most successful "walkers". Described as "families," "group of human beings
in a mutual bond," "gay street gang" who does their fighting on the ballroom floor instead of the
street.
walkers
realness - Ability to look like a "real" woman or a "real" man i.e. look heterosexual, part of the normal
upper-class white society.
banjy girl: A "real" girl. Paradoxically, "going back into the closet." Blending in with "everyone else."
"Look like a girl taking her little brother girl to school."
reading: The art of insult in the community, akin to "dissing" or something like this in the ball culture.
In conflicts between the gay world and straight world turns into more of a vicious insult.
shade: A more sophisticated form of "reading," or insulting. More mental and psychological than
vocalizing insults, and turns into voguing and dancing battles on ballroom floors. Quotes: "get em any
way you can," "hit em below the belt," "i don't tell you your ugly, but i don't have to tell you cuz you
know your ugly."
mopping: Shoplifting: "go into a store and just lo- mopping's stealing"
stunt: Shoplifting, esp. stealing food, on a much larger scale. Walkers commonly steal food, money,
and clothes for balls.
hustlers, hustling: prostitution
b. Judith Butler, “Gender is Burning: Questions of Appropriation and Subversion”, “Melancholia and the
Limits of Performance”
Judith Butler, "Gender is Burning: Questions of Appropriation and Subversion", "Melancholia and
the Limits of Performance"
In this paper, Butler analyzes the idea of “drag queen” from the movie Paris is Burning. She proposes that
the gender is merely a socially constructed idea, and that one shouldn’t see heterosexuality as simply
something “normal” and “natural.” She also introduces the idea of performance vs. performativity
(performing social norm repeatedly to the extent that we don’t even realize it, that it becomes “true”). She
also attacks the view of how homosexuality is seen as a result of disappointment from heterosexual
experiences, as this view assumes that heterosexuality comes before homosexuality and is thus more natural.
She acknowledges that even the actors in the film are performing to us who are audiences. And that in the
end, what the drag demonstrates is the ambiguity between “male” and “female,” that it is always hard to
identify what feelings are masculine or feminine, and thus in the end even “heterosexuality” is nothing but a
socially constructed normality. Here are some important quotes:
To claim that all gender is like drag, or is drag, is to suggest that “imitation” is at the heart of the
heterosexual project and its gender binarisms, that drag is not a secondary imitation that resupposes a prior
and original gender, but that hegemonic heterosexuality is itself a constant and repeated effort to imitate its
own idealizations. That it must repeat this imitation, that it sets up pathologizing practices and normalizing
sciences in order to produce and consecrate its own claim on originality and propriety, suggests that
heterosexual performativity is beset by an anxiety that it can never fully overcome, that its effort to become
its own idealizations can never be finally or fully achieved, and that it is consistently haunted by that domain
of sexual possibility that must be excluded for heterosexualized gender to produce itself. In this sense, then,
drag is subversive to the extent that it reflects on the imitative structure by which hegemonic gender is itself
produced and disputes heterosexaulity’s claim on naturalness and originality.
This “being a man” and this “being a woman” are internally unstable affairs. They are alaways beset by
ambivalence precisely because there is a cost in every identification, the loss of some other set of
identifications, the forcible approximation of a norm one never chooses, a norm that chooses us, but which
we occupy, reverse, resignify to the extent that the norm fails to determine us completely
Thursday, April 24 - Lecture notes
Key Ideas:
-The dominance of English in the US has been taken for granted, so there were never concerns about
legal protection prior to the 1980s.
-1981 – Senator Hayakawa introduced a constitutional amendment to make English official, which
seems innocuous, but it also prohibited any federal or state regulations to require the use of another
language as Hayakawa was critical of bilingual education and voting rights.
-After 1983 Hayakawa founded US English, a lobbying effort that within five years turned into a
400,000 member organization with a 6 million dollar annual budget.
-Legislators began to climb aboard and by 1990 17 states had adopted statutes or constitutional
amendments declaring English their official tongue
-Official English became a polarizing issue – supporters claim that English has always been the
common language and would be a unifying force for foreigners to join into – opponents see it as a
threat to civil liberties and free speech and an insult to the heritage of cultural minorities.
-Sorting out the arguments is difficult, and there is no history of English as a symbol or weapon in
American history.
-In the mid-1980s, Bennett, the secretary of education, claimed the Bilingual Education Act would be a
waste of taxpayer money and had much support in letters from the public, but it became clear that the
bilingual education issue was a lightning rod for tensions about demographic and cultural change. The
potential benefits of bilingual education were being ignored.
-California is a case study of difficulties accommodating limited-English-proficient students and has
been hampered by English Only resistance and budget constraints.
-Crawford wants a balanced language policy debate to make a policy consciously planned and national
in scope. He intends to clarify the central arguments and admits that his bias is one of: “Adopting
English as the official language would be a backward step for the country.”
Connections to the course:
-The English only debate clearly relates to the Gregorio Cortez film as well as any questions of respect
for the unknown.
-Also, English in the US can be contrasted with ideas about Creolite as that language has clear cultural
and national significance while English in the US does not.
-The question of Official English as a policy issue can be used to connect any bilingualism idea to
politics or social awareness. Xenophobia is an obvious theme.
WHAT’S BEHIND OFFICIAL ENGLISH?
There have always been self-appointed guardians of English

Never in high-powered Washington lobby before
Group named US English spent $18M+ since 1983 to promote English as official language of U.S.
Why the need for this?
Over 98% of 4yo+ speak English
Immigrants line up for scarce seats in English classes
85%+ of children from language-minority homes learn English, with most rarely speaking anything
else
Then there is no need to protect “English”

Merely a new strain of nativism
Top leaders resigned, among them President Linda Chávez

Did so to protest anti-Hispanic comments made by boss

Used to stand up to those who called Official English anti-immigrant

Claimed immigrants who spoke English would have more opportunities
Federal tax records show ties between Official English and various organizations thought to desire “the
Latin onslaught”
John Tanton is founder of U.S. English and FAIR-Federation for American Immigration Reform
His Opinions:
This question of bilingualism stems from US immigration policy and country’s inability to assimilate
the rapid influx of immigrants
Immigrants might bring other bad traditions such as bribes, are too Catholic, have low educability, and
have high fertility
Rusty Butler (1985) suggested that language issue could guide terrorism
Robert Melby (1986), chairman of Florida U.S. English Campaign, pushed for eliminating 911 services
in English a motivator for learning English
US English founded on two key issues of 1960s:

Ecology

Population control
Tanton member of Sierra Club and Planned Parenthood b/c population growth is serious threat to
environment

Immigration restriction through FAIR

Cultural impact of immigration through U.S. English (Official English)
Linda Chavez said his views were: Anti-Hispanic, Anti-Catholic, and inexcusable

Many donors with hidden agendas joining

Now have 400,000 members and $6M annual budget
Logical that those in US English who view English as a unifying force would support having more open
spaces in English classes available to immigrants
This objective assumed by supporters in Arizona, Colorado, and Florida

Incorrect assumption
Lots of money spent to get measures on ballot making English official language
Failed to support English Literacy Grants program

$4.8 to earmark adult class of English as Second Language
Questioned about this and response was that teaching English was “moral obligation” of Spanishlanguage television stations
Accused of hypocrisy

Started aiding private English literacy projects

Comprises <1% of $4M expenditures since 1987
Rather than promoting language acquisition, efforts go towards restricting use of other languages
Would have deep-rooted effects:


Language of drivers’ exams? Ballots? Courts?

Would courts provide translators?

Schools allowed to use bilingual education?
Arizona Proposition 106 would forbit public employees to use other languages on job
in 1787 German Americans made up approx. same proportions that Hispanics now make up

Framers declined to give English official status

Probably not an oversight, done on purpose

Despite Ben Franklin’s efforts to “anglify” German children
If English really wanted to foster ethnic harmony it would give money so that more English Classes
could open up rather than exploit feelings about language to build new nativist movement.
While there are real questions of language this is not merely a question of language
b. Mari Matsuda, "Voices of America"
This is a long damn article. I think I've distilled the main points here and in the final sections VI and
VII, Matsuda's own conclusions.
Important Points
* There are unconscious biases that affect interpretation of law such as title VII, especially
in terms of accent and intelligence and level of education.
* There is no such thing as "standard pronunciation" or "no accent." Normalcy of accent is a
societal construct.
* Matsuda's Suggestion for Analysis of Title VII, as put forth in 4 questions:
1. What level of communication is required for the job?
2. Was the candidate's speech fairly evaluated?
3. Is the candidate intelligible to the pool of relevant, nonprejudiced listeners, such that
job performance is not unreasonably impeded?
4. What accomodations are reasonable give the job and any limitations in intelligibility?
* Matsuda equates the demand for speech uniformity with preference for conformity,
distrust of difference, and attachment to "large, looming notion of "we."
* Also see less legalese points listed in sections VI and VII as Matsuda's main sociological
conclusions.
* Adopt legal rules and ethical positions that promote linguistic pluralism.
I. "Everyone has an accent" . We take "has an accent" to mean something not the normal "nonaccent."
Two questions:
Small : application of antidiscrimination law to accent-bias? i.e. Title VII analysis and application. (I-V)
Large question: what kind of world do we want to live in? what range of difference do we want? (VI,
VII)
Looking for "coercive and hidden assumptions embedded in law"
" I had to kick their law into their teeth in order to save/ them, However, I have heard that sometimes
you have to deal/ Devilishly with drowning men in order to swim them to shore." African-American poet
Gwendolyn Brooks
The drowning man is our country
II. Relevant cases of accent discrimination
A. Manuel Fragrante's Story
Turned away from a clerkship after scoring highest on civil service test, because of his Filipino accent.
civil service tests based on job skills, therefore less biased then general intellingence/aptitude tests.
turned away with specific comments on "heavy filipino accent"
linguist concludes, English speaker would have no trouble understanding Fragrante
defendant testifies, no prejudice, unreasonable public and communication is the essence of the job.
B Kahakua case
Applied for meteorology broadcast position turn down in favor of haole (white) mainlander with little to
no experience but "great broadcasting voice"
was found that race was not a factor rather "better diction, better enunciation, better pronunciation,
better cadence, better intonation, better voice clarity, and better understandabilty." "there is no race or
physiological reason why Kahakua could not have used standard English pronunciations."
C More Stories, More Voice
All these cases of discrimination:
Korean accent councilman
Sirajullah - no malpractice insurance because foreign accent make lawsuit defense difficult.
Chicana okay to teach because she spoke "without any trace of an accent and looked like an Anglo."
African-American accent announcing classical music
Hispanic v. Anglo accents in applying for job by phone
Concludes "accent discrimination is commonplace, natural, and socially acceptable."
III The Doctrinal Puzzle of Accent and Antidiscrimination Law
The puzzle, according to Matsuda
1. Title VII - no discrim on basis of race and national origin
2. Title VII - no discrim on traits such as accent as stand ins for race and national origin
3. Title VII - allows discrim on basis of job ability
4. Communication, and therefore accent, employers will insist are elements of job ability.
Hard to change accents late life (i.e. in the case of foreigners of different national origin), so "discrim
against accent is the functional equivalent of discrim against foreign origin." But all employers will say:
my customers can't understand him
There exists an unconscious bias in every society towards certain accents - do we think southern
accents sound dumber? African American Vernacular English less educated?
Two major complicating factors - a) does accent impede job performance or are they simply different
from some preferred norm? a) The role of speech in the job. 911 operator or bricklayer?
Asian lecturers being incomprehensible - or is this a factor of unconscious bias? The European lecturer
is "brilliant and incomprehensible" while the Asian lecturer just "can't speak English."
Should employers be allowed to pick what they think is the best accent? What if this is always the
"White accent"?
Summarizing the article The Id, The Ego, and Equal Protection: Reckoning with Unconscious Racism.
(Lawrence) "all of us in this society have absorbed cultural messages of racial inferiority, which invade
our seemingly neutral evaluations of others."
Presents an analysis as a guide for sorting cases where a) accent is legitimately nonfunctional in a given
job OR b) a claim of nonfunctioning is merely a restatement of societal prejudice against the accent.
IV. The Hundred Year's War
A.
Period from 1860s to 1960s where deaf community fought for acceptance of American Sign Language.
There was resistance against ASL simply because it was not the accepted practice of oral speech.
B. What is accent?
Pronunciation rather than diction.
When an employer refuses to hire a person "with an accent," they want someone "without an accent" a linguistic impossibility but socially constructed reality.
Accent is a societal and cultural creation that situates people socially - we all do this everday
unconsciously, talking different at work, school, with friend,etc
There exist a view in speech pathology that accents are a "handicap" that should be "controlled"
Linguistic research shows "language variability is inevitable and that moderate accent differences rarely
impede communication when listeners are motivated and nonprejudiced."
V. Toward a doctrinal reconstruction
Matsuda's Title VII analysis. 4 questions:
1. What level of communication is required for the job?
2. Was the candidate's speech fairly evaluated?
3. Is the candidate intelligible to the pool of relevant, nonprejudiced listeners, such that job
performance is not unreasonably impeded?
4. What accommodations are reasonable give the job and any limitations in intelligibility?
The following is an in-depth breakdown of more methodological ideas about asking each of these 4
questions. Of note is the "problem of non-prejudiced listeners" who by saying "i can't understand"
really mean "i can't tolerate differences." She also applies these questions to the original cases of
Fragante, claiming the evaluation of his speech was "shoddy," and criticizes the subjective interview
after the objective, job-skills related civil service test.
In the Kahakua case, there was a perceived problem with non-prejudiced listeners - i.e. employer
thinks people will want to hear "white accent." and not accept "local accent."
VI. Accents and Liberalism
"The way in which we speaks reflects self, personhood, identity. To tell people they cannot express
themselves in the way that comes naturally to them is to tell them they cannot speak."
"We hurt ourselves when we exclude the possible knowledge that diversity in participation can bring."
important concept of the modernist idea of the beauty of the individual.
"The way we talk, whether it is a life choice of an immutable characteristic, is akin to other attributes of
the self that the law protects."
VII. Accent and Antisubordination
"The Anglo speech is normal, everything else is different, and acceptability of any given speech depends
upon its closeness to Anglo speech."
Accent evaluation is an exercise in power.
Uniformity is not necessarily efficiency - assumes attainability which may not be possible and assumes
variability impedes communication, not shown.
Sociolinguistics finds that accent serves to help elites stand apart and separate and superior to the
masses.
"The need to control, cordon, conquer, correct, at all cost; the perverse sexuality of technical
triumph... this seems to generate th hate in accent cases."
"Even if accent is changeable, no citizen should have to alter core parts of identity in order to
participate in society."
Anti-accent discrim. is linked to radical pluralism, groups and individuals as members of groups are free
to live in and express their culture - including their language, their religion and their style of living."
"The only center, the only glue, that makes us a nation is our many-centered cultural heritage."
c. James Crawford, Language Loyalties “Introduction” and pp. 171-177)




Americans have seldom fought over language, mainly because the dominance of the English language
has been taken as a given
Official English issue has been polarizing: for some English has always been our common language,
where for others it is an insult because their roots in the US go deeper than English speakers’Mexican-Americans, Puerto Ricans, and American Indians
English Only as a simplistic answer to the US’ language problems; at worst, a vehicle for xenophobia
US never designated an official language because the majority of its citizens spoke English as their
native language, or learned English soon after immigrating here; thus, there was no serious
competition from other languages





There is little awareness of the bilingualism and multilingualism that existed in earlier times (ex.
German-Americans who spoke both German and English)
One reason for being pro-English only- the language problem could feed and guide terrorism in the
US by Spanish-speaking separatists
Another reason for supporting English as the common language- how else will the US deal with the
transition from a dominant non-Hispanic society with a Spanish influence to a dominant Spanish
society with a non-Hispanic influence?
It seems logical that supporters of English Only would expand opportunities for immigrants to learn
English as they believe that English as a common language is the country’s “main unifying force”
 However, US English spent lavishly to get the common language issue on ballots but declined
to fund the new English Literacy Grants program
 There is no Official English legislation to help anyone learn English
One view is that a democratic government has no business telling the people in what language they
can speak
d. Ron Unz, Editorials/ propositions.
Bilingualism vs. Bilingual Education. English is not Racism.
Proposition 227
Ron Unz unsuccessfully ran for Governor in California and advocated for numerous initiatives to make
changes to bilingual education programs. The two relatively short articles are opinion pieces of his
regarding bilingual education in the US and Proposition 227 is a bill passed in the California Congress
regarding bilingual education.
Proposition 227 was passed to change California’s bilingual education to an opt-in structured English
language educational system and it was approved by the voters. The proposition did not end bilingual
education; rather, it allows parents to opt-in to a bilingual education program at the school, if sufficient
numbers of parents petition the school.
Ron Unz supported the bill and wrote the two articles “Bilingualism vs. Bilingual Education” and
“English is not Racism”. Both articles are relatively short are expressing a straightforward point Ron
Unz is making:
In both articles Unz is arguing that bilingual education programs are a misallocation of federal funds,
since they have a failure rate of 95%, meaning that at the end of the programs only about 5% of
students learn to speak English.
He talks generally about how English is becoming more and more important around the world in all
kinds of clusters of society and different sectors of the economy(heteroglossia). Yet, according to him
many American schools have stopped teaching English based on the notion that too much English too
early is going to impede child’s development.
In addition, he argues that many children are kept below English fluency level due to a perversity of
federal fund allocation that attributes more funding for school districts where children don’t speak
English.  Schools are basically penalized for teaching English to children.
His push for Proposition 227 eventually made it possible for parents to opt out of the bilingual education
programs at their schools and have their children taught English-only in elementary school.
Choose and Lose: Aesthetics and Democracy
Tuesday, May 29 - Lecture notes















