A review of Sam Rocha‘s Tell Them Something Beautiful: Essays and ephemera.
By Ashenafi Alemu Aboye, EDST, UBC, email ashenafi.alemu@alumni.ubc.ca).
Tell Them Something Beautiful: Essays and ephemera is written by Dr. Samuel Rocha, a professor in the Department of Educational Studies. The book is a literary-philosophical deliberation on the author’s encounter, experiences, and views of life, and the reality of day-to-day life in North America. The book is organized into a forward, an introduction, and four parts namely, Diagnosis and Discontents, The Ordo Amoris, Teaching as Deschooling and Funk phenomenology, followed by a conclusion. It also has the author’s interview with journalist MAX LINDENMAN, a bibliography, and indices which span over 225 pages altogether. Literary experts often refer to the Death of the Author, in such and other instance, to leave the author unmentioned. In works like Tell Them Something Beautiful, to neglect the efforts of the author and the finite linguistic choices s/he has to make from infinite possibilities in language would only be to kill the author and authority. Hence, I mention the author and the work interchangeably and repeatedly in this evaluation of the work both for the sake of convenience as well as to acknowledge that it is not a purely literary work of art as mentioned earlier. However hard we try to avoid the author and his intentions as well as life experiences, there seems no escape from the authority of the author and hence we see Dr. Sam Rocha’s Religious Authority. Beyond issues in philosophy of education, interesting topics such as Catholicism also make part and parcel of the book.
The issues raised in this book present the life journeys and life encounters of the author ranging from stories of one’s parents to being a caring father, from being a graduate student to being a professor, among others. In this sense, the book also feels like a memoir for its craft as well as for its use of novelistic devices (Karr, 2015). The book feels more like a work of art, an imaginative product that integrates creativity and philosophy with real-life phenomena. In the book, readers will certainly come across a number of instances where the author creates, re-creates and co-creates his past phenomenologically. It is not, however, a mere creative work of art. It is rather an intellectual endeavor to address the intellectual (ex-post) responsibility of responding to the metaphysical demands(to use Rocha’s own words), of acknowledging intergenerational social injustices, and of finding one’s voice to make the world a better place. As an intellectual engagement in issues that concern our society, the book discusses crucial topics that have significantly impacted our day-to-day life ranging from gun violence to racism, from the failure of institutions to issues of solidarity and race, to mention but few. As a Phenomenologist, the author also critically reflects on brutal social phenomena and the phenomena that such phenomena leave our humanity into question. It is a philosophical deliberation of the author which is based on the philosophy of folk phenomenology but taking it a step further in a reflective critical way.
The beauty of the work begins with the title itself which mentions telling something beautiful. Moreover, the diction, the style of the author and effective use of antonyms and other features make the work memorable. It seems to me that the book is not actually telling something beautiful. Rather it is telling the ugly truth in a beautiful way. I learned this as I dived into the book where it says: “Truth-speaking…is impoverished unless it pays deference to beauty” “Truth spoken with total disregard to for beauty is rendered sterile. Sterile truth cannot bear fruit. It cannot love. Even these “truths” I have spoken here are null and void if they are not perceived as sufficiently beautiful”
Tell Them Something Beautiful remains in readers minds for its craft and literariness. For example, the book narrates the experience of the author, mentions his family and parents in various contexts from the way he grew up to the way he is helping his kids grow up intellectually as well. It uses the first person point of view to establish proximity with the reader which makes it feel like the reader is actually engaged in a genuine conversation and story hearing with the writer at the same plane of real-life situation than the imaginative fictional aspect of life.
Many critics argue that mixing memoir with the analysis is somehow tricky. To control one’s emotions and feelings and to limit your personal experiences and subjectivities so that the equally important analysis of events and reflections- be it philosophical or social-scientific- will not be overshadowed with your first-person points of view is mostly a challenge for writers. Dr. Rocha successfully achieved this in a divine proportion. He provides historically important facts and incidents to substantiate his arguments and advance his claims in many parts of the book. Effective use of extra-literary conditions such as historical figures and social incidents foregrounds the author’s phenomenological percept of the world and other day-to-day happenings surrounding us.
