Reply to E!

There is definitely a huge sense of division that appears when focusing on both these texts. Not between the texts themselves but through the dominant and non-dominant cultures that appear in both. In Barton’s essay he talks about the different discourses we use depending on the situations we are put in. Elaine uses the example of talking to your religious boss as opposed to your friend about your weekend, in this situation you will obviously be formulating your speech around the “appropriate speech index”, manipulating your speech intentionally to please whoever you are talking to. Although this is a small and comical example it’s still an excellent one which can be used to provide insight for into the nature of discourse on a much larger scale. Barton says that discourse is more then just speech, it has implications concerning interest, shared beliefs, and social norms. This is concerning because obviously there is a popular discourse, a dominant one that is used to exemplify literacy in this country, which inherently devalues other forms of discourse, making them appear, almost, less important. This it what Gee is getting at. These literary practices maintain the authoriatative status of the dominant discourse. Because there is a certain discourse that is considered the “right one”, not being fluent in it can lead to oppression and discrimination. The dominant discourse, isn’t just about talking, it influences the way we think about people and how we view what is valuable. Like Gee says if you can speak in this discourse or at least can fake it that’s when you have the ability to gain social goods, prestige, and status. However because one must transition into a discourse other than his own, the dominant discourse, he is in constant conflict with his family and cultures discourse while trying to be a valuable player in the popular discourse. There is constant division and it’s because one discourse is discrediting another and acting as if it is not valuable. In a perfect world this would not be the case, of course, because, this is obviously not true. However, I don’t see the dominant discourse changing anytime soon. Like Gee said “beyond changing the social structure, is there much hope? No, there is not.” And I don’t see the social structure of this country, at least concerning literacy, changing anytime soon, because, I don’t think people really see it as something that affects social practices and opinions as much as it does. I didn’t even really understand or see it’s impact on how it structured my views and opinions until this class, so I don’t know how the masses ever will. I wish change about the dominant discourse was as easy as what Gee suggest or as influential as "E" hopes it could be in the classroom, but I think it's such a massive monster it's way more complicated to take down. It's way bigger than "the classroom" and "literary essays", it's a whole nations way of thinking, which it's known to be true for hundred of years, you can't change that very quickly and with relative ease....