Foreigners are the motor of democracy
You need constant waves of foreigners coming in, in order to foster democracy
Start worrying about worries that foreigners bring up, and focus on them
Neo-Rousseauvians – focus on unity, such as Anderson does
Taylor, defends communitarian democracy
 Communitarianism- argues for groups’ rights
Democracy is about living with strangers says Honig
National novels- romances, because to make a nation you have to get through a lot of barriers; they
also create a context for mutual dependence and trust
Bonnie Honig says that the national family is stifling- no room for independence, and she likes the
idea of democracy as a gothic novel (dark, scary, something you don’t understand exactly)
 Being that it is a gothic novel- there is a love interest there, but also something you’re afraid of
Feelings of fear, excitement, and love – related to Kant’s idea of the beautiful and sublime
Shklovsky’s defamiliarization- makes you appreciate new takes on stuff; can make old things better
and more efficient
Bakhtin- one ideological unitary as opposed to the national family
Barthes- pleasure – cut and loss of control when foreigners come in
Butler- dualism based on gender (links xenophobia with homophobia); foreigners bring about a clash
as well, foreigners and the nation
Book of Ruth in the Bible illustrates that society and economy of Israel needs foreigners – they
refresh the system
World needs to be seen through a range of discourses, including that of foreigners, if not, we miss the
point
a. Bonnie Honig, “Natives and Foreigners” and “The Genres of Democracy”
Natives and Foreigners is the first chapter to Bonnie Honig’s book “Democracy and the Foreigner” and “The
Genres of Democracy” is the fifth and final chapter.
Her chapters are very “symbolic” and not focused on individual achievements of foreigners but rather the
concept of “foreignness” as a whole.
Honig takes a more unconventional approach by reversing the question and asks her most fundamental and
basic question in the book/chapters: “What problem does foreignness solve for us?” (p.12)
She addresses this question by talking about a number of political theorists and “founder-foreigners” such as
Rousseau, Freud and Girard. Her sights are firmly set on the United States and she is trying to challenge
nationalist and exclusionary visions of the role of the foreigner. She suggests a goal of a “democratic
cosmopolitan” and calls for a widening “of the resources and energies of an emerging international civil
society to contest or support state actions in matters of transnational and local interest such as environmental,
economic, military, cultural and immigration policies.”
Therefore, she encourages the foreigner to be a “democracy refounder”  somebody who is not
simply assimilating in their chosen nation, but has a distinct contribution to make to democracy
So her approach to foreignness is unique in that it does not talk along the lines of typical studies where
foreigners are either seen as a threat to the cultural and linguistic unity or as source of worldliness.
The device of the foreigner, in her eyes, is a convenient and necessary tool for “political fiction”, enabling
them to “externalize the source of the violence that often attends the imposition of the law and thus distance
themselves from their own implication in it”
Generally, her book and the two chapters we read are trying to explain how foreignness figures in democratic
thought and leaves a lot of interpretations open, as she touches upon different angles to approach her question
from philosophy, social theory and immigration policy.
One of the examples she brings forth in her book is this:
In America, the archetypal foreign-founder-the naturalized immigrant--as reconfirming the allure of
deeply held American values, whereas to COSMOPOLITANS this immigrant represents the deeply
transnational character of American democracy.
She talks a lot about symbolic politics of foreignness and argues that debates over foreignness help to shore
up national and democratic identities. In addition, she takes the argument a step further and claims that the
anxieties connected to liberal democracy animate ambivalence towards foreignness.
A good overall review putting everything together:
May 17th at 9:00 am
**Builds on to our knowledge from the midterm…
3 parts (so 3 essays):
1. Film clip: Selection of 2 to choose 1 from. The clips will be shown twice. Comment on the clip and
relate it to bilingual arts and the authors/theories we studied in class. Write for about 30 mins, so like
a short essay with 3 body paragraphs.
a.
Ex: clip from “Paris is Burning”
i. Idea or “realness” connects to concept of gender and performance in Butler’s theories.
Real implies genuine, and so they want to portray that their portrayal of gender is
genuine. This connects to language and Derrida’s idea that we borrow language and are
also performing according to social codes, like how we borrow the social notion of
gender. According to Butler, “performativity” is something we’re constantly engaging
in. Take notes and maybe even quote parts of the narrative in the clip.
b. Ex: “Juno” clip.
i. Clerk and girl communication when he says “this is one doodle that can’t be undid”
shows use of slang and incorrect English. Relates to the roughness of language and
defamiliarizing language. The movie defamiliarizes the concept of teen pregnancy by
presenting the topic in a different light. Slang like as in regional/social uses of
language. Also uses stereotypes like the conversation with her parents when they say
they hoped to hear she was on drugs or DUI (like stereotypical teenage problems). Also
DUI requires knowledge of social slang for driving under the influence (of alcohol).
2. Selection of literary pieces (novel, short story, essay or poem)…Can be excerpt from something we
read or a part of something we’ve never read before. We can choose one from 2 or 3 choices. Write a
short essay one it. Incorporate key terms and theories from thinkers we studies in class. You do NOT
need to identify the author of the quote, just analyze it.
a.
Ex of something we read: “The sound of language a cubist painting. The Latin-Arabic tongue
splish-splashing and sliding through the tongue the Pilgrims came here talking, whereas 100
years before the Mayflower Puritans, San Juan was a city jumping with the first mestizos
opening new Spanish vocabulary mixed with Arawak fruit pulp.” –Fernandez Cruz
i. Talking about the complexities of language, defamiliarizing the concept of the
“conquerors” of the US because Puerto Rico was conquered by the Spanish. English
was already formed of other languages and well as Spanish. They are all mixes, like the
concept of decomposition from Cabrera-Infante (relates also to cubism) In this relation
to cubism he compares language to an aesthetic form.
b.
Ex of something we did not read:“Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul.
Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steos down the palate to tap, at threee, on
the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta.”
i. Issue of decomposition. The use of punctuation and visual writing on a page had the
effect of changing the phonetic sound on the tongue: defamiliarization and
decomposition. Identity in a language: Lolita is made up of different pieces.
3. A more current text (from one we read or one we’ve never read before). It can be like a piece of news
from the internet, for example. There will be a choice of 1 from like 2 or 3. Relate it to the study of
bilingualism and write a short essay on it (like use code words on it and relate key author’s theories).
You do NOT need to identify the author of the quote, just analyze it.
a. Ex of something we read: “Politics of bilingualism: A politics of foreignness in which
different parties to the debate try to mobilize a founder;s foreignness on behalf of their ideal,
while also striving somehow to solve of manage the problem of the founder’s
fereignness….To the foreigner as founder, immigrant, and citizen, one could also add other
categories—the foreigner as refugee, boundary crosser, terrorist, outlaw, repository of
irrationality, erotic excess, anarchy and so on.” – Honig
i. The foreigner is many things…in political discourse he sometimes becomes tied to
anything related to en enemy. The idea of democratization (the foreigner is either
democratized and part of a society or not) like in acculturation and assimilation. Idea of
appreciating the unknown (like Kant). The idea of identity in language (Derrida).
b.
Ex of something we did not read: “The American ppl believe English should be the official
language of the government…We should replace bilingual education with immersion in
English so ppl learn the common language of the country and the language of prosperity” –
Former House Speaker in a speech to National Federation of Republican Women
i. Concept of the importance of audience (Conservative women) and social context (the
“language of prosperity” may be true in some states, but not in places like Miami
where you need to be bilingual to get a good job!). He is using labels “common
language or prosperity” has strong implications. Identity and nationalism in language
(Benedict Anderson).
From the midterm and beyond:
Titone:
Code-switching as a defense mechanism. Bilinguals possess both the understanding of various languages
and the capacity to consciously interpret and utilize their knowledge of the social functions and vast
applications of language (metaconsciousness). Movie about Mexicans. Meta-linguistic… Bilingual
personality: bilingualism is positive because without it there would not be countries (like the US)
Hemingway:
The roughness and difficulty inherent in language and of the importance of highlighting the ‘awkwardness’
of language in order to uncover its true ‘art.’ For example, he plays around with sentence structures that
appear awkward in English as if they were directly translated from an original form in Spanish. “For Whom
the Bell Tolls” is in Pidgin (Old Castillian is represented in Old English). Literal translations: “me voy” is “I
go” rather than “I’m going/leaving.”
Fleming:
Pidgin is any simplified or broken form of language used for communication btw speakers of diff languages.
For Whom the Bell Tolls is in Pidgin. So, the reader become bilingual in a sense too. Strangeness and
roughness in language, the unknown/novice.
Cabrera-Infante:
The concept of a split-audience (the idea of the awareness of an audience) and the bilingual moment. The
idea of ‘getting things wrong’ and of seeing language in its ‘decomposition’ as Prof. Sommer mentioned in
last week’s lecture. Specifically, when applied to the technique of translating, Cabrera makes use of several
‘neologisms’ (such as ‘AmeRícan’) which are clearly wrong when it comes to the rules of language, but
which serve the purpose of highlighting the unfamiliar and unstructured characteristics of language (either by
decomposing the word—American and Puerto Rican put together; or by bending the rules of language—by
adding an accent that would be grammatically incorrect, both in English and in Spanish). “Three Trapped
Tigers” (translated from “Cuban”)
Shklovsky:
He is against the principle of ‘the economy of creative effort’ (which states that a good writing style should
deliver the greatest amount of thought in the fewest words) because he claims that it leads people to have
automatic and habitual thoughts, hindering their creativity. Break from aesthetic approach. Artistry, he
argues, requires ‘de-familiarization’ (a process by which the familiar is made strange) because the ‘familiar’
way it is not really the ‘artistic’ way. Bilingualism: language should have the effect of forcing people to
notice and interpret its meaning, rather than simply allowing people to make automatic assumptions about
meanings that they are habitually pre-disposed to.
Marzan:
Spanish American Roots of William Carlos William
Bahktin:
Heteroglossia:Within one language there are many languages (like technical jargon of finance in English).
Polyglossia: There are many languages (like in the example of Cabrera-Infante). Plays around with language
by taking an expression in one language and using it in another in a way that makes it sound odd… For
example, in “Pnin” he does this by switching terms around from Russia and English, and by choosing
expressions that sound familiar in one language but unfamiliar and awkward in another (like “cradle the
phone”). A key aspect of rhetorical forms that has caught the attention of linguists through time is their open
orientation toward the listener/reader. Bahktin makes a distinction between a reader’s passive
understandings of the rhetorical discourse and his active understanding of it. He then argues that it is the
second type of understanding that the speaker counts on to enter in to a dialectic relationship with his
audience. Dialogical Nature of Language: Need dialogue for language, language does not exist in a
vacuum. Style analysis of novel through lense of dialogue (diological nature of language) versus monologic.
When applied to bilingual arts, Bahktin’s ideas on rhetorical forms and their open orientation toward the
listener/reader perhaps take on a new form since the speaker is able to get very distinct reactions from his
split audience (at both the linguistic understanding and the socio-cultural awareness levels).
William Carlos William:
Red Wheelbarrow (Rosa his mother, “by rote” in Spanish)…Equated identity with language. For example,
foreignness signified being informed by a language other than English for him. Thus, Williams highlights the
strangeness and complexity associated with unknown languages. Finding himself in language gives him
identity as a poet.
Freud:
He presents a theory on the details of the grammar and vocabulary that make up “wit.” He then looks at these
elements in the context of psychological processes. According to Freud, an integral aspect of jokes is "the
economy of psychic expenditure.”
Condensation and Displacement: both happen in dreams as well as jokes. The technique of jokes is
condensation (say in too few words) and displacement (replace one object for another like symbols in
dreams). Both have a social purpose (social friction and displacement) and involve the unconscious impulses.
It relates to bilingualism where the roughness of language arouses ones emotions.
Ortiz:
Concept of ‘transculturation,’ specifically as it applies to the case of Cuba. The term ‘transculturation’ can
be thought of as a substitute for the term ‘acculturation’ (in Cuba). It is possible to apply Ortiz’s idea about
‘transculturation’ to the study of bilingual arts, particularly as it relates to the mix/clash of languages that
takes place when two different cultures interact and to the idea of finding ones self in language.
Roberto Fernandez:
It’s Raining Backwards… It is possible to note that this story focuses on the issues of language, culture and
social-identity that are pervasive in immigrant communities. The characters in his work deal with the
difficulties that come with assimilating to another culture and with their subsequent quest for finding one’s
identity in a multi-cultural and multi-lingual context. Relates to the issues of assimilation, like studied Ortiz,
and of finding identity in language, a topic that Derrida dealt with in his works as well. (americanization of
names Mirtha Mirta)…Tongue Brigade forces immigrants to leave behind Spanish: results in lower selfidentification w Cuba (issue of identity in language)
Derrida:
Identity in language and nation… He was born in Algeria but French citizen and then stripped of his French
citizenship during the Holocaust. Another example is the film clip from the beginning of the year with the
Mexican fighting for land rights and addressing the sheriff in Spanish. Monolingualism: There is only one
language…we borrow it so it is not ours and language is ‘artificial.’ Imagined Communities: (Benedict
Anderson) National/cultural identities are constructed, they are an imaginary product of social construct.
Language doe NOT equal identity (it is borrowed).
Kant:
Sublime: Pleasure in accepting we don’t know the ineffable/sublime and subsequent (to relate this topic of
aesthetics to bilingual arts) appreciation for the roughness of language and bilingualism. Class theme is
recongizing subliminal qualities of text and getiing over not understanding (Respect). Beautiful: Art for
purely aesthetic purposes with no utility/usefulness in the object outside of mere visual pleasure. Aesthetics
locates the freedom that comes from judgment (the bridge between pure and practical reason) and this applies
to language…Beautiful: pleasant stimulus, disinterested judgment (no utility). Sublime: unpleasant (scary)
stimulus and judgment of non-understanding, but eventual pleasure comes from respecting the
unknown…like in language.
Barthes:
Pleasure can be expressed in words but bliss (the ineffable) cannot…it is the symbolic equivalent of an
orgasmic experience that you get from a text. Not deliver (leaves reader hanging) and that is what reader
wants, the friction…to be shaken and surprised (2 codes in language collide and break normal flow of
language so friction and shock—sexual metaphor)
Chamoisuer:
Creole (transculturation). Totality in itself, not various components…made French language ours
(antropofagia)
Oswaldo:
Antropofagia…
Taylor:
Contemporary politics are driven by need and demand for recognition. Identity through language by which
we define ourselves. Dialogical nature of language (Bahktin), communitarian (collective goals) view of
liberalism where good of the whole is the priority. Politics of universalism: every person has right to define
themselves.
Benedict Anderson:
Imagined communities via national identity. Cultural symbols of identity…Imagined bc even small nation
will never know most of its members and community bc deep sense of brotherhood. The basic building
blocks of national identity are language and technologies for communication.
Wittgenstein:
He puts forth the view that conceptual confusions surrounding language use are at the root of many philosophical
problems, and also argues that language itself can be understood in terms of the philosophy of the mind. One
of the topics he explores is on the “experience of being guided” specifically in the process of reading and
interpreting a text. In other words, a reader’s “reading” of a particular text is influenced, or “guided,” by the
author of the text itself in the sense that there is a certain order in which the words, and their respective
meanings, are ordered in the written passage. For the study of bilingualism, the idea that things that are
foreign to us, or out of our control, can actually be valuable in themselves and worthy of our appreciation is
important because it foments a sense of respect for different languages and ways of communicating. The
same could apply for translations, which more directly relate to Wittgenstein’s notion of “guidance” since an
entity external to the reader (the bilingual translator) is controlling the quantity and quality of the information
that is then presented to the monolingual audience.
Romaine:
“Bilingualism and
Intelligence”
The question of whether bilingualism is somehow correlated with levels of intelligence; in other words,
whether it is possible to say that bilinguals are either more or less intelligent than monolinguals. Studies by
Ianco-Worrall (1972) suggest that bilinguals reach a stage in semantic development two to three years earlier
than monolinguals… Blanc (1989) suggest that there are some tasks in which bilinguals are superior to
monolinguals, specifically those which are dependent on high levels of selective attention (which is a central
mechanism of cognitive performance). Relate this to Titone who suggests that bilinguals have a greater
degree of control of their cognition and language manipulation. But Romain says that the degree to which
bilingualism is considered to be either a positive or negative factor for people’s intelligence depends on
contextual factors (socio-economic). For example, immigrants with resources and a welcoming atmosphere
in their new country spend more time enhancing their knowledge in both their mother tongue and in their
new language, so higher cognitive abilities in general. However, immigrant with few resources and an
unwelcoming atmosphere (where their heritage was discriminated) tended to instead abandon their old
language and had less resources to commit to learning the new language, which hindered their cognitive
development.
Butler:
Paris is Burning
The difference btw male and female is bc they conform to one social role vs another, it is like role playing
(performance). Nietzsche says that truth is the accumulation of performance. Queer theory was at first
meaning abnormal, but then the gays adopted it and re-claimed the word to be associated with homosexuality
(the ‘reclaiming’ is a theme key to Butler). Language and sexuality are both based on social context and are
adaptable…they are both about identity and thus about subjectivity. Code-switching is like cross dressing.
We borrow both gender and language to express ourselves, though neither belong to us (Derrida).
Matsuda:
“Voices
of America”
Crawford:
“Language
Loyalties”
He analyzes the roots of the English Only movement in the USA, largely attributing them to anti-immigrant
sentiments. He argues that the question of bilingualism grows mostly out of U.S. immigration policy, and
that groups that seek to make English the official language do so mostly out of discrimination, or even fear,
of foreigners. Crawford proposes that, instead of focusing on policies that isolate non-English speaking
groups, organizations such as English Only should join advocates for non-speaking minority rights to remedy
the scarcity of seats in English classes if they really wished to foster ethnic harmony and promote a peaceful
co-existence of different languages.
Unz:
“Bilingualism
vs. Bilingual Education” and “English is not Racism”
He argues that the system for promoting bilingualism in schools in the U.S. has many flaws. He criticizes the
government funding method where school districts are rewarded extra money for each child who does not
know English. This creates a set of incentives where school teachers are rewarded for not teaching English.
He argues that there is a trend where children are not as “bilingual” as they could be because they fail to
speak both languages with the same level of proficiency (mostly because of a flawed education system). Still,
the “flaws” that Unz proposes depend on the measurement used to evaluate proficiency. Whether a child is
“proficient” or not in one or more languages is relative.
Honig:
“Natives
and Foreigners” and “The Genres of Democracy”
Politics of bilingualism: A politics of foreignness in which different parties to the debate try to mobilize a
founder;s foreignness on behalf of their ideal, while also striving somehow to solve of manage the problem
of the founder’s foreignness….To the foreigner as founder, immigrant, and citizen, one could also add other
categories—the foreigner as refugee, terrorist, outlaw, repository of irrationality, anarchy and so on. So,
foreigner is many things…in political discourse tied to anything related to en enemy. The idea of
democratization (the foreigner is either democratized and part of a society or not) like in acculturation and
assimilation. Idea of appreciating the unknown (like Kant). The idea of identity in language (Derrida).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------From our last version of the study guide:
Week 1. The Bilingual Question
Lecture Notes for Thursday, January 31

What is the bilingual question?
 Psychological / Cognitive
 How do we extract meaning differently in different languages
 Translations can cause a lot of meaning to be lost
Is thinking in one language different than thinking in another? How?
 Does the brain work differently when one thinks in another language?
 Can we ever attain the full meaning of a piece of literature from its translation?
 Does the language that one works/thinks in affect creativity?
 Question of identity / Political
 Does the language one speaks give them an identity? In other people’s eyes?
 Is this identity different from their cultural/ethnic identity?
 Do people make the mistake of assuming that the two are the same?
 Policy of education
 Should neighborhoods with a predominant immigrant population be given educational
instruction in another language?
 Art
 Do different languages have different ways of representing art?
 We only study art one language at a time so what does that do to our
comprehension/understanding?
 Are we missing literary effects between different languages?
 Family
 New generation speaks different native language than that of their parents – difficulties
in communication within families.
 Doctors/Scientists
 Important to have a universal language to communicate efficiently and share ideas.
2 film clips
 Edward E. Olmos’s The Ballad of Gregorio Cortez
 See deadly effects of an incompetent translator
 The translator knows he’s translating poorly because he is interpreting instead
of directly translating. He “translates” several sentences as one brief phrase so
the viewer knows that something’s being lost in translation.
 No subtitles so if the viewer is not a Spanish-speaker, he or she gets the idea that
Gregorio Cortez is being tough/rebellious from his body language etc.
 When watching with an audience of Spanish-speakers, feel left out. Know you’re
missing something because the audience laughs
 What is the target audience? Spanish speakers, non-spanish speakers or bilinguals?
 Different groups give different interpretations of the scene and the film speaks
differently to you depending on which group you’re with.
 Marilyn Monroe in The Prince and the Showgirl
 We see that the sophisticated European aristocrat is underestimating the “dumb”
American blonde showgirl.
 Marilyn says she’s from Minnesota so of course she speaks German, as if it’s the most
obvious thing in the world.
 Raises the question of what languages we associate with certain people and
what other associations we subconsciously make with respect to language.


