Columbus Sailed the Ocean Blue in 1492... (a reflection)

When asked to research, construct and lead a class in a college classroom I viewed it as a challenge to educate and inform rather than a challenge to lead. Leadership in all settings has never really been an issue for me but what I discovered in this project in particular is that power dynamics and presets can hinder education and information in a greater way than the lack of leadership itself. This understanding of power dynamics and hierarchies draws a direct correlation between similar dynamics in the texts we have read in class and the societies in which these texts where derived from. After completing this project I was both satisfied and dissatisfied. I think with any project when a goal is set there is always a possibility for failure. In this project in particular I viewed failure with an open mindset; failure is a space for improvement - a space for education and a space to inform.

For example, Anzaldua is struggling with a clear power dynamic of her society and other personal dynamics derived from her community, her family, and herself. In creating a rhetoric of resistance Anzaldua was seeking to create a rhetoric that resist but in resisting creates a new identity for herself and creates a space where new identities can be safely formed for others as well. Similar to how both Tupac Shakur and Fredric Douglas are both writing in spaces where conflicting dynamics and identities exist. Some dynamics differ in both Shakur’s and Douglas’s pieces because of the era and time both were writing in. Both Douglas and Shakur was similar to Anzaldua in creating a space where personal identity is being created and in that creation of personal identity it is creating a space where new identities can be accepted and infiltrated into society.

One of the points that my partner and I wanted to the class to understand was the link between Aunzaldua, Shakur, and Douglas – they were all crafting a new identity, and were all crafting a rhetoric of resistance. But in this instance and in many instances these rhetoricians (Anzaldua, Shakur, Douglas) messages can be easily overlooked or misunderstood either because of the genre they are writing or because of the reader’s personal dynamics that over-complicate their messages. That representation of misinterpretation of messages or overcomplicating messages is reflective of the reactions and discussion that developed and evolved during out class project. In many instances the discussion and the topic of discussion was not exactly what my partner and I had expected it to be, and in many instances were not as deep or meaningful as my partner and I wanted it to be- it was still a positive learning experience.

As the class discussion continued I began to realize that in many settings, in classrooms, or anywhere personal histories, ideologies, and prejudices can hinder teaching and education. One of the larger points of our project was to show the complexities and immensities of colonization. My partner and I presented the class with two texts both written almost a century apart and both writers writing after slavery ended. Even though Douglas and Shakur were a century apart their struggles with family, identity, power and literacy were all the same. Why? What are the implications of very little to no positive change in society for African Americans in America in 100 years? The United States and African Americans are products of colonization. The implications of colonization go far beyond conquering, killing and murdering a generation in order to colonize. Colonization is an act that has the ability to (and in this case did) infect, belittle, and dehumanize generations upon generations on human beings. Colonization is more then a history term; it is an act, an act that could potentially diminish cultures, races, and traditions. The act of colonization of the Americas supported and propelled Eurocentric views and ideologies worldwide. We wanted to challenge the class to think about how we got to where we are today? Have we really moved that far from the original views and ideologies implanted during colonization?

These points were central to our project and our goal. As we tried to unpack these ideas in class I felt that they were skipped over and misunderstood by many of the people in the class. The question for me isn’t why that happened – because I have seen it happen before in this class and other classes. It is fear or guilt. It is the same issue that in my opinion hinders Pratt’s ideas about “contact zones”. I truly find it hard to believe that there is a space where human being can leave their moral beliefs, ethical beliefs and life histories aside to talk in the present moment about a particular issue. That is one of the reasons why I have chose to move forward with the experiment about Pratt’s “contact zones”.

Overall I think the project was satisfactory - not because we got to all the points and ideas that we had hoped to discuss, but because I began to discover the roots to why it is hard to get to those points in public spaces. Is that a bad thing? No. I think that it is merely a reflection of society and the beings (humans) that operate within it. It is human nature to feel, to remember and to experience. To ask humans to walk into a space and to ask them hostile questions about race, gender, religion, sexual orientation how could one expect them not to feel, to reminisce, and to experience that moment?

The truth is that Columbus did sail the ocean blue in 1492. The forgotten truth is that he got lost, landed on the Americas, slaughter hundreds of Native Americans, then invited his friends to come and live with stolen humans from Africa treat them like animals and use the blood of there ancestors to fertilize the seeds of dehumanization for generations to come.

How can I expect a class to have meaningful conversation when they and the generations preceding them have been taught a misguided truth?