In Brandt's introduction to her book she mentioned that a sponsor of literacy does more than just help another person, he/she can also help him/herself. This got my thinking about class I took last semester, English 443 The English Renaissance. We talked a lot about the patronage system, how rich lords and ladies would sponsor writers so that the writer could write and not have to worry about living expenses. This created better writing and a thriving literacy environment, which we can all agree is good for the writers. The sponsors benefited because the writers would dedicate their work to them, in these long complimentary poems at the beginning of their work. These poems were usually slightly ridiculous because each writer was trying to out-compliment their sponsor. So one writer would write that his sponsor was the most beautiful woman (sponsors of art were often woman) in all of England, another writer would say that his sponsor was the most beautiful in all the world, and another writer would say that his sponsor rivaled the gods in her beauty. Each writer wanted to portray their sponsor or patron as the best so that person would continue to sponsor him. From this you can also see a pitfall, these poems were pretty bad sometimes. Writers felt so pressured by the sponsors to write something great and complimentary that the actual writing was poor or too weighed down by praise (that doesn't always seem sincere) to be good.
I think that some of these pitfalls can be applied to us today. I know that in some of my papers I wanted very much to please a teacher or parent (my sponsors) that the paper ended up falling flat. Or sometimes I would read a book just because I thought it was the book that I thought my sponsors would want me to read, but I wouldn't really be taking anything from the book, just reading it for appearances. Both of these result in poor literacy. The paper didn't display those aspects of writing that it should of, and there was absolutely no analysis or understanding that went along with my reading of the book (or really even appreciation).
Yes, it is good to have someone that is pushing you to read and write at your best level, someone who encourages you. But we can put so much weight in what these sponsors think that it can negatively effect literacy, I think.
Close Reading Phillis Wheatly with Poetry in America—Resources for Educators
-
The director and host of PBS’s Poetry in America, Elisa New, joined NCTE in
honor of National Poetry Month. She …
The post Close Reading Phillis Wheatly ...
1 day ago
1 comment:
Sponsors sometimes thrive on competition. I did a lot of what you did about writing to please and also reading to please. Literacy and the way we use it has turned into something that makes you of a higher status. Sponsors are worried about what your performance will do to them. Rather, how it will effect them in the long run. They try to push students sometimes too far and it really only hurts the student. Sponsors need to be more aware of the student and their needs. If you want a student to learn and grow push them in the right direction for their own well being and not yours.
I understand that with testing and what not it makes Sponsors give more of a push. Sponsors do put too much pressure on students and sometimes students can't handle that pressure. I think that's why we hold dear to our hearts, the Sponsors that held a positive motivation we needed for that extra push. They are hard to find but once we encounter them we can grow and learn. For example, I don't need a teacher to tell me to use big words or to make my paper more complex. Instead, I had a teacher who told me that I didn't need to use big words to make the paper my best. She told me that sentence structure and making sure my ideas were presented as clearly as possible made the paper the best it could be. I ended up getting a really good grade because she was just that extra push I needed.
Post a Comment