Week 2. José Can You See? : National Imaginaries
Lecture notes for Tuesday, February 5


The PepsiCo deaf Super bowl ad was played at the beginning of class
Borges
 Borges was first translated by Giovanni in 1969-1972
 His style was Americanized eg. Smoother transitions
 Translator thought he made Borges’s writing better – Borges obviously not pleased.
Even with good intentions, correcting style was not good.
 Roughness can be the desired effect, not something to be “cleaned up”
Treviranus wants to solve the case and move on
Lonnrot wants to explore every possibility
 Says of Treviranus’s theory that is it possible but uninteresting.
 See 2 uses of language: communication vs. performance
Lonnrot offended Borges in his youth so becomes the butt of Borges’s joke.
The reader isn’t told where the story takes place; it is deterritorialized
 The reader gets some hints but not definitive: could be Paris, could not be.
 If you’re not in the “in-crowd” you don’t know where it takes place.
 For the ideal reader, it’s an unfamiliar city
 The story actually takes place in Buenos Aires
 For someone who knows Buenos Aires, the geography (dirty river in south etc.)
is a clue.
 Water + desert is also an Argentine rhetorical move
In reading this text, English is not enough; struggle over all of the foreign words that appear
 Even Spanish is not enough
 No one has enough language competence to make the reading feel natural
 Mirroring the reality of the modern world where you can never know all of the
languages you might need.
 It’s “fun” knowing that you never know enough
Lonnrot is an arrogant scholar
 Turns himself into a Hebraist over the weekend.








Addressing some confusing terms
 Talmud: collection of Jewish scholarly work
 Kabbalah: can interpret Torah as #’s
 Robert Fludd: English philosopher
 Developed first theory of circulation of blood
 Baal Shem: fonder of Hasidic sect
 Tetra grammation: can write name of god (4 letters) but cannot speak it (sinful)
 Can rearrange the letter vertically so that they resemble a stick figure of man
 Study God’s ineffable name to study God’s image in man
 Lonnrot goes after the lead associated with these letters because it is more interesting


Lonnrot falls into a trap made specifically for him
 Wouldn’t have happened if he wasn’t so smart and arrogant
 Crook could read Lonnrot’s “code”
 The crook didn’t have to know everything, just had to know Lonnrot well.
A game of people coming back from one life to another
 Not about the right answer but about playing the game
Lonnrot was trapped because he over-analyzes
 He wants to add complexity
Literature is transgressive by nature: it upsets borders.

Titone





One theory: different languages affect outlook
Titone says it’s the awareness of using different languages (rather than the languages
themselves) that affects outlook.
Why did Titone write this essay?
 b/c of his children? Growing up bilingual.
 Written in Canada where government promotes bilingualism as an advantage.
Jorge Luis Borges “Death and the Compass” in Collected Fictions. London: Penguin Books,
1999.
In "Death and the Compass" Borges tells the story of Detective Lönnrot, who attempts to catch the
perpetrator of a series of odd murders, using the ineffable name of God and a tetragram as his clues,
ultimately finding himself caught in a carefully prepared trap. The plot is pretty much as follows - First,
a rabbi is murdered. Inspector Treviranus surmises that the rabbi has been surprised by a burglar and
then accidentally been killed. “Possible, but not interesting” is Lönnrots answer. In a typewriter a piece
of paper is found on which is written the following sentence: “The first letter of the Name has been
uttered”. From this clue Lönnrot sees the murder as ritual and somehow connected to the
Tetragrammaton, which is the un- utterable name of God. A few days later a journalist who wants to
talk about the murder appears at Lönnrots place. Lönnrot prefers to talk about the diverse names of
God, but nevertheless the journalist writes in the newspaper that Lönnrot is studying the names of God
in order to find the name of the murder. Scharlach, an enemy of Lönnrot who has sworn revenge, reads
about this. He then arranges one real and one fake murder. The circumstances of these “murders” are
carefully staged. The rabbi was killed on the fourth of December (according to the Jewish calendar).
Scharlach arranges the second murder on the fourth of January and the third one on the fourth of
February, leaving certain clues behind, for example the drawings of a rhombus. He then sends an
anonymous letter to Treviranus saying that no more murders will take place because the locations of
the three constitute “the perfect vertices of a mystic equilateral triangle”. However, from the clues left
be- hind, from the time of the murders (the fourth of the month), and from the Tetragrammaton,
Lönnrot surmises (and Scharlach had predicted this) that a fourth killing will take place, and from the
map send by Scharlach he could find the precise location (of course the four points would make up a
perfect rhombus). When Lönnrot appears on the location he himself is the victim of Scharlach.
Renzo Titone, “The Bilingual Personality as a Meta-system: The case of Code Switching”

Starting point: “‘code-switching’ is not only a neurolinguistic process but more patently a
psychological phenomenon”, so looking into personality of “code-switcher”
0.
The Question

Earlier discussions: relationship between bilingualism, culture, personality, social attitudes, and self
Earliest observations: Diebold (1966), bilinguals using code-switching as defense mechanism
For instance, repressing past trauma by sticking to language least associated with it
Side note (from Titone): This can cause trouble for psychiatrists, but it’s their job to get past that
barrier
Siguan (1976), though, focused on problems that bilingualism caused for traditional understanding of
personality
If personality tied to culture, which is tied to single language, what to make of bilingual?
However, conclusion that bilingual is split personality can only be valid if two cultures are completely
antagonistic towards each other
Question: Can bilingual be considered as traditional individual? And can code-switching be
explained by personality theory?







1.
The Facts

Lots of anecdotal records of bilingualism in children
1.



H. Herbig Bizzarri – child, Ilaria, switches between English and Italian, sometimes peppers English
with Italian connectors (e.g. “ma”) for comfort
C. Foster Meloni’s divisions of code-switching: a) contextual switches, b) metaphorical switches (for
dramatic effect), c) switches for lexical needs, either because son forgot English expression or
couldn’t find an English equivalent, d) random switches
Meloni: why difference in code-switching between sons? Marcello must code-switch more because
when Adriano grew up, languages more rigidly separated (one parent spoke English, the other Italian)
2.








Code Switching in bilingual children
Code-switching in adult bilinguals
Code-switching not recognized until 1960s
Code-switching understood as one of strategies used between bilingual speakers
It refers to “alternative use of two codes within the same discourse”, so different from talking in one
language, and then leaving it behind entirely
It can take different forms, like switching from one sentence to another or in the middle of a sentence
Poplack (1908-82) on Puerto Ricans speaking Spanish and English: code-switching only really
happens within a bilingual group
If in presence of larger group with dominant language, though, bilinguals will stick to dominant
language
Also, competency comes into play – if bilingual better at L1 than L2, they’ll prefer to switch after
finishing sentences, whereas if they feel comfortable in both, they’ll switch even in the middle of one
However, bilingual won’t break grammatical structure of either language – bilingual competent
socially and linguistically
2.
A tentative theoretical paradigm

So, what factors cause code-switching?
1.

Conditioning factors
two types: endogenous (within person) and exogenous (social/cultural) factors
1.







1) interlanguage: being good at both  L1
2) difficulty of production: hard to make sentence make sense in L2  L1
3) lack of equivalents  L1
4) adequacy in self-expression L1
5) expressing foreign concept  L2
6) Aesthetic resonance (e.g. old preference for French among bourgeois and literateurs) --> L2
7) “fossilized” verbal habits (especially with English) --> L2
2.










Bilingual awareness and linguistic decision
Observation: young bilinguals have early understanding of language variety
Metalinguistic awareness/consciousness: understanding behind the languages that tells a bilingual
when to use each one
Difference in levels (ex. Kid talking to friends cares much less about which language to use than
scientist in conference)
3.

Code-switching as related to personality structure and relational dynamics
Self defined as individual in relation to environment
bilingual individuals show consistency, unity, self-identity”
Given definition from Allport: “Personality is the dynamic organization within the individual of those
psychophysical systems that determine his characteristic behavior and thought”
“personality is a metasystem” rooted in the Ego
 “Normal


Exogenous factors
1) Adapting to interlocutor – if native,  L1, otherwise  L2
2) “showing off” in a conversation  L2
3) Change of context
4) Authenticity of quotations from foreign sources  L2
5) For emphasis (ex. Italian mayors who normally speak in regional dialect switching to Italian for
“matters of national importance”)  L2
6) Terminological needs
7) Two-level context
8) Other
2.

Endogenous factors
 “Code-switching,
therefore, is but a symptom or a surface sign of the multiple dynamic organization
characteristic of a rich personality”
Lecture Notes for Thursday, February 7 (two versions)
Western Europe:
Middle ages: heavily controlled by Church

Sacrifices to church: money, children

First-born usually dedicated to church

Di-Glossia (one language perfectly known, other isn’t)

Coherence/power came from the use of Latin all throughout Europe

Enormous shift fro universal to particular
1493: formal grammar published in Spanish

Relationship between nationalism and other isms (racism, etc)

Solution: belonging through language (Benedict)—part of nation


Mitigate racism b/c can learn language to belong
Nations identify as a language

Imagined community

Connected w/ someone just because they share the nation’s
language

Same values, etc

Modern construct (vernacular—common speech of people)

Groups of people who don’t understand each other’s language but identify
w/ each other w/ in language
Benedict:

Strong supporter of nationalism b/c it binds people through language, etc.
 “Where
does nationalism really take off? Europe…”
Church is shattered into vernacular

Italy 1871—hear many languages
Local languages resent the hegemonic language that takes over

Conqueror: Read Simón Bolivar, etc.

Most Spanish conquerors spoke same style of Spanish, therefore
there was homogeneity
Anderson: (I think that professor Sommer said this was Anderson’s p.o.v.)

Newspaper as daily novel of mid-19th century on

You as modern citizen have to make sense of material

There is passion/love that develops (through language) for fellow
countrymen

Nation from Latin root for “first to be born”

Democracy: where everyone “fits” in

Anderson: France=France because they speak French
In time of mass migrations, how do we relate nation w/ a language?

Difference between nation and country (Engl. & French in Canada)
What does it mean to belong to a country but be bilingual?

Miss what it means to be a modern citizen if think in 1 language at a time

Major figure of enlightenment thinking (was intellectual thinker)

Major scholar that resented the French (in rev.
Kant:
Herde:
 “We

think in German, they think in French”
Bilinguals start off w/ heacaches  indigestion death

Thought bilinguals developed gas and thus farted

Spanish word for “fart” = “kiss” in Mayan

Joke is on him!
What does it mean to have an identity, a self, a person?

Titones and self: says that the self was created, the self can do many
things

Can use one language or other and not be confused because we can
have multiple identities

EX: nowadays many people have more than 1 passport and yet we don’t
worry about corrupting our sense of “self”

Student question: Initial confusion of the self?

Have to ask migrants
Political identity and persona (person you are projecting to others)

Persona: Schnesky (Part and Whole)—means “Mask”


No confusion about self, just chose to play may roles
The self is dynamic, the self is resourceful
Effects of multi-lingualism

Decreased rates of schizophrenia

More cognitive capacity/range
Debate in politics between Communitarians and Individualism

Communitarians: protects rights of groups within countries

Can be a bias against minority groups

Coziness/copact nature irritated by “contamination”
Taylor:

Living “my way”—“First task is to purge themselves…”

Better to add pieces (autonomy) than to make so pure that…

Communitarians: Demands respect (recognition)  demand a feeling

Being coherent, stable, etc. goes against creative genius of the self, etc.

Coherence=community

Community=dialogue, etc
Dangerous sentimentality (Politics of Recognition) of this theory: Bahktin vs. Smith (I
think)

Hobermus: when straight line liberals speak, they speak as individuals who
represents other like them

Need tension to keep Liberalism alive

Have notion (esp. as privileged people), of obligation to protect minority
rights

Politics is about conflict and bilinguals can tolerate the conflict since self is
in more than one language
Conversation:

Liberalism: oppose rights of every individual instead of universal

If ethnic minority doesn’t place demands on liberal law, then
congeals into something undemocratic
Nationalism is a passion. There is no way to reason in and out of nationalism, because you can’t fight or
adopt passion with reason.
The first born in the family was often tied to the church; the land was tied to the church.
Language that tied people to the church was Latin, for everyone was capable of speaking some Latin.
Diglosia – the elite language is only partially known.
In Renaissance Europe, common, autonomous languages start taking off. Formal grammars begin to be
publish because there is consistent usage.
Feelings and passions are now identifying with the local rather than the Church.
So the modern period comes with an enormous shift in sensibility.
Keep in mind that we are just talking about Western Europe here, but it does come to affect the whole world.
What is the relationship between Nationalism and other isms, such as racism?
Benedict Anderson
Is nationalism a breeding place for racism or is it a solution? It is a solution because the belonging is through
language.
Nationalism is an imagined community. What does imagined community mean?
It means I am connected to someone I don’t even know just because they belong to the same nation as I do.
Vernacular – the common speech of people.
Strong supporter of nationalism because it binds people together across racial lines, etc.
The Europeans copied the Americans and spread one language all over huge territories. For example,
Spanish was spread all through Latin and South America
Newspapers are very important
Nation comes from the Latin root “to be born”
With mass migration and not everyone speaking the exact same language, what happens to the nation? And
what is the difference between nation and democracy?
Titone – we would miss what it means to be a modern citizen by thinking one language at a time due to the
current mass migration
German Enlightenment – Kant, because enlightened, is an international thinker.
One of his disciples, Herder, claimed that bilinguals damage first their minds, then their bodies, and then they
die. Believed that there was nothing to be learned from the French because they think in a different language,
different sense.
Identity, self and person
Titone – claims the self is able to use more than one language and not be confused
Persona – means mask, the part of the mask that is being named is the little part that you project your voice
through. Per-sona means “for sound.” So the mask is a very small part describing the whole. Actors are not
limited to only one mask. A good actor can play many roles, and is not confused when he puts on a different
mask.
Communitarianism defends the rights of groups inside a community where theirs is different from the
hegemonic culture.
The politics of recognition is a demand for respect, what is respect? A feeling.
Respect is either felt or not felt. Judgment is something summoned through reason?
Taylor wants coherence – everything is nice, compact, same language/preference
But to quote Bakhtin as a supporter is an error because he wants complexity
Charles Taylor, “The Politics of Recognition”
Thesis: Contemporary politics are driven by need and demand for recognition.
There is a link between recognition and identity. Our identity can be partly shaped by the recognition or its
absence or the misrecognition by others. So a person can suffer real damage when they internalize what
society mirrors back to them. So even when women, for example, get the opportunities of advancement, they
may not take advantage of them because they have internalized a picture of their own inferiority. This same
point is argued for black people and indigenous and colonized people. There is a need to purge ourselves of
this imposed and destructive identity.
Traces the development of this discourse of recognition and identity. First, a collapse of social hierarchies
ushers in a “politics of equal recognition” especially in places like the US. Second, new understanding of
identity as individualized identity –authenticity, being true to oneself (St. Augustine, Rousseau, Herder). This
comes about from a change in how we view morality. Morality is an intuitive feeling for what is right and
wrong, which leads to a greater emphasis on being in touch with our feelings. New source we have to
connect with is deep within us, not just God (St. Augustine & Rousseau).
Human life is dialogical. We are able to understand ourselves and define our identity through the acquisition
of language (broad sense). And this only happens through interactions with others. So human life is not
monological—something that each person accomplishes on their own. *footnote—this inner dialogicality has
been explored by Bakhtin.
In earlier ages, recognition was not a problem for identity because it was built into the socially derived
identity that was based on social categories. But the new, “original” identity now has to win recognition
through exchange with others and this attempt can fail.
Recognition operates on two planes: On the intimate plane, recognition by our significant others is crucial to
the formation of our identity. On the social plane, equal recognition of cultures/groups/individuals is
important, because non-recognition or misrecognition leads to its internalization of a deformed identity (ie
and inferiority complex)
II.
Poltiics of recognition means two different things:
1. Politics of universalism/equal dignity (ie – the equal distribution of rights and immunities)
2. Politics of difference: recognition of unique identity of individual or group.
*The second arises historically from the first
Putting them together creates an internal contradiction because it asks that “we give acknowledgment and
status to something that is not universally shared”. The politics of difference “redefines nondiscrimination as
requiring that we make these distinctions the basis of differential treatment”. So this leads to justifying
preferential treatment for minorities—what some call “reverse discrimination”.
So politics of difference emerges from politics of equal dignity but diverges quite significantly from it.
The politics of difference accuses the politics of equal dignity: “blind” liberalisms are themselves the
reflection of particular cultures. So the idea of “liberalism” may be a “particularism masquerading as the
universal”.
Politics of equal dignity emerges from Rousseau and Kant:
They both have complicated arguments for what amounts to “reciprocal recognition between equals”.
Rousseau’s solution though goes against any type of differentiation. So the condition of a free society is that
its members be identical. Rousseau’s philosophy postis “Freedom” , “The absence of differentiated roles”
and a “very tight common purpose” as inseparable. The equation of freedom and absence of differentiated
roles exists in some modes of feminist thought and liberal politics.
Diversity versus rights-liberalism:
Canada example—some indigenous communities in Canada and French-speaking communities want to be
ruled by different and self-imposed legislative laws.
Is espousing collective goals on behalf of a national group inherently discriminatory?
Procedural Liberalism – non-teleological view of rights. We can disagree about the ends, but there should be
fundamental and universal human rights that we agree to abide by no matter who we are or where we live.
(non-Quebeckers)
Vs
Collective Goals – (ie communitarian view of rights). Societies/groups can fashion their rights according to
the ends/goals that they collectively agree to. Ends before rights. Teleological. (Quebeckers)
Taylor has a communitarian/“collective goals” view. He sees some forms of liberalism as being inhospitable
to difference. Liberalism can’t accommodate what members of distinct societies really aspire to which is
survival (cultural and linguistic survival in case of indigenous Canadians and Quebeckers).
There is another brand of liberalism that defends the universality of certain fundamental rights but that is
willing to weigh the advantages of uniform treatment against the advantages of cultural survival.
However, even this second, more enlightened strand of liberalism does not escape the criticism that Western
liberalism is not culturally-neutral as it claims to be. Rather, Western liberalism, with its value of separation
between church and state, is an organic growth of Christianity, as many Muslims argue.
He argues that because our countries are becoming increasingly multicultural, it is important that we not only
allow different cultures to survive but that we recognize and acknowledge their equal worth.
The main locus of this debate has been university’s humanity departments where people want to scrap the
“canon” of authors (ie dead white males) so that more room can be made for women and people of nonEuropean races and cultures. Not doing this makes women and non-European peoples feel demeaned because
their culture is not being recognized.
Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities. London

