Reading student essays this semester, I was reminded of something I have always known but too often forget: students are not biographically invisible. They are not simply, only, generically, students.
One of my students, a young man from Puerto Rico, described studying, during his freshman year in high school, with his best friend, the only son of a man everyone knew but no one openly acknowledged as a powerful drug lord. Another young man, born in a metropolitan inner city, was abandoned as a child by his mother and lived in a series of foster homes, most of which devalued what the word “home” connotes. Only an unbanishable drive to learn and a talent for football got him to a desk in my Freshman Composition class. A third young man, mugged at gunpoint, still carries the trauma with him, embodied, visceral, inextinguishable, resistant to every therapeutic gesture. His desk is often empty. A female student’s back-home boyfriend was growing increasingly distant; another lost her mother to a brain tumor; still another confessed her addition to Facebook and worried that the medium of the computer screen would displace her desire, or ability, to fully inhabit real-life social relationships; still another, with ADHD, was contemplating discontinuing his medication.
Other students narrate happier stories: loving parents who sacrificed for their well-being; thick networks of caring friends; sports successes and sports failures that catalyzed personal growth; travel to other regions of the country or to other countries, from which they returned chastened by what they had so casually considered themselves entitled to; video game rivalries; books that absorbed them, transported them so completely into a clock-frozen now that they forgot they held the book in their hands; religious belief that guided and inspired, or wavered and was abandoned; sudden moments of transcendence, of insight, of understanding—unmediated moments fully recognized as suffused with meaning.
Students have lives, lives that extend far beyond the classroom we occupy and its cabined agenda of thesis and support, of fluid expression and patterns of organization, of spelling and comma splices, of standard usage and the MLA documentation system. Students have experiences, intense and textured, that echo in the world if I am attentive enough to listen rather than hear. In their writing they struggle to give their lives language, to learn how to make events signify, to make the world intelligible, to enflesh it, give it a pulse, make in breathe in synchronicity with their need to understand it, grasp it, make it reveal itself. “Listen,” I must continually remind myself; “pay attention.” I must remember that I know that they have lives and purposes and intentions with values firmly sutured to them, remember that my classroom world, so engrossing to me, so self-enclosed and self-evidently significant, so islanded in its disciplinary structure, is not their world, nor the much wider world of choice and contingency and contradiction they stand poised to enter.
Such remembering makes teachers both the students’ ally and the bearers of their discipline’s standards. Teachers do well, in other words, when they both affirm and challenge. The two are really the same gesture. We affirm and challenge when we recall that, etymologically, the word “educate” means to lead forth and bend our effort toward eliciting from students that which it is in them to be, drawing them out into the articulation of what had been inchoate, into the recognition of what had been shadowed and barely glimpsed. We affirm and challenge when we create learning environments where ideas can be inhabited rather than paid a cursory visit, where thoughts await deliberative judgment, where analyzing supplants merely witnessing, where students chronicle rather than observe only. We affirm and challenge when we dare students to know, double dare if necessary, when our expectation and assessment is based what constitutes excellence in a particular endeavor. We affirm and challenge when we recall that the simple words “you can do it” are the empowering grace of intellectual courage and perseverance. We affirm and challenge when we enable them to see that the world is made, not given, and because it is made it can be remade, that its conditions, as John Dewey says, can be adjusted, rather than their having to adjust themselves to fit those conditions.
Students have lives, lives they may wish to forsake completely or embrace fully, lives that are anguished or contented, lives that are stammers of doubt or shouts of confidence. They do not, should not, speak the grammar of our lives. Theirs has its own syntax, and we do well when, and only when, as Walt Whitman says, we “teach straying” from us so they can find the richness of its expression.
