Friday, March 29, 2013
So I suppose this had to happen. My anthropological lens is seeing different Discourses. Gee's article really opened my eyes and gave a name to what I tried to call societies. Discourse is so much richer, because it includes all the values and non-verbal or intellectual manners in a group. Something I think about is family literacy. I think I've mentioned (possibly too much) that I have a blended family. My two older daughters are my husband's, and the two younger are mine. I spent six years alone after I lost my first husband. I thought of myself and my children as a kind of a triumverate. We created our own family Discourse, because we had no family for 900 miles. Over the years, I gave my children a different upbringing. They have knowledge of so much of history that many parents don't provide their children. Not necessarily the history in the books, but - I'm trying to put my finger on what to call it. They know who Ruby Keeler is. They can identify a Bob Fosse film. They can identify the movie with the phrase "what an ***hole" (Ghostbusters). They know what a 741 is (it's the dewey decimal number for humor under the old library system). They're computer literate (occupational hazard). They have their own political views and we have spirited discussions when the subject arises. They can become VERY spirited, but that's okay. Boscherts don't raise their voices. Lillemons do. And it IS a discourse. Tom (my husband) is very aware that there's a closeness between the three of us that's kind of different. I imprinted on my children and we have a Discourse that our older daughters aren't a part of. It's not anyone's fault, though. It's just what evolved because of our lives. Tom has become a member of our Discourse; he's the only father the children know. He's not 'like' us, but he has his place. And I'm aware that I have to modify our environment when all four children are with us (we try to vacation together every year). For years I saw the Discourse of my husband's family, but never had a name to put to it. I just knew I wasn't a "Boschert". Could I teach my older daughters the literacy of the triumverate? I don't know. I tried putting Bloom's Taxonomy to it. Could they remember it? Could they apply it? Could I analyze it? Some people just accept things the way they are. I have a tendency to analyze. So now I will be trying to remember the new taxonomy to look at what we learn. I've always used the old Bloom. To quote Holden Caufield, "So it goes."