Intro
Successful revolutions have defined themselves by national terms
 Marxists movements tend to become national in form and substance
 The end of the era of nationalism is not in sight because of sub-nationalisms that are
everywhere
 Common view is that “nation” is indefinable
 Nationalism represents Marxism’s great historical failure, as it is an uncomfortable anomaly
for Marxist theory
 Thesis statement
 Nationality, or “nation-ness” are cultural artifacts, that have emotional legitimacy. He
argues that the creation of these artifacts towards the end of the 18th century were
products of historical forces that were then capable of being transplanted with great
variety to different places (4)
Concepts and Definitions
 Nation (paradoxes)


Viewed as modern by historians but antique by nationalists
 Universally found
 Has political power (more so than other isms) but has never produced its own great
thinkers
 Calls it an ambiguity which is similar to the “neurosis in the individual” which is
incurable
Imagined political communities are…
 Imagined- b/c even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow members
 Limited- because even the largest nation/community has finite, elastic, boundaries
 Sovereign-at a time when Enlightenment and Revolution was destroying the
legitimacy of the divinely ordained, sovereign states became places for freedom within
these territories
 Community- because there is a conceived deep, horizontal comradeship


Chapter 2 – Cultural Roots






Nationalism
 Concerned with death and immortality (unlike Marxism or Liberalism), which gives them
religious imaginings
 Religion has remained because it is a way to explain misfortune
 Secular transformation of fatality into continuity, contingency into meaning
 This established a self evident frame of reference towards the religious community and the
dynastic realms
The Religious Community
 Imagined through sacred texts
 Example: classical Arabic for Islam
 Also dependant on the non arbitrariness of the signs
 Latin was used to teach, it was also used in churches
 Fall of Latin led to the fragmentation of one imagined community to become plural and
territorialized ones
 Print capitalism also big
The Dynastic Realm
 Divinity of power was way of legitimizing rule
 Monarchies were the standard models
 Dynastic states as late as 1914 were the majority of world political systems
In one way he says that imagined communities of nations replaced religious communities and
dynastic realms, but also stresses the claim that “different modes of apprehending the world were
taking place” making it possible to “think” the nation
Novels and Newspapers
 Re-presenting the kind of imagined communities that is the nation
 Gives examples of novels that had nationalistic consequences : Noli Me Tangere, Semaragn
Hitam, EL Periquillo Sarniento and others
 What connects the stories in a newspaper together?
 Calendrical coincidence, and because it is a kind of book
 Books are mass produced, newspaper is extreme form of a book sold on a colossal
scale
 Hegel hypothesizes that prayer was replaced by the newspaper: ritualistic, everyday, etc
Script
 Offered privileged access to ontological truth
 Created a belief that society was naturally organized around centre-monarchs
 Conception of temporality where cosmology and history became indistinguishable, rooted
human lives in the very nature of things
Chapter 3 – The Origins of National Consciousness

Books
20 million by 1500, changed the appearance of the world
Bilinguals
 They were those who spoke Latin, they had access to information, knowledge, sacred texts
(very small percentage though)
 Latin becomes more Ciceronian, increasingly removed from ecclesiastical and everyday life
Reformation
 Impact, martin Luther’s thesis, read all around Germany
 Ignited religious propaganda war
 Protestantism + print capitalism = large reading public
More languages appear (they are variations of Latin)
 Choice of language becomes gradual, creates division
 Interplay between fatality, technology, and capitalism
Print capitalism
 Once created it unified fields of exchange, fixities of languages which led to the subjective
idea of a nation
 Also created languages of power





Conclusion
Convergence of capitalism and print technology on human language created the possibility of a new form of
imagined community, which were the basic building blocks for modern nations.
Week 3. Hurts so Good: Bilingual Aesthetics
Notes for Thursday, February 14
Cuba

Become country—19th century

Modern country by modeling after US

Spanish colony until 18__

Political and cultural stronghold


Writers, etc.
Baseball 1850-60’s

National sport in the US

Cuba identifies through baseball rather than Spanish culture—bullfights

1900: sent 1,300 Cuban teachers to Harvard

learned American style of teaching and took that back
Victor Borges: Inflationary Language (saw YouTube clips)
Cabrera Infante

Modern literature: starts similarly to a cabaret setting

Mood: playful, excited, international, playground for adults

Represented Cuba in late 1950’s—right before revolution

Cuba=decadent tourist culture

English vs. Irish: use for communication vs. use for performance

He is performing for the crowd by using language

p.4: “heat”  Spanish grammar coming off: “is heat”

deforming both Spanish and English translation

literary translation: speaking creates literature

Guayabero w/ black tie: tropical and gringo

Typitality
 “AmeRícan”

don’t need accent in English

accent is wrong in Spanish

word also sounds like “I’m a Rican”
Minervo Eros:

Coño

Don’t respect “registers”: normal rules for use

Without words  even without talking

Series of psychoanalytic sessions (talk of dream)

Dreamed she was fish and decomposing


Light up water around
Beauty of things falling apart
 “organismic

decadence” = beauty in decay
makes sparks

Tragic comedy: humor prevents intimate communication

Cuban=own language


All people in this are artists: boleros, photographer, Bustrófedo


Own accent and humor
Play w/ language but miss intimacy
Bustrófedo; writing that goes back in itself

Life – joke within joke

Jean E. Mar: “I’ve had enough” in French

Square 64 69 “vice versa” (versos): kind of false

Doesn’t like redundancy:

Desert of the Sahara

Steeple chase race
Cabrera

Whim of an author: night=day, men=women, red=black

There are principles in my novel, but I won’t tell you what they are

Sometimes the principles will be revealed, sometimes they won’t

Christian Chandy: 1761-68

p.285: what literary art is –literary allusions
 “it
was a very complicated trail of thought”

 “it
next page: squiggly line (trail)
was very sad”

 “I’ll
next page: all black
give you mirror image”

next page: mirror image
List of names (why valley?)  ballet?  belly? Ballet dancer=redundancy

Alicia Wonderlova: Alice in Wonderland but Russian

Marks Platonoff

Isadora Drunkass

Ruth de Lukinglass

Joe Lemone: José Limón—famous dancer

Getting things wrong is art

Seeing language in brilliance of decomposition is beautiful
Principle:

Material tha can be used, unravel
Hemenway:

Trying to convey the tension between the two groups [“inside, outside”]

Keeps awkwardness/foreigness—keep monolingual up against roughness

Noticing how difficult it is

Difficulty, roughness
Guillermo Cabrera Infante, “Prologue” and “Catalogues” in Three Trapped Tigers
Summary:
The prologue is basically an announcer in Cuba who is speaking in both English and Spanish. He goes back
and forth to present the show and hype it up. In both languages he seems pretty pumped up and is a bit more
accommodating in Spanish. He also makes subtle mistakes in his English rendition. He talks about how the
show is going to be hot, how there are a lot of stars and honored guests present. He also makes a lot of jokes
that have sexual innuendo in them. It is meant to be read in a certain rhythm because he clumps some words
together to keep the flow going. The show is suppose to be from Brazil and is going to be very entertaining.
The audience has a lot of Americans in it.
The catalogue is basically a series of jokes amongst friends which are mostly inside jokes. They are about
the author’s own life and about the Cuba in which he lived in. These jokes also poke fun at a lot of important
figures in Cuba and in the U.S. at the time. He gives a list of fake books and names which represent puns on
real books and people. There is also a small section at the end where a woman dreams about a worm being
eaten and this is a representation of Cuba being destroyed.
Points to Keep in Mind:



The book is said to be translated from “Cuban” which is not an actual language but is simply a
specific rendition of Spanish used in Cuba.
The show at the beginning shows the decaying state in which Cuba was during the time because of all
the “yankee imperialism” found there. There is suppose to be beauty in the state of decay, as shown
in the pleasure received from the show.
The majority of the jokes are not understood by the reader, only about 1/3 by the general public and
about ½ for Cubans because they are truly inside jokes.
Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls (first 50 pages)
Summary:
The book begins with the narration of two men traveling to scope out a bridge. The men are Robert Jordan
and an old man who functions as his guide. It is revealed that Jordan had visited Spain in the past, but is not
completely familiar with the place at the moment. Jordan is supposed to blow up the ridge after an attack
ordered from his superior, Golz. Jordan is given very specific instructions and then is taken to a small village
by the bridge to wait for the attack. At the village, Jordan meets Anselmo, a disillusioned man who is lazy
and only cares about horses. Anselmo does not want Jordan to blow up the bridge because he is tired of
having to move around. The old man and Anselmo speak to each other in old Castilian which is very
difficult for Jordan to understand. Jordan also meets Anselmo’s wife who is eccentric and complains about
everything. Then Jordan sees Maria who seems to be his love interest. Maria is described as beautiful but
only partially because her hair is short since she was in prison. Jordan becomes engrossed with Maria and
does everything to talk to her and gets her to blush. Then Jordan and the rest of the group must hide from a
group of moscas or fascist patrols and Jordan still thinks of Maria.
Points to Keep in Mind:





Jordan is an American in Spain who can barely understand the old Castilian which is spoken so it
must be translated into bad English for the reader.
The old Castilian is said to be inaccurate in its English rendition.
Hemingway will randomly throw in Spanish words but will quickly tell the reader what they mean,
probably catering to his largely monolingual audience.
Jordan talks about how the word boredom is not used by peasants in other languages, but rather is
unique to Spanish- this can be seen as a critique of the Spanish class system
Hemingway is very much into detail, he will spend pages describing one scene or person.
Bruce Fleming, “Writing in Pidgin: Language in For Whom the Bell Tolls”
Definition:
Pidgin: any simplified or broken form of a language, esp. when used for communication between speakers of
different languages.
Reading:







The book is written in pidgin English
It is a technique of peppering the dialogue with foreign language expressions, and even translating
Including dialogue with foreign expressions does not bother the reader because it reminds the reader
of the nationality of the speaker
However, translating foreign expression ends up making the “utterance sound rather more unlike our
language than like it” – this makes the language “strange”
 the “strangeness” in English also results from an abnormal word order, explicable to the
initiated as following a normal Spanish word order
 another example of strangeness – it is the fact that some of the words offered to us in quotation
marks cannot have been spoken by any creature living or dead, real or imaginary (even in
translated form) by the member of any identifiable linguistic group
Thanks to the author’s deformations of normal English, the reader become bilingual in a sense too
The author’s objection to the language in this book and the haze of strangeness it throws over all the
people save Jordan (the main character), makes Jordan to remain irrevocably an outsider and is never
required to come to terms with the world around him
Quote: “The book is, as I say, full of these comprehensible-but-strange sentences that the reader with
the slightest knowledge of Spanish tends to see as “howler” translations, or perhaps rather crude
jokes”
An extra set of summaries of Week 3's readings
Week 3 Readings
Cabrera-Infante. “Prologue” (1997)
This prologue is basically the narrative of an individual who is introducing a show entitled “Going to Brazil.”
He gives the introduction in both English and Spanish, literally translating every 2-3 sentences (so switching
between English and Spanish every 2-3 sentences). The Spanish text is in italics and the English text is in
regular font, highlighting the notion that not only the languages itself are grammatically and phonetically
different from each other, but also visually in the space of the page.
On the one hand, some portions of the translation are quite literal.
For example: “Topicana! The MOST fabulous night-club in the world—el cabaret MAS fabuloso del
mundo—presents—presenta—its latest show—su nuevo espectáculo—where performers of will take
you all to the wolderfull world of supernatural beauty of the Tropics—al mundo maravilloso y
hermoso: The Tropic in the Tropicana! El Trópico en Tropicana!” (p.3)
-Here, the translation is even literal visually (as the MAS/MORE is in caps for both languages)
On the other hand, some are not so literal, and thus some meaning gets ‘lost in translation’
For example: “Público amable, amable público, pueblo de Cuba, la tierra MAS hermosa que ojos
humanos vieran, como dijo el Descubridor Colón…Pueblo, público, queridos concurrentes; perdonen
un momento mientras me dirijo a la selecta concurrencia que colma todas y cada una de las
localidades de este emporio del amor y la vida risueña. Quiero hablarle…a los caballeros y radiantes
turistas que visitan nuestra tierra—to our ENORMOUS American Audience of glamorous and
distinguished tourists who are visiting the land of the gay senyoritas and brave caballerros…You are
now in the most beautiful land human eyes have ever seen, of Christofry Callumbus, the
Discoverer…” (p.4)
-Here, the translation is not literal.
-Also, the narrator is making the audience aware of the act of translation that is taking place.
-There is also a unique spelling of some terms that are original to both the English (Christopher Columbus is
spelled “Christofry Callumbus”) and Spanish (señoritas is spelled “senyoritas” and caballeros is spelled
“caballerros”).
Fleming – Writing in Pidgin: Language in For Whom the Bell Tolls
The novel is set in Old Castille Spain and thus speaking a dialect of Spanish.
The question at hand is whether Hemingway succeeded in providing the proper effect regarding the language
of these characters.
Fleming believes that the heart of the problem is that Hemingway’s characters use speech overtly rendered as
Pidgin English.
What is this Pidgin English, and how does it depart from the norms of English?
Characters use italicized expressions in Spanish such as “desde luego” for “of coruse,” and
“maquina” for machine gun. Sometimes the phrases are also followed by words recognized as
translation
a. These techniques do not bother us, the former reminds you of the nationality of the speaker
and the latter offers a translation for the reader’s convenience
b. Fleming believes that the technique of literal translation of “Me voy” to “I go” instead of “I’m
going” (which was lauded by many critics) effectively makes these people sound strange.
2. In the dialogue, old Castilian is represented like old English. The novel admits that Robert Jordan can
barely follow this dialect that the old man uses.
a. One of the first questions is: if Robert Jordan, or Hemingway perhaps, can only barely follow
the dialect, then he is relating that the conversation went “something like this” but could not
directly translate. Thus, is it legitimate to use quotation marks which indicate direct reporting
of speech in this case since there is divergence from what was actually said?
b. In translating, the word “thou” was used for the contemporary Spanish “tú.” Barea, a critic,
believes this is an unfair rendering of the language because it does not represent its poise and
simplicity. He feels this way specifically about the direct translation mentioned in 1b.
3. The book is full of comprehensible but strange sentences that Spanish speakers would see as “howler”
translations or maybe crude jokes.
a. The appearances of these pidgins are somewhat haphazard; sometimes sentences will have
many, a few, or even none.
4. Some of the words in quotations clearly could not have been actually uttered. In Anselmo’s speech it
is the words “this” and “that,” and elsewhere it is “obscenity” and “unprintable”
a. e.g. “Go to the unprintable… and unprint thyself.” (p. 45)
b. One would think that this is done for the sensitivity of the reader or publisher
c. Yet the repeated use of the same word in different forms (such as unprintable) makes the
speech sound more poetic so perhaps it is closer to the ritualized or unheard curses of the
Castillians, or maybe it is farther in that it does not evoke the shocking effect of the “true”
1.
curse.
The difference between the “real” and “unreal” or the question of reality is evident here as we question
whether how what is actually written represents the form of reality and would exist outside the text. Fleming
relates this to “unreal” stylizations in the history of art using the constant singing of operatic characters even
when they’re not “singing” as an example of something we may enjoy because we are both aware of the
“unrealness” and accept it at the same time.
In film, Hollywood uses English with this accents to represent speaking in another language but gives voice
over or subtitles when English is not spoken. And while documents held up to be read are in English, shop
signs will be in the foreign language unless they are important in which case they are written in flowery type
of script.
Between FHTBT and film, there are significant differences.
1.
In film, we have the physical image of the character but in literature, the words he utters are the
blocks with which we build our image of him rather than utterances of a seemingly complete
physically viewed character.
2. More interestingly, film characters only speak broken English when they are presented as trying to
actually speak English; otherwise they speak perfect English with an accent. This effect is replicated
in some literature where the reference point chosen makes certain characters seem somewhat unreal.
Each literary work presupposes and inside and outside, and it is often successful if the inside
correlates with the position of the audience.
a. This problem of the insider and outside is particularly central to FHTBT and is exemplified by
the language.
b. Jordan’s own pidgin is definitely less comical than that of the others. Jordan is the only
bilingual in the group, so he is able to think in clear English and as such transcends the others.
He is the one speaking a foreign language to communicate with the Spaniards and the reader
in a sense becomes bilingual too because he is able to pass from pidgin to normal English.
c. We do identify with these foreign characters, but their never lose their exotic flavor because
they began as strange. In contrast, characters in novels normally start as amorphous and gain
individuality.
Fleming’s main objection to the language is that Jordan “remains irrevocably an outsider
and is never required to come to terms with the world around him” (p. 275). Hemingway heroes often adopt
a pose of normalcy and understand both the language and customs of the foreign countries with no need for
surprise. Yet the characters remain outsiders and thus can never fully interact with their environments.
Hemingway wanted to write as if he had been an actor. So how do his books help us with our own lives
which do not seem strange to us, but we must find a relation to? Fleming believes that Hemingway’s
“refusal to come to terms with the fact that our own lives are not exotic ultimately limits the usefulness of
Hemingway's writings.” We do not develop a relation to the situation in the novel because it is in an exotic
setting, whereas we must do so for ourselves in everyday life in our own situations.
Fleming ends his piece dramatically by claiming that Hemingway’s outside, exotic place, speaks to those
who are caught up in the tasteless world of their own realities. Instead of expressing this tastelessness, he
relentlessly avoids “this state of normalcy or reality – the tasteless, dead centre of all our lives.”
For Whom the Bell Tolls—Ernest Hemingway

