Subheadings: Marginality, Essentialism, Translation, Love
The marginalized know more about the group, culture or society that keeps them far from the center than can members of that center know about the margins. Yet neither margin nor center exists without the other. There is an infusion of each in the oter. This idea is reffered to as
currere of marginality.It is both a particular approach to autobiography focussed on marginality, and a curriculum of marginality.
This curriculum of marginality is about excavating excluded stories. Excluding them in favor of happy or safe stories leads to apathy and violence. Distinguish social marginality from individual marginality without getting stuck in a language of oppositions, of polarities. What Edgerton calls the interactive layer of marginality is sometimes a dialectical synthesis of social/individual or even larger, social/community/individual, and sometimes a deconstruction of those layers, which undermines claims to a "positive" stable identity for either self or other, margin or center.
Dialectical thinking is dependent on a notion of structure which presupposes a center of meaning of some sort. A dialectical approach depends on conceptualization as direct connection to the real, thus giving rise to the possibiolity for synthesis or incorporation. it is a movement between concepts in search of the knowable. Dialectical thinking is predicated on an "ordered structure."
Deconstruction is based in rereadings--the refusal of final meaning (or synthesis). It proceeds in search of a space between concepts--a marking of the unknowable. Solutions are perpetually deferred. The value of deconstruction over dialectics is its self-conscious recognition of the ordered structure and the way in which the structure itself produces, necessarily, victims. Possibilities and visions for processes/movements capable of minimizing violence and victimization seem most plausible through an awareness that works to keep power and meaning in motion.
Freire operates through dialectical thinking in his approach to the oppressed (marginalized) and thus to identity in that he believes that only the oppressed can understand the full significance of oppression, and are the only ones who'll have the vision and strength to eliminate it.
Encounters between marginalized people and their oppressors involve "differences between" and require one-way translation (translation with a master). Those that take place without a master (within a community) can set cultural power in motion.
Individual margins are encounters across "differences within" oneself, sometimes surprising the self. A reading that sets up the conditions for a knowledge-wthin-difference would proceed through some degree of awareness regarding collective and individual histoories. These readings, such as autobiographies, can be attempts at identity formation.
It has has to do with the necessity of coming to terms with difference and otherness...difference between margin and center. A society that values learning listens to its margins. This puts margins in a double bind because they must function within a cultural memory that is not their own. The meaning of "I am this" changes completely when responded to as "You are that."
Essentialism, on the other hand, depends on who is utilizing it, how it is deployed, and where its effects are concentrated. An example is the legal definitions of race. (Susie Phipps in Louisiana, 1982.) Resisting from the margins, through literature and art, gives us significance.
Translation and Tradition
Edgerton goes on to discuss different definitions of translation that go beyond the literal, everything from somatic, to culturual, to historic, to interdisciplinary, to notions of transformation rather than translation. Translation can occur across layers of marginality ("autoethnography" of Z.N. Hurston). In a situation of dominance, the cultural translation is all one-way with severe penalties for those who cease to adapt to the demands of the dominant group.
Tradition, when translated, is rearticulated, reinterpreted, reterritorialized. Edgerton's theory of marginality insists on the possibility for dynamic self-creatiion for the margins through translation and love. Communication and translation are exercised in the attempt to eliminate the noise of otherness. For translation to be a two-way process, local historical circumstances (relations among cultural groups of a place) have to be excavated and acknowledged.
Love in the Margins
Love is the solution but is no solution because it resists the framework a "solution" requires. Love is also about listening, a marginalized part of language. "Feminine" conceptionm of love is marginalized in philosophical literature. Edgerton defines a feminine conception of love as not hierarchalizing, artifically splitting agape and eros mind and body, spirituality and sexuality.
Agape, self-less love considered highest by Christian {male} theology. Eros, physical, romantic, etc.. (Glad I was never Christian). Agape, love of god to mortals, Platonic, Freudian. "Male" definitions of love always this duality, hierarchy. Mind and body...St. Augustine and Plato wrote women were all body and men all mind.
The displacement or deconstruction of hierarchical love is found in the idea of transference love, a pedogogical situation. It is the prerequisitie for translation without a master, a necessary condition for pedagogy. Transference is love directed toward knowledge. Learning and love are deferred.
Another kind of love is eco-erosic...love of the land, the erarth, all people and living things without exclusivity. This is the love we should bring as teachers. (Makes me think, disconnectedly, of Crowley's "Love is the law. Love under will.")
Conclusion:
A femine/feminist standpoint is more capapble of displacing three hierarchicalized oppositions (center/margin, mind/body, agape/eros) than is a standpoint at the center. Encounters between cultures are what constitutes the very notion of culture, and the results of these encounters are manifested in regionally particularistic forms. (These words like "particularistic" and "problematization" are killing me.)
Nonsynchrony refers to complex dealings with
differences between, an example being one's racial interests coming into conflict with one's gendered issues. Readings of
differences within and their interactions with
differences between are crucial to development of cultural theories that do not disarticulate radical minority and feminist concerns.