Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
DOI 10.1007/s11256-013-0250-9
Critical Race Theory, Hip Hop, and Huck Finn:
Narrative Inquiry in a High School English Classroom
Jennifer L. Martin
Published online: 19 June 2013
Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013
Abstract This study explores the impact of reading Huckleberry Finn through the
lens of critical race theory for both teacher and students in a racially diverse urban
high school environment. The teacher/researcher used narrative inquiry and creative
non-fiction to examine student language usage, white privilege (including her own),
and student reaction to the novel in a collaborative qualitative study. Major findings
include distinct differences between students of color and white students in their
level of teacher trust and their views on reclamation.
Keywords Critical race theory Critical race pedagogy Narrative research Huck Finn
Missing a few consecutive days because of a conference during the
Huckleberry Finn unit was one of the worst teaching decisions of my career.
Teaching this novel resides among my most difficult and dangerous classroom
memories. A complex text, it is one I am not sure is appropriate for tenth grade
as our district curriculum requires. The ‘‘N’’ word appears 219 times and
although this is a historical text pointing out the ubiquity of racism, I can feel
some of my students cringing each time they hear the word. I felt a little piece
of Josiah, an African-American male, disappearing—219 times. Some of the
difficulty with the language is because one cannot dismiss the user of the ‘‘N’’
word as a racist. Reading a novel such as To Kill a Mockingbird is much
simpler. One can easily explain the use of the ‘‘N’’ word in the novel by
dismissing the character that uses it as racist and ignorant. Not so with Twain.
And this is the point. Getting students to examine the text in this way is
difficult, as it is for them to separate the writer from the ideas conveyed, as it
J. L. Martin (&)
Department of Education, University of Mount Union, Alliance, OH 44601, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
245
was to get Josiah to understand that when he made fun of other students based
upon how dark their skin was that the implication was ‘‘light, so close to
white, is right.’’ My students established that some people have access to the
‘‘N’’ word and others do not. A substitute erased weeks of work and struggle
in a moment when she entered the classroom toward the end of our reading of
the novel. She informed my students that Huck Finn was a racist text banned
in the U. S. She stated that she would neither read this text to them nor would
have it read in her presence, and that she would be contacting the Board of
Education later that day to report me. She punctuated her argument with,
‘‘Your teacher is white, right?’’
A Teacher’s Purpose
This paper tells one story of one classroom, illustrating how race still does much to
measure the distance between people and their experiences. The story begins with
my idea, as teacher, to problematize the traditional canonized texts depicting
marginalized populations used within many literature classrooms, including, at
times, mine. I reveal my challenges as a white educator teaching in an urban
alternative school for students labeled ‘‘at-risk’’ using language and literature as
vehicles to examine the impact of hegemony on students of varied races. This issue
is universal for high school literature rarely changes, yet historically we are ever
farther from the original context and thus must reexamine textual relevancy in light
of the constantly changing social context of our classrooms. Texts that are
categorized as Literature with a capital L should not be exempt from such analysis.
Because I had had great trouble teaching Huckleberry Finn and making it accessible
to my students, I developed a plan whereby my students and I would interrogate the
text and investigate whether or not it was relevant and pertinent enough to study in
our classroom. This approach, so I thought, would provide a unique way for students
to engage with the text.
When I learned of the revisionist version of Huck Finn adapted by Alan Gribben,
where the word ‘‘nigger’’ is replaced by ‘‘slave,’’ I was immediately inspired to teach
the novel in a way that would be more relevant to students. Providing students with
access to the controversy would be my starting point, while also problematizing the
issue of language usage already resonant in their lives, i.e., examining the prominent
use of the ‘‘N’’ word in hip hop. I wanted to determine how students would make
connections between the novel, the controversy over reading it, and their own
language usage and lives with both ‘‘in school’’ (curriculum) and ‘‘out-of-school’’
(hip hop) literacies, and if such examinations would be transformative for students.
The main question that guided this study was as follows: How would the analysis of
race and racism in students’ lives through both in and ‘‘out-of-school’’ literacies
contribute to a deeper and more critical reading of Huck Finn? This paper details
critical conversations inspired by the reading of Huck Finn in an urban alternative high
school. My theoretical framework represents intersections between critical race theory
(CRT) and pedagogy (Bell 1992; Ladson-Billings 1999), anti-racist and culturally
responsive pedagogy (Gay 2010; Nieto 2008; Sleeter 2008), and hip hop
123
246
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
consciousness (Hallman 2009; Neal 2003). Freire’s problem posing method (1998) is a
pedagogical approach used throughout the classroom study described in this analysis. I
will describe the struggles I faced as a white teacher/researcher attempting to center
race in an effort to fight racism, and the struggles the students faced within our
classroom during this teaching; I will provide insight into the relevancy of examining
the literacies of race within fiction narratives and how we (both teachers and students)
can use these opportunities to make sense of our lives. I will also underscore the
necessity of culturally responsive pedagogy and provide details on how teachers can
be more culturally responsive in classrooms by sharing lessons learned.
Theoretical Context
The main principles of critical race theory include the recognition of race and
racism in society, a critique of the traditional western values of objectivity and
neutrality, a reliance on the knowledge and experience of people of color in the
definition of its tenants, an interdisciplinary focus, the goal of the elimination of all
form of oppression (Lynn 1999), and, I would argue, CRT necessitates the advocacy
of anti-racist whites. Because critical race theory seeks to determine how racism is
perpetuated, for the purposes of undermining racial bias within systems and
institutions, dismantling white privilege is a necessary component of this mission.