In the essays and ephemera, the school itself is depicted as something which couldn’t escape the ephemerality of its existence as an institution. It is evaluated in what it offers to its subjects or the evanescence or impermanence of thoughts and characters that are gained only temporarily. In his book Toward a History of Needs, Ivan Illich argued that schools trap children within a compulsory bureaucracy of ever “more subtle and more pervasive social control”. Well, it is much better not to send your kids to school these days than have the news of the active shooter especially if you are living south of the border. It makes sense for responsible citizens at this “irresponsible time” (Kohan, 2018) that we need to de-school our society.
What makes the contribution of Dr. Rocha uniquely significant with regards to De-schooling is the fact that he came up with a de-schooling framework that lays the basis for those who are interested to practice it. In this sense, it is possible to argue that Tell Them Something Beautiful presents an alternative phenomenological praxis to what some writers once perceived as a mere intellectual exercise (Jandric, 2014). What is more interesting is, however, the explanations given with real-life evidence that Dr. Rocha shares with readers about the implementation of de-schooling he practices at home to help his own kids educate themselves without going to school. I would like to pose a question about the title of the book. Would the title Tell Them Something Beautifully be more convenient? I was excited reading this book. I strongly recommend the book. It made me ask myself how to write a critique of this book beautifully so that its truth will not appear “sterile” [to use Rocha’s word] as a result of my own lack of skill. It is the strong side of the book that it has firmly instilled that question in me whether every of my writing is told beautifully or not.
Another strong side of the book is the fact that it presents readers with ideas that beautifully challenge the Western social imaginaries. Some examples from the book are the essays entitled White History Month, Black Messiah, Dead White Guys. The book is accessible/comprehendible for the humanist reader as well as the trained philosopher, for beginner readers as well as the experienced journalists. It is beautifully written in a language full of de-familiarization or what Russian formalists call estrangement. Tell Them Something Beautiful is not easy to identify as a book that belongs to a particular category or associate it with a particular theme. It is comprehensible but sometimes assumes a prior knowledge of a particular context. Its meaning is accessible for a beginner but is also elevated and sufficiently complicated for those who wish to engage in some thought experiment as well. It would certainly make for the taste of those who identify themselves as belonging somewhere in the middle of philosopher/intellectual- social critique, too.
In general, the book is an excellent reference to enlighten readers with current situations, to keep themselves up to date about some social issues and perspectives, how we could alternatively see and practice education, race relations as well as religion, among others. Thus, I recommend reading the book.
References
Illich, I. (1973). De-schooling society (p. 46). Harmondsworth, Middlesex.
Illich, I. (1978). Toward a history of needs. Pantheon.
Jandrić, P. (2014). Deschooling Virtuality, Open Review of Educational Research, 1(1), 84-98, DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2014.965193
Karr, M. (2015). The art of memoir. HarperCollins.
Kohan, W. (2018). “What is an Educator Responsible for? Some Questions for an Irresponsible Time”. Nexus Interdisciplinary Conference: Responsibility. University of British Columbia.
Rocha, S. D. (2017). Tell them something beautiful: Essays and ephemera. Eugene, Oregon: Cascade Books.
I was really interested in Dr. Sam Rocha presentations and readings because I am personally interested in alternative schools and the concept of unschooling. At first, I was a little bit destabilized by the readings because I am used to a different perception about unschooling which is more centred on learning than teaching. In regard of my past readings on the subjects, unschooling was more about creating spaces where learning can occur in a more autonomous and creative way. Although, teachers or facilitators have a key role in these situations because they can catalyze learning experience and help students to learn how to learn. Personally, my philosophy of education is more centred on my philosophy of learning. Learning is an act in which the learner realizes his own potential and can “step outside of it, to view it with fresh eyes, and thus to enrich our experience and enlarge our range of choice. Education introduces us to worlds we might otherwise never encounter; thereby reshaping our vision of the world we think we know.” (Osborne, 2009) It is a really personal act in which we need as a teacher to teach in such a personal way.
