I am writing this in the middle of February 2023, Black History Month. As we have noticed year after year, the proliferation of inspiring quotes from Martin Luther King Jr. denotes the celebration of Black History Month, and the demand for visibility of Black scholars, writers, artists, thinkers, and doers rises, even after the 2020 “unprecedented reckonings” that had promised change. Such hypervisibility during one month of the year acts as signposts, pointing towards, if not attempts at structural change, at least obliging the understanding that visibility is one step towards thinking about that change.
In the higher education industry, Audre Lorde’s quotes and visage used in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion materials echo the use of Martin Luther King Jr. during Black History Month. Her speech at the Second Sex Conference in October 29, 1979 , “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House” and is often cited in speeches, posts, and texts. But what is the house? And what are the tools? And has her sharp, smart commentary of the gaps within feminism, become a tool in itself? Honoring the quote requires the context of her ideas, as visibility for visibility’s sake is simply decorating the Master’s House.
Audre Lorde’s comments during “The Personal and the Political” panel is full of quotable sentences, as she calls for a deeper look at what equality looks like. Prior to that famous sentence, she clearly states, “It is learning how to take our differences and make them strengths.” Namely, she states how differences are a site of power and political knowledge, and that they should be welcomed, understood, and seen as related to each other, while also urging those attending the conference to understand how de-radicalized identity politics continues the structures of oppression that so many have been fighting against. Difference can be a strength, while division is a tool. The house? The patriarchy - a structure of power.
These are the pertinent questions: What are the tools? What is the house? In higher ed, we often think about The Institution as the house. Are they tools or are they the house? In an Inside Higher Ed column arguing against the use of the GRE, Audre Lorde is cited to have reminded us about the master’s tools dismantling the master’s house. Upon first read, the tools seem to be standardized testing, the house, higher education institutions. And while the author, Michael Hunt, points out how the GRE is inequitable, one could assume that marginalized students need equal access to the resources that might help their GRE scores. Hunt points towards holistic admission, and calls for radical approaches to selecting graduate students. Do we, in this scenario, actually want to keep the house?
While understanding the house as a metaphor for the institution is absolutely valid, I do think it’s important to remember what house Audre Lorde was calling out. Her words were not just about representation within higher education, where she was denoted as visibility for Black lesbians, or Black women, or lesbians. Her call to action is a politicized representation, a push against patriarchy and homophobia, and an ask for intentional understanding of difference to combat racist patriarchy. Often our calls for representation loses that politicized part — visibility, even as a difficult accomplishment in itself, is not the easy answer. Changing the game does not always involve winning the game.
Sofia Y. Leung and Jorge R. López-McKnight point out the tools in their conclusion of Knowledge Justice.
We can push for BIPOC knowledge without invalidating or rejecting other knowledge(s) or considering it less valuable in order to make our own knowledge more important. To do so would not only be using the master’s tools (Lorde 2007), but also lead to fatigue in the long run. As we are committed to structurally transforming LIS to be more just, we must continue toward liberation for and with BIPOC by interrupting how White Supremacy continues to construct knowledge…(320).
That is, the house is white supremacy, the tools, division in thinking one form of knowledge is better than another (one right way, a white supremacy characteristic). This does bring criticality in our citations, a troubled understanding of how LIS practitioners validate knowledge and uphold our own practices and politics of citation. In a cursory (not thorough at all!) search through Springshare’s community forums, a few LibGuides pop up with citing Audre Lorde’s particular quote. Some used the quote as simply a standalone quote in the book circles that came out of the summer of 2020 (“Is Everyone Really Equal? Book Discussion Series” and Session 1 Questions: Foreword thru Chapter 3 - Actions Speak Louder) while others cite a collection of her work as a part of a reference list in anti-racist resources. Of course Audre Lorde’s work should be cited, but I often wonder at the citation in reactionary, ‘justice focused’ resources. What are we saying are the tools? What is the house?
In that fall of 1979 in New York University, Lorde ends her comments partly with “I urge each one of us here to reach down into that deep place of knowledge inside herself and touch that terror and loathing of any difference that lives there.” That call for self reflection - not just outside signposting, but internal reflection - is important, especially in our own politics of citation. Often learning about oppression comes with a deep unsettled feeling of uncertainty, a crisis of, how can we see anything except for these walls? Fighting against oppression, even when our practice begins as a thought provoking prompt, we have to be clear what we are saying the house is, what are the tools, and if the intent is actually to dismantle the house. Sometimes we are not, and that is okay. There are other spaces and places outside of a house.
No comments:
Post a Comment