Showing posts with label Catholic education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Catholic education. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
The Sisters of St. Antoninus
I was born, raised, and educated in the bosom of the Catholic Church, which, of course, makes me wonder, not without a twinge of guilt, why I used the word “bosom.” My Catholic education began at St. Antoninus Elementary School. Antoninus was a Dominican who in the 15th century served as the bishop of Florence. “Antoninus” means “little Antony,” likely an affectionate reference to his making himself small through inordinate humility. The Dominican sisters who taught at St. Antoninus were, to those of us in their charge, anything but small. They were wholly other figures, talismanic and imposing, their power welded to the authority of the Church and consecrated by the gold wedding band emblemizing their marriage to Jesus, possessing, so we thought, a bionic capacity for inducing in us the humility characteristic of the school’s namesake.
We were certain the sisters conspired nightly in their convent to devise the means necessary to liberate our natural inclinations to reduce all things to the small, tight circle of our prepubescent egos. The evidence of a conspiracy was irrefutable.
· Every sister carried a ruler, at all times and in all places, for the sole purpose of bestowing quick, hard raps on hands that misheld a pencil, on heads that peered out the window instead of at a sheet of long-division problems, on rear ends that moved too fast or too slow in the myriad lines that formed our mode of travel to lunch, or the playground, or Mass, or the gymnasium for polio shots. The ruler measured our misbehaviors which, like the devil it was meant to expel, were legion.
· Every sister utilized the “claw,” a technique whereby, after a stealth approach from behind while we were daydreaming or conversing with a neighbor, she would bury her fingers, up to the first knuckle it seemed, in our shoulder’s trapezius muscle. I made the mistake of describing this technique, and its effectiveness, to my mother, who promptly adopted it. Thank goodness I kept silent about the ruler.
· Every sister sent miscreants to an indeterminate sentence of kneeling on the hard linoleum, back to the class, in a corner at the front of the room, an unrivalled method of penitence, symbolically mimicking the postural humility of Mass but without the comfort of the padded kneelers. Many years later, reading Agamemnon, I understood completely Aeschylus’s comment about “the pain of pain remembered.”
· Every sister warned us about Elvis and the blasphemous hips that threatened the legacy of natural moral law stretching back to St. Thomas Aquinas. I discounted this warning, however; my mother was an Elvis fan and bought all his records. I simply could not see my mother as a barbarian at the gate of Church teaching. Besides, my father preferred the sister-approved Perry Como and Bing Crosby, and to my mind that defused whatever anti-foundational potential my mother’s affection for Elvis harbored.
And every sister told us a version of the following story: “Boys and girls, one Sunday morning two boys decided to ship Mass and go fishing. Well, while standing to pull in a fish, their rowboat flipped over. Both boys drowned and went to Hell for all eternity because they committed a mortal sin. Do you know how long eternity is, boys and girls? Well, imagine that the Earth is a steel ball and every ten thousand years a bird flies by and brushes the ball with its wing. When that ball is worn down to the size of a BB, that’s only the beginning of eternity.” At first, aghast and dumfounded, we were silent; then, as the sheer enormity of what the sister had told us began to slip-stream into our imaginations, we cried. We wailed with a ballistic ferocity that undoubtedly rivaled that of the Enfield, Connecticut, congregants who listened with mounting horror to Jonathan Edwards’ description of sinners in the hands of an angry God being dangled over the gaping mouth of hell. The sister’s story was a subtle as molten lava, but it achieved its purpose. In an economy of saving souls, a glimpse of sin’s dark energy often pays the bills.
It occurs to me now that perhaps that glimpse was underpriced. To say the sisters were flinty disciplinarians compliments both flint and discipline. We did not fear them necessarily nor consider them inhumane; after all, they were married to Jesus, who, to our minds, would not countenance gratuitous cruelty in his spouses. No, grievances did not fester. Discontent did not simmer. Rather, we considered them obstacles, stalwart in their effort to bring order to the architecture of our id-addled prepubescent beings. They issued a summons to a beyondness, to a beckoning world that did not take our impatient desire for instant gratification as its measure, that did not operate on the principle that each of our impulses should be nanoseconds from satisfaction. We were children, not yet ready to put away childish ways. We did not understand, had no context for understanding, that they hurled themselves against the rock-hard obduracy of kid nature. Living healthily on a steady diet of frappes and kettle corn would have carried a higher probability of success. Only later, as adults, seeing other adults who had not put away childish ways, did the necessity of their Thermopylaen labor become apparent. Only later did I see that the management of desire they attempted to foster through stricture gave us an immanent apprehension of ethics, the principles of deportment, self-command, and a realization of consequences, by which social relations are regulated. Only later, when I was ready for it, was the sisters’ lesson learned.