The Fleming article (nicely summarized by Ben) does a nice job explaining the significance of this
reading for our class. The main character descriptions provide the gist of what takes place and is
followed by a lengthier summary of the first three chapters.
Main Characters
Robert Jordan—The main character in the novel, is an American Spanish professor who has volunteered to
fight for the Loyalists in the Spanish Civil War. He is a demolition expert, and the plot revolves around his
mission to destroy a bridge in Fascist territory.
Pablo—is the leader of the guerillas who help Jordan blow the bridge. Once a ruthless leader, Pablo is now
afflicted by cowardice and cynicism. As he no longer wants to fight for the Cause, he makes difficulties for
Jordan and threatens the completion of his mission.
Anselmo—is Jordan's elderly guide and trusted friend and a good man. He truly believes in the Loyalist
cause, however, and thus is a brave and loyal soldier.
Longer Summary
Chapter 1
The first chapter of For Whom the Bell Tolls introduces us to the protagonist, Robert Jordan, an American
who joins the Loyalists in the Spanish Civil War as a demolition expert. We first see him climbing a
treacherous mountain path with his elderly, but incredibly strong, guide Anselmo. Robert Jordan emphasized
that in war, there exist only those who can and cannot be trusted; he trusts everything about Anselmo except
his judgment, which has not yet been tested and which Jordan reasons is "his own responsibility." Anselmo is
a good guide and the job to which he leads him, to blow out a bridge, is like many others Jordan has
performed, but for an undefined reason he is worried about "other things."
These worries seem to stem form the conversation Jordan has with General Golz before beginning on his
mission, as the narrative immediately jumps to a flashback of Jordan receiving his orders. General Golz is a
Russian officer sent to aid the Spanish communists directing the attack in which Jordan must destroy the
bridge, and in a flashback scene we learn that the crucial mission is to be performed in an unorthodox
fashion, and thus is highly dangerous. So too, Golz frustrations that his operations, strictly military test
ground from his perspective, are always stalled or botched, may be the cause of Jordan's sense of trepidation.
Golz is a direct contrast to Jordan's idealistic selflessness.
Anselmo leads Jordan to Pablo, the leader of the guerilla band whose aid Jordan enlists in the destruction of
the bridge. Although Pablo mistrusts the foreign Jordan and is mentally and emotionally wearied from
fighting and the threat of death, Anselmo convinces Pablo to help by intimating that Pablo has lost his
willingness to fight- meaning to give up all he has- now that he has property, horses stolen from slain
Monarchists. Now that Pablo has wealth he wants to enjoy life; devoting this life to a cause now comes at a
much greater price.
The chapter closes with Jordan mentally assessing Pablo, whose gloom is dangerous, he concludes, because
"he is going bad fast and without hiding it." Jordan appears inclined to analyze and mentally prepare himself
for future occurrences, as he reminds himself to beware if ever Pablo acts friendly, for then he will have
made a decision for the worst. Jordan also notices that he too has been gloomy, which is unlike his usual
joking self. Jordan admits to himself that he feels overwhelmed and wishes he were in gay spirits, as were
General Golz and Anselmo. The best soldier, according to Jordan, is happy, because high spirits in the midst
of combat is "like having immortality while you were still alive." Noticing how few happy soldiers were left,
and dually noting that his own positive attitude, and thus chance for survival, were faltering, Jordan tells
himself that he is not a thinker anymore, but merely a "bridge-blower."
Chapter 2
Robert Jordan and Anselmo arrive at the guerillas' camp- a cave beneath a tree-covered valley that could not
be spotted from the air. The gypsy Rafael guards the entrance to the cave. Despite his vulgar manner of
speaking, Rafael appears high spirited, as he jokes about his gypsy heritage and how many meals he can eat
in one day. Rafael draws a parallel between Jordan and "the other with the rare name." Kashkin, was
captured upon completing his mission of blowing up a train and killed himself. Jordan reassures Rafael that
he will not premeditate the outcome of battle and ask his men to kill him to escape the hands of the enemy, as
his predecessor did.
Pablo and his men then sit down to a meal prepared by "the woman of Pablo," Pilar, and Maria, a girl they
rescued from the train, which was carrying prisoners of war. Despite her cropped hair, which was shaved
during her interment in the Fascist jail at Valladolid, and her unsure manner, she is beautiful. Throughout the
dinner she gazes at Jordan steadily and smiles, leaving him with a "thickness in his throat" and an inability to
speak. Pilar is described as very ugly, "barbarous" but very brave. She is more of a leader to the men than
Pablo, for she lacks his fear of death. Since Pablo "went bad" and lost the courage and zeal he displayed at
the beginning of the war, Pilar maintains the unity of his band. Pilar is a gypsy and, upon introductions, reads
Jordan's palm. She refuses to tell Jordan what she saw, but makes Jordan promise that he will lead Maria to
safety at a refugee home in Valencia after he completes his mission at the bridge.
Chapter 3
Now that the main characters- Jordan, Pablo, Anselmo, Pilar, and Maria have been introduced, along with the
unfolding of a private love affair and the public concern of the war, Hemingway focuses this chapter on
furthering the mission to blow the bridge. Anselmo and Jordan go to inspect the bridge that lies over a deep
gorge in a mountain stream. Jordan's internal observations reveal that "the problem of its demolition was not
difficult." Happy to finally be about the task at hand, he happily makes a few sketches. He and Anselmo then
speak of the plans to blow the bridge, and then discuss the similarities between Gypsies and American
Indians. Specifically, they note how both groups "believe the bear to be a brother to man."
Upon their return to camp at nightfall, Agustin, another member of Pablo's band, greets Jordan and Anselmo
at the mouth of the cave. Agustin has forgotten the password to the cave, revealing how tired he has become
with fighting for the cause.
Agustin speaks in vulgar slang, but he nevertheless conveys two warnings to Jordan: one is that Pablo has
"gone bad," or turned into a coward, and that it would be best to complete the bridge mission as soon as
possible. The other warning is more prophetic, as he repeats that Jordan should "look after his stuff,"
meaning his explosives. Thus, the tension surrounding the bridge and Jordan's interaction with Pablo is
heightened.
Week 4. Common Sense Sublimes
Lecture Notes for Tuesday, February 19

Kant says he’s written a book of the critique of pure reason
2.




























Where pure reason = knowledge, which is understanding based on the real world
A priori: already exists
understanding: scientific approach (only part of knowledge)
pure reason goes with understanding
faculty of understanding: just trying to understand the world
practical reason is how Kant uses the world, deals with it in practice
2. this faculty is attached to practical reason : desire
3. affecting the world, trying to use it, not just understand it
both faculties are in one person – how do they work together?
4. Objective vs. subjective knowledge – where’s the bridge?
 After Kant’s first two critiques, this is the question.
At the beginning of the third critique, Kant says he needs it to bridge the previous two.
Reason/desire: another part of knowledge
Understanding is short hand for pure reason
Judgment is the bridge between the first two critiques
5. Bridge between empirical knowledge/data and usefulness of said data
Enlightenment: French revolution raging next door
6. All about thinking for one’s self and not taking orders
4. There was the need to locate a faculty of judgment that hadn’t been previously needed or used
How are you going to get to judgment without deceiving yourself with reason?
If you judge carefully and assume that others can too, expect to come to the same conclusion
Very important when authoritarian regimes are crumbling
Training ground for getting good judgment: aesthetics
8. Judgment is like a mental muscle; it needs to be worked
If don’t have judgment, pure reason runs rampant
Need to use all faculties when dealing with people
Why do aesthetics train reason?
9. Ask you to judge something you’re not invested in
4. Judgment does nothing practical in the world
5. Judging freely
Everthing you judge except for beauty and sublimity (aesthetics), you are invested in
12.
If invested, can get opposing judgment when considering the same thing/situation
 Personal motivation affects judgment
Common sense: the understanding of a thing that we all have in common
13.
Basis of any collective/democratic action
Can only have commonality/meeting of minds around something that no one is invested in
Most important in terms of Kant: that which we find beautiful has no interest (practical, moral) to us.
Beautiful things that also serve a purpose: aggregated beauty
First things you look for in an aesthetic judgment:
1. Must be disinterested (*most important)
4. Object must look purposeful; like it has a design
5. No a priori
Disinterest allows you to take a step back – no strings attached
1. Connected to freedom
Kant is betting on the fact that everyone else also finds a flower beautiful in a disinterested way.
1. Criticized for betting too hard.
Kant’s ambition: to target the little opening in our cognitive abilities (which allow us to connect with
others in a disinterested way) that leads to freedom
1. Not saying that freedom=chaos
4. At the time, freedom is frightening
When judging something to be beautiful, not judging with respect to an a priori category
1. Something beautiful is always new and surprising
4. Appreciate the freedom that you have to love that thing (not loving out of any need)

We never know the shapes that beauty takes because they are always surprising
1. Pleasing does not equal beautiful
4. “perfect” face submits to pre-existing categories measuring perfection against some standard.

Recap













We talk about aesthetics because it locates the freedom that comes from judgment
Locate freedom of the world to surprise you; not measuring against anything
SUBLIME (what we can focus on in our course)
 What is the sublime?
 The effect is scary, confusing, displeasurable
 Beauty: stimulus is pleasure BUT sublime: stimulus is displeasure
 Many treat the sublime as only the first moment, the stimulus
 Kant: What do you do with the stimulus? You go to judgment
In beauty, judgment yielded understanding
In the sublime, judgment leads to non-understanding
 Has nothing to do with understanding of pure reason
You then reflect on what you understand and what you don’t
 Reflection is made possible by reason
 Reflect on your own limited understanding; that the world doesn’t fit in your head
Pleasure is not in the thing, it is in you
 Gain immense pleasure from the pride of understanding your limits
If beauty is objective pleasure (thing), the sublime is subjective pleasure
For the sublime, also no a prior, also should have disinterest
Link to bilingualism:
 When we see different characters/scripts in a text, we are confused
 Stop and ask why we’re not understanding
 The world is too complicated to know everything – pride in that realization
 Reasonableness saves you from fear
General point:
 When dealing with multilingual texts/communities, have scared/offended/confused reactions
to foreign text and that confusion is normal BUT it is only the first step
 The pleasure is in the knowing that you can’t understand everything: see the extent of the
universe
Sublime: little moments of disconnect with the world
Last important point:
 Aesthetics is not only a moment of judgment but of emotion
 When experiencing beauty, Kant says that love is the emotion that comes our of us – expand
heart and take in more of the world
 Emotion associated with the sublime (pleasure stage): respect, esteem
Immanuel Kant, “Analytic of the Beautiful” “Analytic of the Sublime” in The Critique of
Judgment
Analytic of the Beautiful
-Kant calls a pure judgment of taste subjective insofar as it refers to the emotional response of the subject and
is based upon nothing but esteem for an object itself: it is a disinterested pleasure, and we feel that pure
judgments of taste, i.e. judgments of beauty, lay claim to universal validity.
-Judgments of taste are universal because they are disinterested: our individual wants and needs do
not come into play when appreciating beauty, so our aesthetic response applies universally.
-Our feelings about beauty differ from our feelings about pleasure and moral goodness in that they are
disinterested.
-We seek to possess pleasurable objects, and we seek to promote moral goodness, but we simply appreciate
beauty without feeling driven to find some use for it.
-Aesthetic pleasure comes from the free play between the imagination and understanding when perceiving an
object.
-Kant states that beauty is not a property of an artwork or natural phenomenon, but is instead a
consciousness of the pleasure which attends the 'free-play' of the imagination and the understanding.
-Even though it appears that we are using reason to decide that which is beautiful, the judgment is not a
cognitive judgment, "and is consequently not logical, but aesthetical".
-It is important to note that this universal validity is not derived from a determinate concept of beauty but
from common sense.
The first part of the book also discusses the four possible reflective judgments - the agreeable, the
beautiful, the sublime, and the good.
-The agreeable is a purely sensory judgment – things in the form of "This steak is good," "This chair
is soft," or, "That night of passionate chess was satisfying." They are purely subjective judgments,
based on inclination alone.
-The good is essentially a judgment that something is ethical – the judgment that something conforms
with moral law, which, in the Kantian sense, is essentially a claim of modality – a coherence with a
fixed and absolute notion of reason. It is in many ways the absolute opposite of the agreeable, in that
it is a purely objective judgment – things are either moral, to Kant, or they are not.
-The remaining two judgments - the beautiful and the sublime - occupy a space between the
agreeable and the good. They are what Kant refers to as "subjective universal" judgments. This
apparently oxymoronic term means that, in practice, the judgments are subjective, and are not tied to
any absolute and determinate concept. However, the judgment that something is beautiful or sublime
is made with the belief that other people ought to agree with this judgment - even though it is known
that many will not.
-The judgment that something is beautiful is a claim that it possesses the "form of finality" - that is,
that it appears to have been designed with a purpose, even though it does not have any apparent
practical function.
Analytic of the Sublime
-While the appeal of beautiful objects is immediately apparent, the sublime holds an air of mystery
and ineffability. E.g. While a Greek statue or a pretty flower is beautiful, the movement of storm clouds or a
massive building is sublime: they are, in a sense, too great to get our heads around.
-Kant argues that our sense of the sublime is connected with our faculty of reason, which has ideas of
absolute totality and absolute freedom. E.g. While storm clouds or a massive building might stretch our
minds, they are nothing compared with reason’s ideas of absolute totality and freedom. (Apprehending
sublime objects puts us in touch with these ideas of reason, so that sublimity resides not in sublime objects
but in reason itself.)
-In aesthetics, the sublime is the quality of greatness or vast magnitude, whether physical, moral, intellectual,
metaphysical, aesthetic, spiritual or artistic. The term especially refers to a greatness with which nothing
else can be compared and which is beyond all possibility of calculation, measurement or imitation. This
greatness is often used when referring to nature and its vastness.
-Kant distinguishes between the "remarkable differences" of the Beautiful and the Sublime, noting that
beauty "is connected with the form of the object", having "boundaries", while the sublime "is to be
found in a formless object", represented by a "boundlessness".
-For Kant, one's inability to grasp the enormity of a sublime event such as an earthquake demonstrates
inadequacy of one's sensibility and imagination. Simultaneously, one's ability to merely identify such an
event as singular and whole indicates the superiority of one's cognitive, supersensible powers. Ultimately, it
is this "supersensible substrate," underlying both nature and thought, on which true sublimity is located.
-Kant identifies the sublime as an aesthetic quality which, like beauty, is subjective, but unlike beauty refers
to an indeterminate relationship between the faculties of the imagination and of reason, and shares the
character of moral judgments in the use of reason.
-Some of his examples of feelings of the beautiful are the sight of flower beds, grazing flocks, and
daylight. Feelings of the sublime are the result of seeing mountain peaks, raging storms, and night.
-Feelings of the beautiful "occasion a pleasant sensation but one that is joyous and smiling." On the
other hand, feelings of the sublime "arouse enjoyment but with horror."
Notes for Thursday, February 21
A book can be more than a repository for words
“Art
as Technique”

dumps on tradition of art criticism

Art is about making images (taught this by our school, etc.)

Poems=thinking w/ images—economy of emotion?


DON’T think of it this way because there are only so many images
and emotions

Art ‡ economy of images
Art is about delay, difficulty, toughness, traction

Cannot be too easy, too familiar, otherwise you miss stuff

Must be fully engaged

Feel distant, challenged, intrigued by it, therefore engaged with it

Images belong to no one, they are the “Lords”

Poets concerned with arranging images, not creating

Prosaic, accepted as poetic

Poetic, accepted as prosaic

Not attuned to whatever artist intended, what we “feel” or interpret is
what matters

Why reduce friction when talking about art? Doesn’t it create friction?


Giving friction and traction prevent people from “sliding” over words,
they instead have to engage with them
Poets and artists want people to engage, struggle, suffer, not to “get it”
right away
 “Habituation


In order of importance: material to abstract
Art gives this back an it “exists so that we care about the world”


relationship between art and ethics
Habituation devours: works, clothes, furniture, one’s wife, fear of war


blights our lives with indifference
When people ask you what the purpose of studying art is


is Death”
Art shocks and primes
What would Tolsky say about the screen?

Explains as if seen for first time

Uses same words as before but in different permutations

An interesting conversation is an unpredictable one

When people misuse language


 “…so
Maybe use cognates form another language

Simply wrong?

No, it’s an interesting use of the word
Engaging because of strangeness
that it’s perception is impeded.”

Traction, difficulty, etc.

Barbaric: crude, etc.

Barbaric: originally meant foreign


Russian formalism (form of art product, not “meaning” that matters)

Defamiliarizes—estrangement



Technique is what matters
What’s he thin of (Chiand?)?


Barbaric language is what makes literature intriguing
Circuitous narrative, dirty humor
Who is Roland Bart’s favorite writer?

Marquis de Saad (Sadism)

Wrote erotic narratives

Bart loved it but makes distinction between artistic sadism and porn

Pornography is made to satisfy the reader—it delivers

Sadism teases endlessly, makes you suffer, feel desire
Texts that give you pleasure vs. bliss

Delivers vs. challenges (make you work for it)

How is bliss created?

Seeing the seam between two pieces of cloth and seeing some
skin between it

Two codes collide or interrupt, etc.