On another hand, I joined this following critic : “ The instrumental treatment of teachers as mere technicians shows that the schooling-industrial complex of today understands the danger of teaching.” (Rocha, 2017). Compared to informal education, formal education contains a large number of restrictions, such as conforming to learning objectives, a number of hours envisaged in the program and constraints posed by the establishment. We must deconstruct learning environments and especially the role of teachers and students. I want to be more a facilitator than a teacher for my students. In facts, students need to learn how to learn and experimental approaches will help them develop motivation and interest for school. I also have a background in environmental education that convinces me that using outdoor learning and place-based education approach is really crucial in our society . It allows students to create a connection between the school and the community surrounding it.
Chawla, L. (1998). Significant Life Experiences Revisited: a review of research on sources of environmental sensitivity. Environmental Education Research, 4(4), 369–382.
Osborne, K. (2009). Education and Schooling: A Relationship that can Never be taken for Granted. In Why Do We Educate? Renewing the Conversation.
Rocha, S. (2017). Teaching as deschooling (pp. 77-80); In Rocha, S. (2017). Tell them something beautiful: Essays and ephemera. Cascade Books
Sauvé, L. (2013). Au cœur des questions socio-écologiques : des savoirs à construire, des compétences à développer. Éducation Relative À L’environnement – Regards, Recherches, Réflexions, 11, 19–40.
Although I agree with the overall argument of your review, on making a comment on Rocha’s use of the “beautiful,” you said: ” It seems to me that the book is not actually telling something beautiful. Rather it is telling the ugly truth in a beautiful way”. It seems to me that you misunderstood how Rocha is using “beautiful”. When you contrast “beautiful” with “ugly truth,” you suggest an axiological understanding of beautiful, where the opposite of “beautiful” would be “ugly.” One could infere from your review that beauty for Rocha is a make-up for the ugliness of existence.
However, as Rocha says (in one of the citations you used): “Truth spoken with total disregard for beauty is rendered sterile. Sterile truth cannot bear fruit. It cannot love. Even these “truths” I have spoken here are null and void if they are not perceived as sufficiently beautiful.” Rocha is not opposing the beautiful to ugliness. Rather, he is opposing the beautiful to the sterile. It is not an axiological claim, it is a claim on Form. Beautiful for Rocha is not revealed in good, but rather as form. In this sense even the ugliness of things is redeemed by a beautiful form, which seems to be the challenge of the book. It is impossible for something to be ugly if perceived beautiful in the way it is told.
Mateus, thank you for this very enlightening comment on the review of Rocha’s Tell Them Something Beautiful. It might appear that I fall prone to the understanding of truth as a binary for ugliness. I somehow agree with you. However, the underlying semantic impression is axiological in the sense that I consider it as a sort of value and value judgment from a particular context dominated by the byproducts of extension of colonial practices. The truth is told in a way that the addressee will not hesitate to swallow the facts and the dehumanizing social practices and colonial dominations that are existing to date. And that, I believe is what Rocha is telling us. If you agree that “the ugliness of things is redeemed by a beautiful form”, as you put it above, then there is that essence of ugliness in what Rocha is telling beautifully. But, I understand that Rocha is polite and considerate not to use blunt language. Thus, the thought of telling truth beautifully even when it is not beautiful flares up from these corners of thought.
My dear friend, debating with you is always interesting. I disagree with you that there is an “essence of ugliness”. Let’s remember that Rocha used the word “sterile” to describe a truth told in a not beautiful way. Therefore, there is no “ugliness.” What might exist behind the sterile is the nothing, the absence of beauty. I believe he is playing with the Augustinian understanding of evil (absence of good), and applying its frame to think beauty (again, form). We cannot forget that in the introduction, Rocha claims his book is “theological in vision and scope.” Thus, if there is one thing this book does not lack are those theological references, sometimes explicit, sometimes between the lines. You do acknowledge Rocha’s authority in Catholicism earlier in your review, but I would like to clarify that I believe your reading of his use of “Beauty” is too secular.