One winter day, like Shakespeare’s schoolboy with my “satchel and shining morning face, creeping like a snail” from the bus drop off to school, I noticed a “snow sister” in the yard in front of the sisters’ convent. It was a bust, actually, and everything about it was exquisitely sharp and detailed—every fold in the hood and scapula, every bead in the rosary hung from the neck, the crucifix in place directly over the heart—everything except the face. It was a nonface, really, a vague gesture toward a face, a non-individuated abstraction meant only to embody the garments that signified the sisters’s consecration to what they took to be who they were and what they did. Even I, for whom the Hardy Boys books constituted the height of aesthetic achievement, recognized the loving application of artistic skill the bust exhibited. Only years later, however, living in a culture of undiluted self-absorption, did I tag it with meaning. It was a self unselfed to assume the larger self of sisterhood, or, perhaps better, a self reselfed as icon but not symbol, for that bust did not represent something else, it was the something else, the totalizing experience of being a Dominican sister, the continual reverence and humility that emblemizes their mindfulness of their lives’ moral context, of their living before the face of God. In his book Integral Spirituality, Ken Wilber describes such a context as “something before which surrender and devotion and submission and gratitude are the only appropriate responses.” All Dominican religious have the initials O.P. after their name, an abbreviation for Order of Preachers. “What see’st thou else,” Prospero asks Miranda in Shakespeare’s The Tempest. The “else” I now see is that the snow bust the sisters of St. Antoninus sculpted preached. I’ve grown up, put away childish ways, fallen away from the Catholic Church. Still, though, the sisters of St. Antoninus are imposing, large in having made themselves small.
Times change. Religious callings have diminished. The Dominican sisters no longer teach at St. Antoninus, replaced by lay teachers. Many of the sisters no longer wear habits. They live in apartments rather than convents. But last winter, after a snowfall, I suddenly wondered if a group of sisters somewhere made a snow sister. And, if they did, did it have a face a habit? Did it have a face?
We were certain the sisters conspired nightly in their convent to devise the means necessary to liberate our natural inclinations to reduce all things to the small, tight circle of our prepubescent egos. The evidence of a conspiracy was irrefutable.
· Every sister carried a ruler, at all times and in all places, for the sole purpose of bestowing quick, hard raps on hands that misheld a pencil, on heads that peered out the window instead of at a sheet of long-division problems, on rear ends that moved too fast or too slow in the myriad lines that formed our mode of travel to lunch, or the playground, or Mass, or the gymnasium for polio shots. The ruler measured our misbehaviors which, like the devil it was meant to expel, were legion.
· Every sister utilized the “claw,” a technique whereby, after a stealth approach from behind while we were daydreaming or conversing with a neighbor, she would bury her fingers, up to the first knuckle it seemed, in our shoulder’s trapezius muscle. I made the mistake of describing this technique, and its effectiveness, to my mother, who promptly adopted it. Thank goodness I kept silent about the ruler.
· Every sister sent miscreants to an indeterminate sentence of kneeling on the hard linoleum, back to the class, in a corner at the front of the room, an unrivalled method of penitence, symbolically mimicking the postural humility of Mass but without the comfort of the padded kneelers. Many years later, reading Agamemnon, I understood completely Aeschylus’s comment about “the pain of pain remembered.”
· Every sister warned us about Elvis and the blasphemous hips that threatened the legacy of natural moral law stretching back to St. Thomas Aquinas. I discounted this warning, however; my mother was an Elvis fan and bought all his records. I simply could not see my mother as a barbarian at the gate of Church teaching. Besides, my father preferred the sister-approved Perry Como and Bing Crosby, and to my mind that defused whatever anti-foundational potential my mother’s affection for Elvis harbored.