Most common: one language interrupting another
Victor Shklovsky, “Art as Technique”, “Commentary on Tristram Shandy” in Lemon, Lee T.
and Reis, Marion. Russian Formalist Criticism; Four Essays
Art as Technique (1917)
This essay is the most important statement of the Formalist method because it announces a break from the
only other ‘aesthetic’ approach available then and offers a theory of the methodology of criticism and the
purpose of art.
Shklovsky attacks the views that art is ‘thinking in images’ and that its purpose is to present the unknown in
terms of the known. He critiques the notion that poetry is a way of thinking in images.
He argues against the principle of ‘the economy of creative effort” (which states that a good writing style
should deliver the greatest amount of thought in the fewest words) because it leads people to have automatic
and habitual thoughts. He claims that the habitual ways of thinking are to make the unfamiliar as easily
digestible as possible…learning is largely a matter or learning to ignore. He argues that ‘de-familiarization’
is the way to overcome this human fallacy.
The true purpose of art, on the other hand, is to force us to notice. Art is the record of the occasion for a
man’s awareness of the world.
“Art
is a way of experiencing the artfulness of an object; the object is not important.” He highlights that an
image is not a permanent referent for the ever-changing complexities of life that are revealed through it; its
purpose is not to make us perceive meaning but to create a special perception of the object—a vision of the
object instead of serving as a means for knowing it.
Tristam Shandy (1921)
This essay is an application of the principles stated in “Art as Technique.” Shklovsky believes that a story is
essentially the temporal-causal sequence of narrated events (because of A then B). This, to return to the
notion of ‘de-familiarization’ is the familiar way of telling something, but precisely because it is the familiar
way it is not the artistic way. Artistry, he argues, requires both de-familiarization and an obvious display of
the devices by which the familiar is made strange. Plot then becomes distorted and de-familiarized in the
process of telling.
He claims that Sterne’s “Tristram Shandy” is the most ‘typical novel in the world’…in other words, the most
plotted and least storied of any mayor novel. Cause and effect does not exist in this novel and the techniques
used by Sterne in this novel (exposition of new characters and the use of motifs to tie episodes together, for
example) are displayed…contributing to Shklovsky’s emphasis of the importance of the idea that through
artistry man’s perceptions are sharpened.
In sum, the plot of this novel is so chaotic that it is considered to be the ‘most typical novel in world
literature.’
Roland Barthes, The Pleasure of the Text. New York: Noonday Press, 1980.
Background information:
Anti-bourgeois, standing apart from the French academic scene, initially an Existentialist and always antiessentialist, Roland Barthes (1915-80) came to prominence with the 1957 publication of Mythologies, a
ferocious attack on French society. Barthes was a hedonist, and argued for fluidity and plurality, in outlook
and social behaviour. Contemporary criticism was ahistorical, he complained, psychologically naive and
deterministic, covertly ideological, bovinely content with the one interpretation. In works which followed,
Barthes claimed to have unmasked the pretensions of Romanticism and Realism. If the first overlooked the sheer
labour of writing, aiming for an art that conceals art, literature in the second becomes a servant of reality and
therefore anti-art. Barthes distinguished the clerkly écrivant (who uses language to express what is already
there, if only the contents of his thoughts) from the nobler écrivain (who is absorbed into the activity of
writing, labouring away towards new elaborations and meanings). In practice a writer might express both
aspects, but the more honest and important writer was the écrivain, whose incessant labours did not adopt the
ideologies of the bourgeoisie, but bridged the gulf between intellectuals and the proletariat. Writers worked
as everyone else worked, and their efforts should not be smoothed over as inspiration of a favoured spiritual
class.
Summary:
The Pleasure of the Text is a short book published in 1973 by Roland Barthes. In the book, Barthes divides the
effects of texts into two: pleasure and bliss. The pleasure of the text corresponds to the readerly text, which
does not challenge the reader's subject position. The blissful text provides Jouissance (bliss, orgasm,
explosion of codes) which allows the reader to break out of his/her subject position. This type of text
corresponds to the "writerly" text.
The "readerly" and the "writerly" texts are identified and explained in Barthes's S/Z: An Essay (ISBN 0-37452167-0). Barthes feels that "writerly" is much more important than "readerly" because he sees the text's unity
as forever being re-established by its composition, the codes that form and constantly slide around within the
text. It is thus that one may passively read, but actively write, even in a fashion that is a re-enactment of the
writer himself. The different levels of codes (hermeneutic, action, symbolic, semic, and historical) inform
and reinforce one another, making for an open text that is indeterminant precisely because it can always be
written anew.
As such, although one may experience pleasure in the readerly text, it is when one sees the text from the
writerly point of view that the experience is blissful.
Section Notes (a.k.a. what Antonio emphasized about the text):
Pleasure of the Text is essentially a discussion of bliss. Barthes says that are two clashing objects in the text
and that “bliss comes from friction.” “Bliss is orgasm.” Antonio later emphasizes that bliss comes from both
friction and loss - not necessarily the same as the sublime. Describes it as a text in which conventions are
lost, and reader is unable to find his or her bearings. Along with clash of different ideas, and the gap between
languages, creates sense of bliss in which sense of mastery is lost. The importance is the reader losing
mastery and control over the text. With this loss comes a very particular aesthetic experience.
Week 5. Comprometido o Compromised: Polyglossia and Society
Lecture notes for Tuesday, February 26
PNIN:

Effects Navokov manages:
1st paragraph: detail that might have nothing to do w/ story

Goes from sublime to ridiculous (tragic comedy)
Important to silly

 “Ideally”

bald: absolutely bald

uses English correctly but very differently

call attention to word you thought you know
Alliteration: flannel, frail, feminine feet
Way of controlling sound w/o changing meaning of words

3rd paragraph:

Secret must be imparted—“shared,” “revealed,” “divulged”
 “Teacher
ever pretend to approach…”
People teach Russian at Cornell


Teaching rationally but without spirit
Shift in Character
 “The
head of the Slavic language at a college…Wangdell”
old fashion charm wroth paying for in domestic cash

4 paragraphs before end of Section 1
 “…the
rest is silent…eat, street, fountain pen, Charleston, marginal autility”
can’t tell normal English from academic English

CH 6, Section 11
 “our
friend…verbal vagaries…slips of tongue are oraculate…”

mispronunciations are mythopoetic

Pnin does for/with English
CH 2, Section 4
 “…warm
flow of pain was slowly de-icing…in meaning for…how fond he was
with his teeth…not a landmark remained”

what happens with this operation

Old self (teeth) just like his language is extracted
 “Perfect”
stranger
1st conversation w/ Mrs. Clemens
 “Her

speaks professor…”
Must “know” languate—author knowledge (master of English) vs. Pnin’s
knowledge (foreigner)
CH 3, Section 6
 “He
also perused the current item…afraid to scrape his shins…acid letter
from…he who lived in a glass house should not try to kill two birds with
one stone”

using English language and making it funny
Thomas Win--T. Win—Twinn: “Bright foreigners fondness for puns.”

Poetic function of one language and dressing it on another
CH 3, English Section 6

Hamlet: “Plila y pela” or “pela y plila”

When you were reduced to looking up the original, you wouldn’t
enjoy it
CH 3, Section 7
 “…Soviet


Old Russian ballads in different languages
There is also a pathos here that goes back to Pnin


documentary film…handsome unkempt girls dance…”
Vandell (vandal) College”—precisely b/c not most successful or
bright man that I can love you, etc.
Something loving of Navokov’s undercutting of Pnin’s performance
Chapter 2, last line
 “I
haf nothing”


might speak like child in English but is professor and is intelligent
Lawrence makes video of body language

What do we make of Lawrence’s interest in body language

Vadokov is ridiculing English teaching of foreign language
 “Doom

should not jam,” etc.
Narrator, not Pnin

Like circuitous road  not direct answer/strong

American reader feels happy ending = good, Russian does not; feel
cheated

All about interesting ways you can lose, can be derailed
 Colleague tries speaking Russian list of greetings
Lecture notes for Thursday Feb 28







Literary critics always look at style – novel doesn’t have just one style
 Goes back and forth in more than one direction, even within the same language
What does this say about the genre of the novel?
Epic vs. novel
 Greek/roman narratives generally epic
 Every epic: string of events with same hero
 Very different from novel - novel focuses on moment with lots of layers
 Have lots of things happening at the same time
 Catchword: meanwhile
 In a novel there is no one important character
How do we think about genre? What is genre?
 Characteristics of a piece of literature
 Tragedy: know ending
 May have small surprises but no big ones; serious
 Comedy: light, happy ending
 Lyric poem: always in the voice on the author; has one voice
 Sonnet: 14 lines, end couplet etc.
Every genre has definitive shape and associated expectations
Shape of the novel?
 Author can combine other genres in any way he likes
 No specific shape: mix, match, combine
 Can have everything and anything – freedom
Bakhtin liked the novel because:
It defies limited stylistic analysis – need to look at the whole
 You can look at parts but cannot reduce the entire novel to one part
Bakhtin writing in a repressive environment, under censorship (soviet union under Stalin)
 Novel allows for subtlety of expression – complexity
 Can send a message without being explicit
 Novel is a place for democracy, conflict
 To resolve a novel is to read it like a repressive subject
 Bakhtin wants people to let novels breathe
Bakhtin is critiquing the whole body of literature
 Advantage of thinking like a bilingual
Literary criticism is framed differently outside of the West
The novel levels social hierarchy – includes everyone
If look only at style, will miss the whole
 Like linguistics, critics do
See similar themes as Shklovsky
DIALOG
 Very loaded word
 Language only exists in dialogue
 Confusion, irritation, conflict
 All about not understanding one another
Philosophers, political theorists etc want to get beyond contradictions
Literary critics don’t need to get pas the conflict
Through art, humans allow themselves the freedom of being contradictory
Bakhtin came to his conclusions after/by reading Dostoevsky
 Doesn’t agree with others’ views of Dostoevsky – thinks they’re trying to push Dostoevsky
into a position
 Bakhtin sees ambiguity, many voices, many ideologies – that’s Dostoevsky to him
According to Bakhtin, all philosophical/scientific efforts in Western thought miss the point
 Limit the view into one language when get scientific
 Reducing heteroglossia: missing the stratifications, ruptures etc.
Studying in one language is like studying with blinders – opposed to general monolingual approach to
study
Polyglossia
 Stratification in more than one “natural” language s
 Natural languages: English, Spanish etc. – our traditional definition of language
Heteroglossia: stratifications within one “natural” language
 Stratifications based on point of view, background etc
Novels admit ppl that don’t necessary fit into a community
Appreciation different from reader to reader
 Again, this is because each reader comes to the novel with a different background/ perspective
etc.
Benedict Anderson: Western nations formed by consolidating dialects into 1 and using it broadly
If you study anything having to do with communication from the perspective of a polyglossic
imagination, you miss the entire object.




















Mihkail Bahktin, from the “Discourse in the Novel” in Holquist, Michael (ed.) The Dialogic
Imagination; Four Essays by M.M. Bakhtin.
Part 1. Dicourse in the Novel (pg 259-275):
Intro: “Form and content are one, once we understand that verbal discourse is a social phenomena”. He goes
on to explain (repeats himself a lot and says the same thing in many different ways) that, in the development
of literary criticism, there has been a bias towards stylistics—“individual and period-bound overtones of a
style”—while its basic social tone has been ignored. He argues that it has “been deprived of an authentic
philosophical and sociological approach.” In other words, it ignores the discourse in the streets, in plazas and
only considers the “stylistic craftsmanship” of the writer him/herself. So it’s not concerned with a living
discourse.
Modern Stylistics 4 the Novel:




For a long time, the paradigm through which novels were analyzed was limited to an abstract and
ideological examination. Question of stylistics were not considered. And if stylistics were considered
it was examined through the criteria used to examine poetry (the predominant artistic form at the
time) or through “empty, evaluative terms” such as “expressiveness”, “imagery”, “force”, “clarity”)
After stylists failed to “fit” then novel into the poetic style, they denied the novel’s artistic value. So
it was seen the same as practical, everyday speech, or speech for scientific purposes, etc… but not as
a form of art.
The fact that novels couldn’t be fit into the traditional stylistics of poetry challenged the whole
system/ “way of conceiving style, exposing its narrowness and its inadequacy”
He defines the novel, as a whole, as being composed of various stylistic unities (for list look pg 262).
So the novel is “ a diversity of social speech types (sometimes even a diversity of languages) and a
diversity of individual voices, artistically organized. The relationship between these different stylistic
utilities are what allow for heteroglossia to enter the novel.
Relates to class:
The traditional paradigm for artistic literature was one that strove for unitary language. It
denigrated/denied the artistic merit of the interaction between diverse forms of social discourse and
languages—the heteroglossia in real life. He explains that these traditional stylistic categories were
“conditioned by the specific sociohistorical destinies of European languages” and ideological
discourse that sought to centralize and to create within a “heteroglot national language the firm, stable
linguistic nucleus of an officially recognized literary language, or else defending an already formed
language from the pressure of growing heteroglossia.” So again, that resistance to diversity in and
within language was reproduced in literary criticism.
Talks as contradictory centripetal and centrifugal forces of language--centripetal as the “unifying”
“centralizing” force that pushes inward and centripetal as heteroglossia that pushes outward. The
centripetal force operates on a higher official socio-ideological level, wheras heteroglossia operates at
a more local level—at street level.
Part 2. Heteroglossia in the Novel (pg 301-331):
Heteroglossia describes all the ways in which the language in the novel presents a sense of otherness. It is
“another’s speech in another’s language” – a double-voiced discourse. There can then be an “authorial
unmasking” to bring to light “another’s speech” and recognize the double-accented, double-styled hybrid
construction. This is shown in that there is one grammatical, compositional marker/style (one speaker), but
there are two utterances, two speech manners, two styles, two “languages”, two semantic & axiological belief
systems. Thereby, the author can fulfill his pseudo-objective motivation to have the collective voice
communicate the author’s intentions.
The 2 features that show Heteroglossia are incorporation and stylistic utilization:

Multiplicity of language and verbal ideological belief systems – not in characters, but from the

author
The incorporated languages and socio-ideological belief systems are unmasked because they
are not realistic.
Basic forms for Heteroglossia in the novel:






Comic novel: author distances himself in varying degrees from “the common language” by taking a
parodic approach (i.e. poking fun at his own language)  this is the “comic style” = the stratification
of common language. The literary parody creates a distance between author and language, and the
author’s deep-seated intentionality; his views are refracted in the way he plays with the stratification
of language.
 Page 308: “It is precisely the diversity of speech, and not the unity of normative, shared
language, that is the ground of style.”
Narrator/Teller: there are two levels: the author and the narrator’s speech, which creates a dialogic
tension and allows the author’s presence to achieve poignancy. The author is thereby freed from
unitary and singular language.
Characters: the character’s belief system allows a second language for the author and adds to the
speech diversity as well as reflecting social Heteroglossia. This quasi-direct discourse uses the
author’s words and the character’s emotions and creates an inner speech merged with the author’s
speech.
Character zones: There is Heteroglossia both in the character’s words and actions: spoken or
displayed characteristics.
Genres: depending on the genre, the language will take on a different meaning, which helps waken
awareness for the materiality of language. Language is indirect, conditional
and distanced  recognition of this results in a relativized consciousness.
Part 3: Glossary Terms:
DIALOGUE: “Dialogue and its various processes are central to Bakhtin’s theory, and it is precisely as verbal
process that their force is most accurately sensed. A word, discourse, language or culture undergoes
“dialogization” when it becomes relativized, de-privileged, aware of competing definitions for the same
things. Undialogized language is authorative or absolute.
Dialogue may be external (between two different people) or internal (between an earlier and a later self).
HETEROGLOSSIA: “The base condition governing the operation of meaning in any utterance. It is that
which insures the primacy of context over text. At any given time, in any given place, there will be a set of
conditions—social, historical, meteorological, physiological—that will insure that a word uttered in that
place and at that time will have a meaning different than it would have under ay other conditions; all
utterances are heteroglot in that they are functions of a matrix of forces practically impossible to recoup, and
therefore impossible to resolve. Heteroglossia is as close a conceptualization as is possible of that locus
where centripetal and centrifugal forces collide; as such, it is that which a systematic linguistics must
suppress.”
POLYGLOSSIA: “The simultaneous presence of two or more national languages interacting within a single
cultural system”.
Week 6. Either/and: Monolingualism or Double consciousness
Lecture notes for Tuesday, March 4



Derrida: at a conference on francophone literature
 New field in most universities
 Hears talk by Algerian (Moroccan? according to the back of the novel) novelist Khatibi
 Khatibi speaking about difficulty associated with being between two languages – the
post-colonial lament
 Derrida feels that Khatibi is complaining too much; being too sensitive
 For Derrida, it’s all French
 Shouldn’t complain because everyone can join in and complain about not belonging to the
language that we speak
 Our language is always beyond our command – we just borrow it; it doesn’t belong to
us
 Monolingualism of the other: making something common into something strange
 Prosthesis: false limb
 Language is artificial but we need it to be human
Step by step argument:
 Derrida says he’s monolingual and everyone really is
 Not a natural state (artificial)
 Can only talk about being monolingual in your one language
 Derrida is against the post-colonials: he says it’s hi only language but it is not his
 Post-colonials say they have a “natural” language and this new language
 Performative contradiction: says one thing and does something else
 Derrida says he doesn’t live naturally in French yet he is speaking French
 Derrida does not allow Khatibi to live in his contradictions
 Pg 7. – 2 opposite yet true statements
 Only speak one language
 Never speak only one language
 Argument is similar to Bakhtin’s – can you ever really speak one language?
 There are many languages embedded within one “classic” language
 Depends how you consider heteroglossia
 If there is only monolingualism, can’t have a mother-tongue
 Derrida is influences by jealousy, resentment
 Language is like law
 Law is mad because it must control us although it is artificial
 Language is mad too
 Khatibi says he’s typically and profoundly Maghrebian, not French
 Derrida is from Maghreb too so what makes Khatibi more Maghrebian than Derrida?
 Derrida tells story of how he work up to the artificiality of language
 1940’s – Jews denationalized in France
 Derrida, at 10yrs old, realized he has no nationality
 Has been cut off from his French identity
 Derrida has no other language to identity through – only French
Derrida knows there are exclusions to what he says – still generalizes to everyone
 If something is deeply true for him, it must be true for everyone
Surprisingly naïve stand
Derrida himself is jealous of others for having more than one language
 His own argument is used against him
 Pg 54 he laments for his lost culture, “from which I am very much recovered,”
 Suspicious
 Derrida had no protection against colonizing language
 Had no where to retreat linguistically, had no one home, protection.
People who lose some language facility because of sickness (eg. Stroke) usually lose only one
language if they are multilingual and have something to revert to
One cannot speak of a language except in that language – WRONG
 Ex. Titone: metaphysical capacity
 Can talk of language above any single language – languages are like masks
Khatibi: denial of his own assimilation into French
FOLD: the idea that language doesn’t go straight
 It folds on itself, going back on meanings
 Makes it only look multilingual
Derrida is being an internationalist: refusing the idea of home language and mother tongue
Derrida made his career on skepticism, incoherence, anti-romantic platform
 No we see passionate attachment to ideals
 Claims that even when we use more languages, we really just want one – very romantic
 Derrida is nostalgic – he laments that he cannot access this ideal language
Khatibi is saved from his anxiety by a foreign language – it is his safe place
 This is not a possibility for Derrida because he does not know the safety of another language
that he can escape to
Even if Derrida had spoken English or some other language, it wouldn’t change his position because
it still wouldn’t be “home”










