HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
May 14, 2004 Paulo Freire deals with many issues of the rituals of repression, oppression and communication in his Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and relates these concepts to education and culture in a way which is defined by several important characteristics. One of these characteristics is the theory of a culture of silence which keeps the oppressed from knowing how to deal with reality in terms of knowledge, as this knowledge is perpetuated and sanctioned by their oppressors. The culture of silence is attributed by Freire to inhabitants of colonial and arguably ex-colonial countries who are alienated and oppressed by an educational system that is not based on true communication, but rather the perpetuation of a system of codified oppression which rewards the oppressor and silences the multitude. The inherence of this situation is challenged by the author, who proposes that those educated within the oppressive culture are alienated from the majority of their compatriots, but can come to question the nature by which they were taught and re-learn skills of cultural dialogue which they have lost in the process. This will in turn allow them to listen to the oppressed rather than pretending to listen to them without respecting, or feeling themselves in a position of superiority towards, what is being said. Although this is posited as a way in which to break the culture of silence and facilitate greater dialogue in which both sides are attentive, the author also focuses on the culture of silence itself and the insidious ways in which it operates. In this system, the oppressor controls the oppressed by organizing dialogue that is one-sided and representative only of the oppressor’s point of view. The culture of silence emerges when this one-sided dialogue effectively silences the people and controls the very words which they are able to use through education, or, as the author calls it, banking education. The culture of silence is not literal; the people are able to respond, but they are not able to respond critically because they are caught in the strictures of the lopsided power system. This in turn affects their respective self-concepts negatively and contributes to an image of inferiority that is created and perpetuated by the oppressor. This makes dialogue almost impossible. The culture of silence as it is discussed in Freire’s work revolves around the poor and dispossessed, and affects them adversely from the perspective of the educational system that perpetuates the culture of silence. It is a tool of the oppressor to keep the population in line and encourages them not to question the nature of their situation or the reality of their circumstances. It is an imposition of the culture of the oppressor onto an oppressed people, who, through this perspective, are seen to be incapable of acquiring true knowledge of their situation through experience or dedication, and need the culture of the oppressor to tell them who they are. Therefore the culture of silence is a manifestation of the oppressor that is visited upon the oppressed. This downtrodden section of society is seen to be ignorant or lazy by the oppressor, who must elucidate them as to the true acquisition of knowledge. What is expected from this exchange is silent gratitude in which the oppressor is not challenged or brought to task for the basic inequality of their perspective. The oppressed are dominated by the majority culture on all levels, and the culture of silence allows this domination to continue in economic, social, and political ways through indoctrination rather than education. This indoctrination assures that the people will not question their situation, and rather will strive to be a part of the oppressive culture themselves, or fall before it in terms of ravaged self-concept and manufactured identity. The culture of silence is perpetuated in many ways by a system of paternalism which seeks to provide authority that is internalized and spread by indoctrinates of the oppressive system. This type of authority is then used to downplay the relevance and importance of voices that may contest the system of oppression by dominating a dialogue that is one-sided. Paternalism is represented by a sort of authority that is used by the oppressive system through those educated within it to deny true dialogue among men and women, according to Freire. The professionalism that is associated with the successful internalization of the paternalistic system is used against the oppressed, sometimes unconsciously but always directly, to deny the validity of their attempts at creating a dialogue. This system of paternalist authority also goes a long way to perpetuate a system of silence that is ingrained in the educational process and then carried through to reality, often unthinkingly, in a way that is seen to be inherently anti-dialogical. As Freire (2002) states, This expands the victimization of the culture of silence in an increasing cycle of miseducation and the application of supposed earned authority and superiority as a way of keeping the oppressed people down, de-legitimizing their potential to engage in dialog and have a voice that is not given to them as a tool of oppression through educational and professional indoctrination. The people are thus not encouraged or readied to know and respond to reality, and instead are subjugated in a situation in which critical awareness of their culture is almost impossible. The culture of silence that results from this situation is further perpetuated by the educational systems which seek to maintain its predominant status in the culture at large. Freire states that educational systems that are based on paternalist authority do not strive to enhance people’s knowledge, but rather to limit it to abstractions that do not have anything to do with their direct reality and experiences. From this perspective, educational systems seek to cull and separate rather than unite and communicate. Therefore, the culture of silence is maintained, as the alienation that ensues further separates the oppressed people from the option of having a voice or a place in dialog that is not prescribed and essentially limited to a one-sided conversation. This is not true communication, which exists when channels are opened and both sides are able to express ideas that have to do with their respective realities. This is seen by the author to be contrary to the true purpose of the colonial or ex-colonial educational system, which seems to be to avoid the praxis that occurs when communication and action are united in terms of dialog. Direct action is