Reply to comment

Reading the last chapter of Pedagogy of the Oppressed made me think about the questions that we asked last week relating to disseminating information, but also good intentions going wrong. Last week, I spoke with my group about how the oppressed can liberate themselves without access to the information that leads to wanting this. I wondered if it was appropriate for an outside person to come to “impart knowledge’ on other people without having real knowledge of their experience. Friere seems to answer this by telling us that the work must be achieved together, through questioning and curiosity.  By noting the importance of activism and verbalism/thinking, he argues that one that cannot successfully lead to a revolution without the other. In a way it seem similar to the binary of oppressed/oppressor, although I agree with my classmates in saying that the lines are perhaps not so clearly defined. In this instance for example, someone with privilege from one sphere can bring this knowledge to someone with privilege in another sphere, bringing reflection and action together to inform praxis.

The chapter also reminded of the many times in which good intentions can go wrong, which I think Friere warns us about in his book, specifically with “leaders.” As leaders of a revolution, he notes, they must be careful not to replicate the same oppressive power structures that lead to the revolution in the first place, mistaking organization for oppression. I think this point is very interesting especially as we think about our roles after leaving Bryn Mawr, how can we ensure that this new knowledge does not get in the way of praxis, which I assume is our ultimate goal? How is it that we can stop thinking about teaching or volunteering, or public service not as giving back to “underserved communities” but rather to the world and ourselves? Thinking about answering this question with Friere’s point in mind that the oppressors are also constrained by the current system of oppression?