Jacques Derrida, Monolingualism of the Other missing Ch. 4-6, SEBAS
Chapter 1














Conversation between two speakers
First is fluent in French, in fact a French citizen
Still, “I only have one language; it is not mine”
Speaker bound by monolingualism
However, he doesn’t feel any claim over his sole language
He lives not at a “crossing”, but “on the shores of the French language”
2nd speaker: Claiming that one has no claim over one’s own language is nonsense
2nd: performative or pragmatic contradiction in stating claim (another example: I am not typing in
English)
2nd: Worst yet, 1st speaker is claiming that “Je n’ai qu’une langue [le français], et ce n’est pas la
mienne” in French!
1st: why would people object to reasoning? Given that 2nd speaker keeps repeating the same
argument
2nd: Repeats the same argument; plus, if one has only one language that’s not theirs, how would they
learn it?
1st: denunciations of performative contradictions mainly from “German or Anglo-American
theorists”, usually aimed against “French philosophers”, although it can be used by latter against other
ones
Denunciation usually against questions about truth (because then, “what you are saying is not true
because you are questioning truth”)
Critics of 1st speaker: such line of reasoning would go from philosophy to rhetoric, literature and





finally sophistry (outright lying)
Critics: Claiming in French that it is a foreign language is “playing the card of the exile and
immigrant worker”
1st: I never said French is foreign, just not mine
1st: At any rate, my claim is plausible
2nd: prove, in an understandable way, your thought which lacks meaning
1st: I will, but my “demonstration” will take another form
Chapter 2





















1st: I have two propositions that are contradictory within themselves and have antimony between
them
1. We only ever speak one language.
2. We never speak only one language.
1st: this bring’s up Abdelkebir Khatibi’s (contemporary writer of Derrida) point about defining
division in mother tongue (connection to Bakhtin)
1st: effort of writing summons memory of this division
Additions to two propositions: 1) we only speak one idiom only, and 2) there is no pure idiom
2nd: Are these possible? And idiom’s different from language
1st: there are distinctions within language, but there aren’t “internal and structural features” to
separate them
1st: And even if position problematic, I’ll start from there
1st: position highlights blur of boundaries, their “historical artifice”; Creolists (like Chamoiseau)
would understand me
2nd: Fine, I’ll take your word for it
1st: Yes, I believe in this antimony
1st: Such “impossibilities” go to heart of translation: “We only ever speak one language…(yes, but)
We never speak only one language”
The law behind it may be mad, but law and language “first condition of madness”
Note: now to the stuff that makes sense…
Louisiana international colloquium on French language
Meeting of Francophones, including 1st speaker (understood to be Derrida himself) and Khatibi
representing Franco-Maghrebians (Maghreb: North Africa, esp. French-speaking Tunisia, Algeria and
Morocco)
To understand who Franco-Maghrebians are, first start with what is (most) Franco-Maghrebian (abb.
F-M)
Using Aristotelian logic, understanding what is most F-M will reveal what F-M is
“A hyphen is never enough to conceal protests, cries of anger or suffering, the noise of weapons,
airplanes, and bombs”
historical reference: after World War II, France let Tunisia and the Kingdom of Morocco go. But
Algeria, which had been a department of France (like Hawaii is a state of the USA) and which had
endured the suppression of Arabic and other local languages in favor of French, had to fight for
independence from 1954-1962 – the French 4th republic fell apart over protests to this war, and
General de Gaulle made the 5th (current) one on its ashes, with more power for the presidency
(extraneous, yes, but this is a Francophile Gov concentrator writing this)
Chapter 3

Hypothesis: Derrida is the most, possibly the only F-M at conference















Justification: among us Francophones, there are French who aren’t Maghrebian (Franco-French),
Maghrebians who aren’t French (Khatibi and others from Morocco or Tunisia), and those who aren’t
either (Swiss, Canadians, sub-Saharan Africans)
Thus, I (Derrida) am only F-M (since Maghrebian isn’t a citizenship), and one by birth
(considerations about cultural belonging through death for another day)
Conference is about relation of birth to blood and language, culture, nationality and citizenship,
Derrida invited to present F-M perspective
Title of meeting: “Renvois d’ailleurs”, or “Echoes from Elsewhere”
Still, being the only F-M doesn’t give Derrida the authority to speak for anyone
Starting off: what is identity, or ipseity? It precedes the ability to say “I”, so more like “I can”
F-M is first and foremost a “disorder of identity”
This is based on citizenship, which in this case is “precarious, recent, threatened, and more artificial
than ever”
Problem of citizenship better understand when it is gained in one’s lifetime (like experience of many
Americans), and especially if it’s been lost in one’s lifetime (not through secession, but actually
losing citizenship “without the said group gaining back any other citizenship”)
Derrida has gone through both losing and gaining French citizenship, having none in-between
History (in book): first, in 1870 France gave citizenship to Algerian Jews through Crémieux decree,
but then from 1940 to 1943, under General Pétain’s Vichy state, French took away citizenship
Derrida: This wasn’t the Germans forcing France’s hand, but an entirely French operation
Algerian Jews had forgotten that 1940 repeal of Crémieux took from them citizenship that they had
had for only 70 years (of pogroms, repressions and yet simultaneous assimilation)
This memory (of being rejected from school for French citizens) at heart of Derrida’s disorder of
identity
It inspires simultaneous desire for memory, amnesia and despair
W.E.B. DuBois, The Souls of Black Folk. (Ch. 1)
WEB DuBois introduces The Souls of Black Folk with the forethought: "herein lie
buried many things which if read with patience may show the strange meaning of
being black here in the dawning of the twentieth century. This meaning is not without
interest to you, gentle reader; for the problem of the twentieth century is the problem
of the color-line."
These succinct lines summarize the aim of the collection, which is to impress upon the
world the particular experience of being an African American some forty years after
the Civil War: the recognition that one's consciousness is forever enslaved to the
other. WEB DuBois argues that successful and complete recognition would require
that each self-consciousness see the other as equal to itself, and therefore adequate
to the task of recognizing and reflecting itself. The unequal relation of slavery,
however,creates a circumstance in which the master sets the terms of recognition,
and therefore undermines the reciprocity that is essential to it. The master comes to
define the identity and the consciousness of the slave, such that the slave is not
recognized as independent by the master. He is defined by his inferior position.
Dubois' analysis of black double consciousness during Jim Crow takes up this notion
unequal recognition to describe how racial power relations in America do violence
upon the black psyche: “…the Negro is a sort of seventh son, born with a veil, and
gifted with second-sight in this American world,--a world which yield him no true selfconsciousness, but only lets him see himself through the revelation of the other
world. It is a peculiar sensation, this double consciousness, this sense of always
looking at one’s self through the eyes of others, of measuring one’s soul by the tape
of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. One ever feels his two-ness,-an American, A Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two
warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keep it from being torn
asunder."
Notes for Thursday, March 6
The Red Wheelbarrow: William Carlos William

Dramatic example of imagism


H.D (Doolittle)-more nouns than adjectives and verbs




Puerto Rican mother (Elena)

English father who was raised in Dominican Republic
Mother raises him—monolingual and “lives” in Spanish
Raised in New Jersey
Relationship between Elena and Ezra Pound


Can analyze many different ways
Who was William Carlos Williams


Poem about butterfly whose words made the butterfly shape
Marzan’s analysis of the poem does not take away from the imagism


~Cubism: Don’t know how one relates to another but draws
attention
Pound was committed fascist
Resentment towards Spanish speakers

Elena called him Carlos

Ezra called him Bill


William lived in translation


Both people thought William Carlos Williams was too much
Always giving meaning to things you know but not entirely
Elena in Paris learning panting before being married


Carlos’ eye for painting is a way of loving her (Marzan thinks
Oedipus-like)

Elena mismatched Carlos’ life—wasn’t “American”
Mother’s name is Rosa “Red” Wheelbarrow (p.161)
 “But
from what element…from imaginary imagination…to do things from
memory is ‘de carretilla’ ”


carretilla is Spanish for wheelbarrow
She doesn’t stop talking about the past (Elena) because she refuses to
become American or part of this new world

Elena is the Red Wheelbarrow

The white chickens could be her neighbors—all anglos

This poem is tribute to mother who has lost her painting and replaced this
with talking about her past

Why would Julio Marzan write this book?


William known as the American Poet

People didn’t suspect that he was Latino or that he spoke Spanish

People must now re-read the poetry with Latino question in mind
What goes on his work

This is choppy, not continuous

On a bridge between Juarez and El Paso (Paso Juarez)
 “Wait,

the others waited while you inspected it”
talks to self: anglo vs. Latino identity; Bill vs. Carlos

Egg-shaped=potential; something may come of it

Now going into an incantation—regular poetic meter

Distinction between “copying” and “imitating”

Doesn’t want to copy what’s there


He will give it his own version
Music from bars and on the way back takes over
 “Agony


of self-realization”
wants birth, to put himself together and to become a poet in
order to reconcile his Anglo and Latino parts
Doesn’t know what to make of this strip artist

disgusted but also thinks she is innocent…she is the only one
that is not “posing”
 “Of
a shape, close as I can get, to no shape…I am a poet, I am a
poet, I admit, ashamed…”

He has been able to voice music/rhythm/dance

Can say who he is and this came from writing poetry because,
otherwise, there are too many pieces of him (which he needs
to reconcile)
Victor Hernandez Cruz:

Red means (~red beans…in PR/Caribbean)

Cooking beans—beings—Adam (Adam=red [in some language])
(man=red)

Raised in U.S. and went back to PR to re-learn Spanish

Writes lovingly and driven nuts by those N.Y. poets writing about drug
addiction and despair—“that’s not how we live”

Mija

Factual stuff is in English

Emotions, secrets, expressions are in Spanish
…those
intimate stores and moments are in Spanish
William Carlos Williams, “El Hombre”, “The Red Wheelbarrow” in Tomlinson, Charles (ed.).
William Carlos William; Selected Poems. New York: New Directions Books, 1985. “The Desert
Music” in The Desert Music and Other Poems. New York: Random House, 1956
“The Red Wheelbarrow”
so much depends
upon
a red wheel
barrow
glazed with rain
water
beside the white
chickens.
Notice the shape of the lines, how he cuts them mid-phrase or even mid-word (as in
wheelbarrow). Also, it is all but one sentence made into a poem.
o
Barrow on its own can mean: “a heap of earth placed over prehistoric tombs”
Note the color contrast, imagery, the contrast of inanimate objects and animals.
What’s the connection to bilingualism/bilingual arts? How does W.C. Williams’ bilingualism help
him write this?
William Carlos Williams – “El Hombre”
It’s a strange courage
you give me ancient star:
Shine alone in the sunrise
toward which you lend no part!
Look at what the title has to do with the poem
Is he deriving courage from seeing the star standing alone, or from shining and still not actually
being a part of the phenomenon, the spectacle of the sunrise (perhaps in how)?
William Carlos Williams – “The Desert Music”
Another poem, this time beginning on the bridge in between El Paso and Juarez
Describes a “inhumane shapeless” object (presumed to be a person) sitting on the bridge, a
refuge on the international border; they debate over what/who it is
Constant repeats of “only the poem!” and subsequent difficulties trying to distinguish if the
writing voice is the narrator/an actor/the poet.
He also refers to the “indians” a lot (while he’s in Mexico)
HOW TO TELL IF A TEXT IS FROMW.C.Williams:
o
The story has lots of line breaks in between sentences (see above poems for
examples)
o
The dialogue also seems to be distinguished by the alignment of the text; it’ll usually
be shifted to the left or to the right, and sometimes in the middle
William Carlos Williams – “Yes, Ms Williams”
In this Introduction, we find out that the story is of course, about W. C. Williams’
mother (who turns out to be half French and half Hoheb)
Admits to growing up with Spanish all around him, with a mother from Puerto Rico
who still had ties back to her French roots in Paris
Even moves to Paris and writes about his experience there, before returning to NYC
to attend the Horace Mann High School
Talks about mother’s fall into sickness and leads up to her final burst, anathema, of
contempt and hatred but in French, and then her following obsession with dreams
Talks about issues with bilingualism in passage (p 21) about how his mother and him
were translating a book until they got stuck in the last few pages as the writing gets jumbled.
He also comments about how his mother’s opinions of Quevedo (from the book) affected her
translation
She spoke English, Spanish, French, and mixed all three through sayings
HOW TO IDENTIFY THIS TEXT:
o
References to mother or father
o
Many inclusions of both Spanish and French throughout story
Julio Marzán, The Spanish-American Roots of William Carlos William, Austin, TX: The
University of Texas Press, 1994. (Chapter 4)
-William Carlos Williams (1883 –1963), was an American poet closely associated with modernism and Imagism.
His father was English and his mother was Puerto Rican, so he understood both languages.
-In “El Hombre” Williams converted the etymology of key words into a metaphor of his background.
Williams was responding against the attitude that branched out of the historyof this culture’s perception of
Spanish things in general (Marzán claims that Spanish culture has been stigmatized in the US by a long
history of antipathy).
-Marzán talks about how Williams and Ezra Pound (who was an American poet and figure of the Modernist
movement) did not have a good relationship. When Williams asked him rhetorically to know in one word a
definition of European consciousness, he answers: “rien” which can be read in French to mean ‘nothing’ or
in Spanish to mean ‘they laugh.’ His idea was to make the two languages inseparable, so as to make Pound’s
esteeming for one over the other look foolish.
-William Carlos perceived the incompatibility of his cultures as epitomized in their antagonistic attitudes
toward sex. Against the squeamish sexuality of his Anglo American identity, his Latin American identity
offered an antithetical openness toward the human body. The representation of competing sexual attitudes is
highlighted in some of his works, like “Adam” and “Against the Weather.”
-One of his most notable works is “Translation.” Here, he argues that by learning from Lorca and Góngoras
(two Spanish writers) ‘an almost ideal opportunity exists for trying out new modes.’ He meant that the
translating of their techniques and spirit into English was a translation of structures as well as idioms.
-Williams equated identity with language; and foreignness signified being informed by a language other than
English for him.
-His having to be a translator of his biculturalism afforded him the opportunity to become a ‘best designer’:
in a mingled America he translated the ‘true’ American spirit into an idiom understood by his townspeople.
-He had something which he referred to as the ‘imaginary translation.’ This was his translation of deep
structure, the poem under his poem in English. This raises the question of why it was that he perceived the
‘root’ of his poem to be Spanish.
-The imagery translation technique is intrinsic to William’s style (see the article for examples of such
poems). Entire poems may have been conceived in translation, while transient performances of imaginary
translations are evident in isolated moments of writing (an example is in his poem “The House”). For
example, in this poem he uses words like ‘interknit’ which are more common in their Spanish form
‘entretejido.’ Another famous work that uses this technique is “Yes, Mrs. Williams.”
-Williams’ sense of himself as a translator from Spanish to English contributed to his seeing possibilities of
translating into poetry the techniques of other artistic media. An example is his opera libretto on the life of
Washington.
-He was also into paintings and thought that by means of mental translations, words could be perceived as
mental objects. He believed that visual images work without the subjective narrative of language, eliminating
those elements that stir emotions alone (which only distort perception) so that the object-image appeals only
to the eyes and the intellect (so more ‘pure’ art in a way). Thus, in some of his poems the words are visually
placed in different places of the page, so as to create an element of imagery (an example is in his work
“Brilliant Sad Sun”).
-“The Red Wheelbarrow” is another one of William’s famous poems. It exemplifies his technique of
imaginary translation, both into visual imagery and from Spanish. There are parallels (in the image each
poem provokes) between the “Red Wheelbarrow” and another one of his poems: “The Brilliant Sad Sun.”
Also, the original idea in his head was “Carretilla de Rosa” in Spanish, and he later translated this
image/thought into “red Wheelbarrow.”
Tato Laviera, “NuYorican”, “Asimilao”, “Criollo Story”, “M’ija”, “Brava”, “Praying”,
“Commonwealth”, “AmeRícan” in AmeRícan, Houston, TX: Arte Público Press, 1981.
Background information:
Tato Laviera was born in Puerto Rico and has lived in New York City since 1960. A second-generation
Puerto Rican writer, a poet and playwright, he is deeply committed to the social and cultural development of
Puerto Ricans in New York. In addition, he has taught Creative Writing at Rutgers and other universities on
the East Coast.
Summary:
His poems and plays are linguistic and artistic celebrations of Puerto Rican culture, African Caribbean
traditions, the fast rhythms of life in New York City, and of life in general. Laviera writes in English,
Spanish, and Spanglish, a mixture of the two. His superior command of both languages and the playful yet
serious value he imparts to Spanglish, distinguishes his writing from others of his generation. For example,
the titles of two of his books, Enclave and AmeRícan, suggest double readings in Spanish and English.
Laviera’s poetry is highly relevant to the study of bilingual and bicultural issues, for in it he documents,
examines, and questions what it means to be a Puerto Rican in the United States. His texts have reflected the
changes and transitions that his community has undergone since the major migrations of the 1940s and,
moreover, offer a paradigm of what pluralistic America should really be all about.
For instance, in La Carreta Made a U-Turn one finds forceful poems denouncing the hardships, injustices,
and social problems that the poor Puerto Rican confronts in New York City: cold, hunger, high rents,
eviction, drug addiction, linguistic alienation, unemployment. The second part of this collection, entitled
“Loisaida (Lower East Side) Streets: Latinas Sing,” examines the issues and problems affecting today’s
Latina women. This is, perhaps, one of the few instances in which a Hispanic male writer conscientiously
and sympathetically addresses the conflicts of bicultural Hispanic women. Laviera concludes this book with a
series of poems which celebrate African Caribbean music, both in its traditional functions as well as in its
resurgence within the contemporary urban context of New York City.
Laviera has been called a “chronicler of life in El Barrio” and rightly so. His poetic language is not
influenced by the written, academic tradition of poetry, but instead it is informed by popular culture, by the
oral tradition of Puerto Rico and the Caribbean, and by the particular voices spoken and heard in El Barrio.
Gossip, refrains, street language, idiomatic expressions, interjections, poetic declamation, and African
Caribbean music such as salsa, rhumbas, mambos, sones and música jíbara (mountain music), are but some
of the raw material with which Laviera constructs his poems. Though published in a written format,
Laviera’s poetry is meant to be sung and recited.
A central tenet to Laviera’s work is his identification with the African American community in this country.
On the one hand, he reinforces the unity and common roots of blacks and Puerto Ricans: “it is called Africa
in all of us.” This tendency also reflects the new multi-ethnic constitution of America which has supplanted
the old myth of the melting pot. In this context Laviera’s poems are reaffirmations of his Puetroricanness,
and of his community’s as a new national identity that diverges from the insular Puerto Rican. He proposes a
new ethnic identity which includes other minority groups in the country. New York City becomes the space
where this convergence and cultural mestizaje (mixing) takes place. While maintaining a denunciative stance
through the use of irony and tongue-in-cheek humor, Laviera’s work flourishes with a contagious optimism,
and his poems are true songs to the joy of living which Puerto Ricans profoundly feel despite the harsh
circumstances in which they live.
Víctor Hernández Cruz, “You gotta have your tips on fire” in Mainland. New York: Random
House, 1973 (pp. 3-4). / Víctor Hernández Cruz, “Read Means”, “The Bolero of the Red
Translation” in Red Beans. Minneapolis: Coffee House Press, 1991. / Víctor Hernández Cruz,
“Water from the Fountain of Youth”, “Writing Migrations” in Panoramas. Minneapolis: Coffee
House Press, 1997
Víctor Hernández Cruz, "You gotta have your tips on fire" in /Mainland/. New York: Random House,
1973 (pp. 3-4)
n.b. there is no link on the website for this reading, and I don't believe we ever mentioned it in class or in
section. Nonetheless, it can be found at: http://www.victorhernandezcruz.com/main1.html
"You gotta have your tips on fire" // Summary:
This short poem is about retaining one's identity in a harsh world that will try to tear it apart.
"You gotta have your tips on fire" // Commentary:
The metaphors in this poem (e.g. the door of pure space and hurricanes) represent obstacles to maintaining
one's identity. Unidentified, these could represent anything that Cruz struggled with as a Puerto Rican
growing up in America. Stylistically, Cruz varies the length of each line, thereby emphasizing the words that
stand alone (e.g. "pana," which most likely means "friend" here). Cruz is confiding in and giving advice to
the reader, who is threatened by an unidentified "they." This third party that we cannot know anything about
threatens us from all around, and to remain steadfast in our identity, we must do our own "dance."
Víctor Hernández Cruz, "Read Means", "The Bolero of the Red Translation" in /Red Beans.
/Minneapolis: Coffee House Press, 1991
Red Means // Summary:
This is a short poem by Cruz that repeatedly mentions the color red in addressing his home country of Puerto
Rico.
Red Means // Commentary:
This is a celebratory poem of the author's home country, which he associates with the color red. There are a
few subtleties of this poem that are worth noting. First of all, one way Cruz refers to the color red is by
mentioning, for example, Adam, who is Hebrew means red earth. Another example is his use of Guyaba (i.e
guava), a fruit with a red interior. Mentioning Red Beans at the very end of the poem makes it clear he is
talking about Puerto Rico, as that is a speciality of the island. Connecting it to other works we've done, the
hyphen in "be-ings" in line one defamiliarizes the word (Shklovsky). We didn't spend that much time on this
poem in class.
The Bolero of the Red Translation // Summary:
This starts off as an autobiographical essay, describing the author's early life in Puerto Rico, and his
emigration to Manhattan as a young child. In a new section, Cruz then elaborates on his view of poetry and
how powerful it can be, while citing the need to use language wisely. The final section of this essay he
addresses bilingualism directly, mentioning how he is "a person of variety" (9), and how bilingualism allows
for greater expressive possibilities.
The Bolero of the Red Translation // Commentary:
n.b. the Bolero is a type of rhythmic dance that originated in Latin America.
Cruz describes the world, towards the beginning of the essay, as if through the eyes of a young child,
overwhelmed by the large American world spinning around him. After the biographical section, Cruz
becomes more abstract; he claims poetry is "the most available art form," and that "through poems everyday
events are given meaning beyond themselves, life is elevated..." (7). Note that this relates to Bakhtin in that
in a good poem liberates its words from concrete references for the reader. Many of the later parts of the
essay are strongly tied to the larger theme in the course that bilingualism allows for greater creativity.
Furthermore, Cruz emphasizes how "we are many people at once" (9), and how poetry can help find the
words and abstract concepts to relate this.
Víctor Hernández Cruz, "Water from the Fountain of Youth", "Writing Migrations" in /Panoramas.
/Minneapolis: Coffee House Press, 1997.
Water from the Fountain of Youth // Summary
Cruz paints an image of multicultural Manhattan that he uses to segue into a discussion of his poetic
influences. From there, he delves into his own philosophy on poetry, where it comes from, and how it is
formed.
Water from the Fountain of Youth // Commentary
Right from the first sentence, this passage heavily emphasizes multiculturalism, specifically that found in
New York. Cruz emphasizes the multilingual chatter he hears around him in Manhattan: "The sound of the
language of a cubist painting" (112). Furthermore, the writing style itself reflects the commotion, as Cruz
jumps from topic to topic, even occasionally throwing in some Spanish. Discusses how the process of
articulating poetry into language is a translation, and how then translating it onto paper or into voice is
another translation. So by the time any reader gets to see the poem, he is already seeing a translation of a
translation. Cruz also talks about some of his influences; he was predominately influenced by poets rooted in
song and literature who were bringing those patterns to writing. Importantly, he relates poetry to migration,
comparing how the flow of ideas across translations can be traced, just as the flow of people across lands.
Cruz is relating many different mindsets in this piece: the idea of connecting music to literature to poetry is
very similar to the correspondance not only between different verbal languages (e.g. Spanish and English)
but also between other forms of language - art, gestures, love, etc. Cruz's concept of language is very abstract
and fluid, and heavily rooted in the multilingual perspective.
Writing Migrations // Summary
Cruz starts off writing that language is ubiquitous; it is all around us, and exact translations do not exist. He
goes on to discuss different Latino poets and shares some elements of their life histories and influences. From
this, Cruz crafts poetry as a function of, among other things, location (physical and emotional), history,
bilingualism, exile, and displacement. Ultimately, Cruz writes that bilingualism, an essential driving force in
the creative process, needs to be used correctly - improper forms (e.g. imposition onto a culture) can lead to
degeneration.
Writing Migrations // Commentary
Initially, Cruz discusses how everyone perceives things differently, and in this light, a monolingual viewpoint
is sterile. Everything we notice in the world around us is communicating to us in a language. Cruz even
writes "Through memorial glances I could see avocados falling into the snow" (119) in reference to the
confluence of languages and culture and the wonderfully strange side effects. His mention of languages
"colliding" and "struggling" is very similar to Ortiz's argument on transculturation; his idea that an identity of
can be formed from a sum of separate parts relates to Chamoiseau's definition of Creoleness. For Cruz,
bilingualism is essential; it helps make poetry "the very path that each student uses to get to the classroom"
(119). Cruz loves the "organized chaos" (123) of the Carribean - the constructive clash of cultures. However,
with such clashes, exile often results, and, similar to Anzaldua, such pain is important in the creative process
for writers (e.g. Nabokov who came from Russia to America but never really settled down here).
Week 7. Aesthetics is/as a Joke
Notes for Tuesday, March 11 nobody signed up
Sigmund Freud, Wit and Its Relation to the Unconscious
In this book, Freud examines the meaning, technique, and purpose of jokes and their role in our psychology
and human interactions. I have left out the portion in which he studies the relation of jokes to dreams
because it seems to be of least importance for the purposes of this class.
Introduction:
In this section, Freud goes into detail about the many ways in which different thinkers and philosophers
have defined jokes. He defines some characteristics of jokes:




