Lend Me Your Ear – Chpt. 2

Brueggemann describes her method in this chapter as a Rhetorical-Cultural approach: “I want to consider where (and who) the terms come from, the social and rhetorical milieu surrounding their inception and usage, how they are used, and, certainly who they are used on as well as how those persons react to them” (28). Note here that she says “who they are used on” rather than “who they are used for” or “used by.” She’s clearly laying claims that these terms are created by outsiders (and I would agree), and implicitly making connections between these terms and weapons – which are the only thing I can think of that we would use on another person. Perhaps we would use our powers of persuasion on somebody, but I tend to also think of that as a type of rhetorical attack. She chooses this method over a straight historical method because histories are often “about the people “instead of “of the people.”

Brueggeman is looking for a “place” (notice here the emphasis on space, at least rhetorically) where the terms and people interact, so she focuses on the issue of “literacy.” She uses three sections to redraw deafness in the nexus of literacy: 1) the “problem” of deafness in education from a rhetorical framework 2) the “literacy legacy” of view literate acts as either language or communication 3) a turn to the subjects and their own signification.

The “problem” of deafness in educational from a rhetorical framework:
Education, historically, has been based on Quintillian’s work on how to educate a rhetor, with a focus on speaking well and the method of imitation. If students are deaf, they cannot hear the speaker to imitate. Additionally, people who are deaf will most often have difficulties with speech, which additionally excludes them from Quintillian’s model. During the enlightenment when education became a more widespread institution, deafness began to be seen as a group trait rather than an individual one. This is when deaf institutions or asylums were formed.

“Literacy Legacy” as Language or Communication
Literacy as communication suggests a one-way, perfectly understandable, interaction. In this model, literacy is “a product to be bought and used, according tothe package instructions, by illiterate consumers (those who have not), “sold” to them by it’s literate owners (those who have)” (36). It is a product, a set of skills, and an end in and of itself. Literacy as language allows for individuals to “become involved in language, to interact with the process of language, to change and fashion it, and to place themselves somewhere in the activity” (36). It involves critical engagement with the world.

The Speaking Subjects
When interviewing deaf students, the number one topic that came up was “passing.” Many students did not want assistance in their classes because it would make it hard for them to pass in a social way (i.e. it would clearly mark them as different), but Brueggeman notes that this also made it difficult for them to pass in an academic way (getting good grades) because they had trouble hearing the teacher.

At the end of this chapter, Brueggeman includes several interviews she has done with students from Gallaudet college about the difficulties they had with English classes.  One student went through twelve introductory English classes before he was diagnosed with a learning disability (presumably because the teachers and/or advisors thought his difficulties with English classes were due to his deafness).

These interviews are especially poignant because, even though both interviewees had difficulty with English in the education system, both profess a love for the English language.  Brueggeman suggests this is due to a separation between English as communication (as taught in their English classes) and  English as an expressive language (which is the aspect that they love).