And every sister told us a version of the following story: “Boys and girls, one Sunday morning two boys decided to ship Mass and go fishing. Well, while standing to pull in a fish, their rowboat flipped over. Both boys drowned and went to Hell for all eternity because they committed a mortal sin. Do you know how long eternity is, boys and girls? Well, imagine that the Earth is a steel ball and every ten thousand years a bird flies by and brushes the ball with its wing. When that ball is worn down to the size of a BB, that’s only the beginning of eternity.” At first, aghast and dumfounded, we were silent; then, as the sheer enormity of what the sister had told us began to slip-stream into our imaginations, we cried. We wailed with a ballistic ferocity that undoubtedly rivaled that of the Enfield, Connecticut, congregants who listened with mounting horror to Jonathan Edwards’ description of sinners in the hands of an angry God being dangled over the gaping mouth of hell. The sister’s story was a subtle as molten lava, but it achieved its purpose. In an economy of saving souls, a glimpse of sin’s dark energy often pays the bills.
It occurs to me now that perhaps that glimpse was underpriced. To say the sisters were flinty disciplinarians compliments both flint and discipline. We did not fear them necessarily nor consider them inhumane; after all, they were married to Jesus, who, to our minds, would not countenance gratuitous cruelty in his spouses. No, grievances did not fester. Discontent did not simmer. Rather, we considered them obstacles, stalwart in their effort to bring order to the architecture of our id-addled prepubescent beings. They issued a summons to a beyondness, to a beckoning world that did not take our impatient desire for instant gratification as its measure, that did not operate on the principle that each of our impulses should be nanoseconds from satisfaction. We were children, not yet ready to put away childish ways. We did not understand, had no context for understanding, that they hurled themselves against the rock-hard obduracy of kid nature. Living healthily on a steady diet of frappes and kettle corn would have carried a higher probability of success. Only later, as adults, seeing other adults who had not put away childish ways, did the necessity of their Thermopylaen labor become apparent. Only later did I see that the management of desire they attempted to foster through stricture gave us an immanent apprehension of ethics, the principles of deportment, self-command, and a realization of consequences, by which social relations are regulated. Only later, when I was ready for it, was the sisters’ lesson learned.
One winter day, like Shakespeare’s schoolboy with my “satchel and shining morning face, creeping like a snail” from the bus drop off to school, I noticed a “snow sister” in the yard in front of the sisters’ convent. It was a bust, actually, and everything about it was exquisitely sharp and detailed—every fold in the hood and scapula, every bead in the rosary hung from the neck, the crucifix in place directly over the heart—everything except the face. It was a nonface, really, a vague gesture toward a face, a non-individuated abstraction meant only to embody the garments that signified the sisters’s consecration to what they took to be who they were and what they did. Even I, for whom the Hardy Boys books constituted the height of aesthetic achievement, recognized the loving application of artistic skill the bust exhibited. Only years later, however, living in a culture of undiluted self-absorption, did I tag it with meaning. It was a self unselfed to assume the larger self of sisterhood, or, perhaps better, a self reselfed as icon but not symbol, for that bust did not represent something else, it was the something else, the totalizing experience of being a Dominican sister, the continual reverence and humility that emblemizes their mindfulness of their lives’ moral context, of their living before the face of God. In his book Integral Spirituality, Ken Wilber describes such a context as “something before which surrender and devotion and submission and gratitude are the only appropriate responses.” All Dominican religious have the initials O.P. after their name, an abbreviation for Order of Preachers. “What see’st thou else,” Prospero asks Miranda in Shakespeare’s The Tempest. The “else” I now see is that the snow bust the sisters of St. Antoninus sculpted preached. I’ve grown up, put away childish ways, fallen away from the Catholic Church. Still, though, the sisters of St. Antoninus are imposing, large in having made themselves small.
Times change. Religious callings have diminished. The Dominican sisters no longer teach at St. Antoninus, replaced by lay teachers. Many of the sisters no longer wear habits. They live in apartments rather than convents. But last winter, after a snowfall, I suddenly wondered if a group of sisters somewhere made a snow sister. And, if they did, did it have a face a habit? Did it have a face?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)