They bring forward something that is concealed or hidden, that wouldn’t otherwise be
obvious
They make connections between seemingly unrelated things
They are brief. This in an important aspect of jokes because they can often say things in “too
few” words, and that is the source of the joke
The way in which they are said is more important than what they say. In many cases, if the
same idea a joke expresses is described in different words, it will completely lose its comic
aspect
The technique of jokes:
One of the most emphasized ideas of the book is that the technique of a joke is far more important than its
substance. Freud identifies a number of techniques, including condensation, substitution, combination, etc.
and he argues that the most common characteristics among the different techniques is that they tend to
condensate expression, conveying a message in very few words, or altering the logic of a statement. In
order to highlight the different ways that a joke can be made, he divides them into two main categories:
verbal and conceptual.
Verbal jokes:
Freud claims that jokes that use puns are the lowest form of verbal jokes because they are so common and
easy to make.
There are other types of verbal jokes that combine different words, replace words by similar sounding one,
separate a word into its different parts, etc. Here is an example of a verbal joke that is a bit more elaborate
than a simple pun:
‘And, as ture as God shall grant me all good things, Doctors, I sat beside Salomon Rothschild and he
treated me quite as his equal—quite famillionairely.” (14)
Conceptual Jokes
There are different ways in which this is achieved, but an important observation is that, for the most part,
these jokes can be translated to English and still make sense, unlike many of the examples of verbal jokes.
He discusses jokes in which a displacement of meaning is made, as opposed to a simple play on word. In
order to better explain this, this is one of his examples:
“Two Jews met in the neighbourhood bath-house.
‘Have you taken a bath?’ asked one of them
‘What?’ asked the other in return, ‘is there one missing?’” (55)
The diversion of meaning is easy to see using a graphic presentation:
The first Jew asks: ‘Have you taken a bath?’ The emphasis is on the element ‘bath’
The second replies as though the question had been: ‘Have you taken a bath?’(58)
It is extremely difficult to reach a satisfying explanation of what makes a joke a joke. There are no
characteristics that all jokes have, and in many cases, it is debatable whether a statement is even a joke or
not.
The Purposes of Jokes
When it comes to the purposes of jokes, Freud classifies them as either “innocent” or “tendentious.” Unlike
innocent jokes, tendentious jokes serve a purpose or aim beyond their own existence (they often have
political, religious, philosophical implications, etc). He also emphasizes that “verbal” jokes, which are
presumably simpler, are not necessarily innocent; and conceptual ones are not always tendentious.
Jokes that are not an aim in themselves (that is, jokes that are not innocent) are of the four different types:




hostile or aggressive jokes
obscene or exposing jokes
cynical, critical or blasphemous jokes
skeptical jokes
[Freud goes into a rant here about how smutty jokes are a form of sexual aggression, and to hear one is
equivalent to being the witness of sexual aggression. This is probably unimportant in light of this class]
Context and some of his general thoughts on joke making:
 “intimate







connection between all mental happenings”
 Learning about joking is going to tell us about other happenings
Another justification for writing - phenomenal role that jokes play in society, people who
command joking consider them of great importance
 It is considered a universal event
 Mandatory in the course of serious instruction perhaps (class)
Freud the scientist
 Student in Medicine in U. of Vienna, then went to france to work with a neurologist
who was interested in the therapeutic aspects of mental healing
 Method of scientific inquiry – triumph of human rationale (mind)
 Disease is the problem, human mind will cure it
 No longer attributing disease to moral causes, witches, demons
 “Freud became an atheist,” complete reliance on his own intellect
 Notion that certain conditions are caused by psychological pressures, hysteria causes
some fuzziness
 The mind is the inventor of reason and the destroyer
 Freud was disturbed and intrigued by features of his own condition
 Psychoanalysis studies when unreason begins to triumph over reason
 Laughter: uncontrolled response, he loves the activity of joke telling
 This is a mysterious force, it is not rationally grounded
Freud as a Jew
 Jews had constituted a separate estate in much of Europe
 Legally circumscribed in their activities
 Afflicted by massacres, expulsion, ghetto, inquisition
 In Freud’s lifetime, Jews enjoyed the rights of citizenship, like the right to compete
freely for places in the University
 Hapsburg Austria – so Jews moved to Vienna in large numbers
 6,000 to 175,000 population
 Seemingly fair system – BUT social discrimination rose in proportion to their
advancement
 Anti-Semitism as a defined movement, arose in precisely this context
 The first anti-Semitic politician elected to office in all of Europe was in the city of
Vienna – democracy was bringing them into power
 Anti-Semitism is a politically effective explanation of the consequences of
emancipation
 Democracy was retarded by the politics of blame
 Jews tried to get mastery over it, by at least thinking about it
 Psychology, anthropology, sociology, etc… many Jews
 Being able to explain your situation helps compensate for the inability to change
 What the joking often played on was the ambiguity of this situation
The good and the bad were happening – same place, same time, same reason
Most joke books are arranged by topics – preachers, rabbis, fools
 We think that the object of the joke is to make fun of something
Freud tries to isolate the features of joking to arrive at it’s essence
Lottery agent boasts of his relations with the Baron of Rothschild, “Rothschild treated me as
his equal, quite famillionairly”
 One would think “familial” would be the word
 Condensation (combination of two thoughts into one) Accompanied by the formation
of a substitute
 The technique is what comprises the humor
 The slighter the modification, the better the joke
Freud and the Aim of Jokes



















It is the technical features that Freud enumerates that makes the jokes funny
Diversion/displacement – changing the standpoint or focus
When we have jokes about rabbis/priests, it opens new doors
The unfairness of unattractiveness is a basic theme
 Ugliness and beauty are cruel and very real antitheses
What is the relation b/t dreaming and joking?
They allow us to articulate what we would otherwise have to repress
Dreams are the language of the unconscious
The pleasure derives from being able to say in this special form what we would otherwise not be able
to say
 Make possible the satisfaction of an instinct in the face of an obstacle that stands in its way
 What are these obstacles? Inhibitions
 The technique of dreams/jokes is the method by which the obstacle is removed/released
A catholic cleric behaves rather like a clerk… in Freud
The really profound jokes are tendentious – run the risk of meeting people who don’t want to listen to
them
Innocent jokes are easier to deal with because they are simpler, their techniques are easier to identify
and classify, tendentious jokes are irresistible but are harder to pick apart (these are the ones that
joking is really for)
Sexual impulses and Aggressive impulses are some of the strongest desires
 Obscene and hostile jokes serve this purpose
 These types involve three people
 The utterance of an undisguised indecency gives the first person pleasure and makes the others
laugh
 Among commoners, crude or lewd remarks of this kind (drunken) are possible, but in Freud’s
society, it is not
Civilization – If people no longer feel free to act on their impulses, joking proliferates
All the primary possibilities of enjoyment, we have to do without
Joking accepts the inevitability of restraint and functions within it
The ugly rabbi joke is particularly funny amongst orthodox Jews why?
 The joke builds up the tension of restraint and finally explodes with the one possible
explanation which allows this idea of pleasure
Joking is a means of preserving something very precious that we would otherwise have to eliminate
The better a society is at being able to keep us in line, the greater the need we have for joking
Jewish society had to live on other people’s land as a minority, could not allow acting out – impulse
to humor might be very great
Freud and how Jokes work in Society



Freud’s concept – means of expelling what has been repressed
 Everybody lived under religious laws, obeyed G-d’s laws because of fear
 People would not give into their passions so easily
 “the wishes and desires of men have the right to make them acceptable”
 The number of sins through speech in Jewish culture is large
 Also, there is a release through speech via joking
 Favorable situation for tendentious jokes is when the joke is directed at oneself, or at someone
with whom the subject has a share – self criticism
While a dream releases an individual consciousness, the joke is social
Sum of psychical energy which has until then been used to repress certain impulses, is then released
and discharged





Politically repressed societies would produce a lot of joking
Radicals don’t joke – they get angry, they want power, plot to change the system
 If they resort of joking, it will be of the aggressive kind
The kind of joking Freud is talking about comes from citizens who are determined to protect the
system they are trapped in, even though it thwarts desires
“Those things are comic that are not proper in an adult”
Instead of using joking, the Nazis used terror… esp. against the Jews
 The point was to make the Jews look ridiculous
 To send people to gas chambers that looked like showers to ‘cleanse people of their lives’
 This is a different kind of joking, a joking with people’s lives
 Both of these are cultures of wanting to return to the unfettered childhood ways – the cultures
of sadism and joking
Notes for Thursday, March 13 nobody signed up
Week 8. Mixeado: Theories of Cultural Juxtaposition
Lecture notes for Tuesday, March 18
Guest lecture by Professor Owens (East Asian Studies and Comparative Literature)











Macaronic: using a mixture of languages
 All vernacular languages are macaronic
 No written vernacular rose up by itself – rose out of others
Languages with characters do funny things to speaking and writing
There is no language called Chinese – its a successful political claim
 Becomes true because enough ppl believe it
 “Chinese” is actually a family of languages – NOT dialects
 Develop big tolerance for sound variation like with English
Everyone is reading and writing the same language but people cannot understand each other
 Most people speak a language under the umbrella of “Chinese”
Hostility between mandarin speaker and native Taiwanese
 Mandarin was imposed by force and public use of Taiwanese was forbidden
 Can write Taiwanese with modifications of Chinese script
There is a common written language for the Chinese language family
 Before 1920: Classical Chinese
Japanese and Korean belong to totally different language families than Chinese
Since 1920, national language in China is mandarin
 Classical Chinese is still used a little
 Written mandarin doesn’t correspond to any spoken mandarin
 Written mandarin is based on an 18th century novel which was deemed as using
“good” language
Colloquial Chinese: you use lots of words you never ever write
Established literary vernacular arose along with the nation state in 1920
 Benedict Anderson
 One region imposing some language on the whole country
Each literary genre had a register that was appropriate to it













Chinese script is not based on pictographs/ideographs
 There is a sound part and a classifier/radical
 In the past when many words had the same sound, the classifier would distinguish them – less
so nowadays
 For the Chinese, literacy means learning characters
Often in china ppl will write words that just wound like the words they want to convey
 It’s possible to speak written Chinese but it’s just not done
For TV and movies, people actually prefer subtitles – easier to read and more universal
 Mandarin is not even close to universally understood
The boundary between translation and transcription is very fine
Local dialect is used for songs
No reader of Chinese can understand Cantonese
 Different grammar
Vietnamese is a member of the “Chinese” language family
 Vietnamese never really thought of themselves as Chinese
 1407 – main conquest
 Every record of Vietnamese that was found, was destroyed
 Very close to Cantonese
 Vietnamese is written in Chinese and pronounced as Vietnamese
Korea
 Creation of writing system was commissioned by the king
 Most writing was done in Chinese until 19th century
 Korean is an Altaic language, written in Chinese
Japanese
 Early on, tried to use Chinese characters that sounded like Japanese words in order to write
 Japanese use Chinese characters as well as kana with grammatical objects to write Japanese
 One of the greatest examples of a macaronic language
 Different word order in reading and writing – writing classical Chinese order
Turkey
 Ottoman empire: one of the weirdest linguistic jumbles ever
 With nationalism, everything changed
 Languages were purged and purified
 Tried to get rid of all foreign influences
 Can no longer read texts produced before 1950
 Must have the text translated to make it readable
Chinese Characters
 Each character can be read in two ways in Japanese
 One reading is like the Japanese 7th century approximation of Chinese 7th century
sounds
 The other reading is as Japanese words
The Japanese also have two varieties of kana
 Katakana – used to write loan words
 Hiragana
Bilingualism is not a stable condition
 Depends on power
 Despite taboos, people mate across boundaries
 As people get thrown together, so do languages
 Natural human impulse: throw all languages together and make it work
 Multilingual inscriptions (eg. Rosetta stone) are a product of empires – have lots of different
people, speaking different languages
 States destroy minority languages in an attempt to unite everyone through a common
language
Notes for Thursday, March 20: nobody signed up
Patrick Chamoiseau, In Praise of Creolity (excerpt)
Prologue



Martinicans like himself are Creoles, “neither Europeans, nor Africans, nor Asians”
This identity emerging from the interior (as in, locally created rather than imposed form the outside)
Caribbean literature not yet flourishing; still recovering from “exteriority”, or looking at Caribbean
through foreign, Western (in Martinique’s case, French) eyes