wanted, instead of the separation and alienation that are propagated by the culture of silence. Freire argues that knowledge is not something that is to be poured from one container to a sort of metaphorical vessel and repeated accurately; rather, it is brought about in terms of stimuli that involve concrete reality instead of abstracted automation. Knowledge is more about using what is around one to invent and re-invent than it is about repetition and rote indoctrination. Neither is knowledge a secure process that can be separated from the reality which it involves inherently. Knowledge is the result of an individual’s inquiry into the world around them, and the culture of silence limits this inquiry severely. From the author’s perspective, acquiring knowledge is separated from the educational system of the colonial or ex-colonial nation that is perpetuating social, economic, and political inequality through is rituals and misinformation. The acquisition of knowledge is not seen to lead to a culture of silence, but the perpetuation of the colonial educational system is seen to lead to a vicious cycle in which the oppressed are denied a voice or the possibility of dialogue. Acquiring knowledge is an active process in which a person is in the world as well as with it. This is a stark contrast to the passivity of the classroom dynamic, in which the teacher is the fount of knowledge and the students are nothing but receptacles. Rather than by force and inculcation, knowledge is pursued in its true form through acts of love, according to the author, and it is this love that unites and makes people capable of having a true dialogue. Knowledge does not happen in a vacuum; it happens through an interpersonal process that takes in an individual’s direct reality and their interactions with others. In what the author calls the banking system of education, this process is perverted, since one side is always ignorant according to the other, and must be filled with knowledge like an empty vessel. This creates role contradiction between students and teachers, where the teacher is the thinker and the student is the object to be crafted or molded. In this type of passive education, students are encouraged to listen rather than talk, and this contributes greatly to the overall culture of silence. It is a situation that is seen by the author to be basically false and unbalanced. “Human existence cannot be silent, nor can it be nourished by false words, but only by true words, with which men and women transform the world. To exist, humanly, is to name the world, to change it… Human beings are not built in silence, but in word, in work, in action-reflection” (Freire, 2002, p. 88). This action and reflection is seen to be missing from the banking system of education, which perpetuates the culture of silence by asking students not to speak, but rather to listen attentively and absorb the so-called knowledge of their superiors. In this system of education which seeks to maintain and perpetuate the culture of silence, teachers provide their students with the illusion of action. This action or praxis is illusory in this respect because the students are not engaging in action of their own, but rather in the action of the teacher. The author states that schools are centered around teachers as subjects and students as objects, and that in this system education and freedom are seen to be diametrically opposed. Education is not about freedom, even though it should be: in this model, it is about domination and the enforcement of cultural silence. “Without dialogue there is no communication, and without communication there can be no true education. Education which is able to resolve the contradiction between teacher and student takes place in a situation in which both address their act of cognition” (Freire, 2002, p. 93). Humanity is not isolated and abstract, and the world is not something that is separated and hidden from people. The educational system needs to focus on people in consideration to their relations with the world to begin to be effective rather than counter-productive. Overall, the situation of banking education is indicative of one in which the culture of silence is enforced: relationships are forged between those who would like to name the world according their cultural perceptions and paternalistic values (teachers) and those who are denied their own right to name the world at all (students). Freire’s solution to this culture of silence and repressed rights lies in the praxis between words and actions. The author advocates activism in response to the culture of silence, which must be broken for any sort of dialogue that is productive to occur, as it is based on the power of the word that is being held from the multitude. “Were it not possible to dialogue with the people before power is taken, because they have no experience with dialogue, neither would it be possible for the people to come to power, for they are equally inexperienced in the use of power” (Freire, 2002, p. 137). So-called promoters of the people must be correct in their self-concept, and make sure that they are willing to listen as well as speak. If they have been bank-educated, they must realize the invasion that has occurred personally and react against it for true communication to take root. “Dialogue with the people is neither a concession nor a gift, much less a tactic to be used for domination” (Freire, 2002, p. 137). Eventually, the system can be questioned in terms of new rule. “The people must find themselves in the emerging leaders, and the latter must find themselves in the people” (Friere, 2002, p. 163). At this point, the culture of silence begins to be broken and dialogue can flourish. In summary, the culture of silence is something in Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed that acts as an insidious and oppressive force and is advocated by paternalism and banking educational systems. In this culture, the oppressed is denied a part in dialogue and knowledge, and instead is fed its own image and asked to silently listen to the knowledge of the oppressor. A solution only becomes possible when knowledge is separated from the educational system and true communication occurs. BIBLIOGRAPHY Freire, Paulo (2002). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Myra Bergman Ramos, trans. New York: Continuum. ------------ About the author: Daniel Brenner is a poet and independent contractor who lives in Jersey City, NJ. He was finalist for the Penumbra Prize in 2002. This is his tianth-thousanth paid review, but the first appearing under his own name. Email: brennerdan@hotmail.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
