The
Ivory Tower is cold, I’ve been told. And, it is. Knowledge for sale.
People as discrete chunks for
analysis. But, we are not cold specimens nor coded anecdotes. If we objectify and fetishize each other and
our stories, we risk the danger and violence of not seeing each other as human beings. However, I have
learned to believe in people again – or, at least, certain people – when we took the risk of choosing love as our
hermeneutic, our lens, for not just our work, our relationships, our research, but our selves.
from A Love Note to Sisters in Struggle, Leah Sicat
If you put the phrase "love as a hermeneutic" into Google's search engine, what will result may surprise you. First, you'll find links to scripture and theological analyses of love particularly rooted in Judeo-Christian traditions; next, you'll find a bunch of folks, including Chela Sandoval and Gloria Anzaldúa, leaning towards the politically radical in their take on how to be in the world, how to care for one another, and on what really matters.
These seemingly strange bedfellows aren't quite as unfamiliar to one another as you might think, though--and that's a whole other blog post. Think, in part, of liberation theology; think also of pedagogical techniques from Freire to hooks and beyond for figuring out how to nurture one another's growth. More on that later.
For now, though, I wanted to point folks to the article that Leah Sicat posted on The Feminist Wire recently--here's the link again. Sicat is a doctoral student in education, and takes up the rawness of the struggle of scholars trying to break through the coldness of the Ivory Tower and get to what really matters--to aim for that hermeneutics of love. She says:
This piece is well worth the read for the way she's grappling with how to bring together a commitment to relationships and dealing with the power-and-hierarchy-ridden, fundamentally alienating framework of the academy. At least, that's what I think. What do you think?
love
charis
analysis. But, we are not cold specimens nor coded anecdotes. If we objectify and fetishize each other and
our stories, we risk the danger and violence of not seeing each other as human beings. However, I have
learned to believe in people again – or, at least, certain people – when we took the risk of choosing love as our
hermeneutic, our lens, for not just our work, our relationships, our research, but our selves.
from A Love Note to Sisters in Struggle, Leah Sicat
 |
| Gloria Anzaldúa: image found at http://thirdterm.wikidot.com/differential-consciousness |
These seemingly strange bedfellows aren't quite as unfamiliar to one another as you might think, though--and that's a whole other blog post. Think, in part, of liberation theology; think also of pedagogical techniques from Freire to hooks and beyond for figuring out how to nurture one another's growth. More on that later.
For now, though, I wanted to point folks to the article that Leah Sicat posted on The Feminist Wire recently--here's the link again. Sicat is a doctoral student in education, and takes up the rawness of the struggle of scholars trying to break through the coldness of the Ivory Tower and get to what really matters--to aim for that hermeneutics of love. She says:
I explore regenerative ideas and tools to uncover stories that have been
structurally and historically silenced by heteronormative,
misogynistic, and colonial narratives. As an education researcher-in-apprenticeship, part of this process includes reflecting
on what I value in relationships and how values ground my movements. The
move toward values was not only a step toward ethics but also
methodologies – ones that value voice over further violence and
fetishization.
This piece is well worth the read for the way she's grappling with how to bring together a commitment to relationships and dealing with the power-and-hierarchy-ridden, fundamentally alienating framework of the academy. At least, that's what I think. What do you think?
love
charis