This necessitates the cooperation of white allies. By extension, critical race
pedagogy seeks, through education, to identify, problematize, and ultimately
transform institutions and society with the goal of ending all forms of oppression. I
used CRP in the classroom in an attempt to develop critical consciousness (Freire
1998) in my students so they would make connections between the racism in the
novel and the racism around them with the ultimate goal of social and political
critique. My students already possessed a critical consciousness of the world outside
of the school. I wanted to connect their insight to the classroom as well.
Critical race theory is a lens allowing for the interrogation of social, educational,
and political issues by prioritizing participant voices (Chapman 2007). Critical race
theory/pedagogy possesses an activist component, the end goal of which is social
justice (DeCuir and Dixson 2004). According to Chaisson (2004), critical race
theory in the classroom is a ‘‘pedagogical approach that allows for the critical
examination and challenging of traditional epistemologies of race’’ (p. 345) and
which can be initially ‘‘disruptive to the identities’’ of some students.
Culturally responsive pedagogy (Gay 2010) runs parallel to CRT because it
requires educators to possess not only the will to end oppression but the knowledge
to inform their choices and actions. Howard (2006) defines ‘‘responsiveness’’ as
dealing with ‘‘…our capacity as teachers to know and connect with the actual lived
experience, personhood, and learning modalities of the students who are in our
classroom’’ (p. 131). Thus, culturally responsive educators take the extra time
necessary to research the experiences, individuality, and learning styles of all of
their students in order to better reach/teach them by meeting them where they live.
Anti-racist pedagogy involves selecting culturally responsive curriculum,
problematizing the curriculum, engaging in conversations about students’ lived
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
247
experiences, engaging in social and political critique, problematizing one’s privilege
and standpoint, and facilitating critical thinking. These theoretical frameworks
coalesced in Freire’s problem posing method. I used this approach that involves
students working toward a learning goal in conjunction with their teacher(s),
whereby all parties learn from one another. The teacher is not the ultimate authority
for knowledge production; rather, the students, along with their teacher, work
together, using their own stories and experiences, to develop a critical consciousness. I facilitated the process of traditionally academically disengaged students
honing their skills of critical consciousness and applying them to the classroom. In
this sense, education can serve the cause of liberation: students and teacher working
together to claim an education that does not undermine personal identity.
In order for youth to transform their lives they must understand the oppressive
forces that impact them and their communities and possess the ability to relate to
other oppressed groups in order to engage in transformational social action (FloresGonzales et al. 2006). Progressive hip hop (Ginwright and Cammarota 2002) has the
potential to inspire this critical consciousness with its critique of social forces that
contribute to colonialism, racism, patriarchy, and other forms of oppression. Youth
labeled ‘‘at-risk’’ are often subject to what Valenzuela (1999) deems ‘‘subtractive
schooling’’ which strips youth of their particular social and cultural resources by
devaluing their linguistic and cultural backgrounds and, by extension, their
appearance, mannerisms, and styles of speech, views them as operating from
intellectual deficits, and thus often funnels them into basic skills programs (Hallman
2009). In order to encourage the application of critical consciousness to the
classroom, students brought their counter-narratives about identity and schooling into
the classroom to bridge the gap between what Hallman (2009) identifies as ‘‘schoolbased’’ and ‘‘out-of-school’’ literacies. We did this through the incorporation of hip
hop in our negotiation of racial dialogues within school and within curriculum. Such a
‘‘multi-literacy’’ approach opens up participatory spaces for students where they are
encouraged to question curriculum and identity (Hallman 2009).
In order for my approach to be transformative, with the cause of social justice at its
heart, students’ counter-narratives were respected and embraced and not viewed as
threatening to the culture of the school (Freire 1998). Counter-narratives can
counteract dominant and negative portrayals of students labeled ‘‘at-risk,’’ and of
students with non-dominant linguistic and cultural backgrounds (which are often
viewed as one and the same). As Hallman (2009) argues ‘‘…hip hop, when paired
with a study of canonical texts in a high school classroom, can push students toward
sophisticated and complex understandings of their society and their identity as
individuals who are a part of that society’’ (p. 39) and can serve as a ‘‘critical bridge’’
between in-school and out-of-school literacies. According to Hallman (2009):
By viewing youth’s out-of-school literacies and affiliations as having an
impact on classroom practice, students’ learning, as well as students’
construction of their own identities is reconsidered. Educators and researchers
must continue to work toward classroom-based initiatives that feature
recruiting students’ out-of-school literacies as critical bridges to both social
change and ‘‘at-risk’’ students’ in-school success. (pp. 48–49)
123
248
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
Because hip hop is self-referential for many of my students, as well as a reflection
upon and often a critique of the larger social context, it became my jumping off
point to view language and text critically.
A Culturally Responsive Approach to Teaching Huck Finn?
English teachers often have to grapple with teaching historical narratives, but to
ignore race in the classroom, to read traditional canonized texts that deal with the
issue of race for example, without problematizing historical and current issues of
race in our lives, is to succumb to institutionalized racism. Huck Finn is a required
text in 70 % of public high schools (Webb 2001), but in most American classrooms
the text is not read through the lens of critical race theory or paired with hip hop
consciousness. According to the National Center for Education Information, 84 %
of the teaching force in the US is white (Feistritzer 2011). Teacher educator ranks
are not getting more diverse, despite the fact that the student population is becoming
increasingly diverse and increasingly underserved by their schools (Pollock et al.
2010; Sleeter 2007). According to DeCuir and Dixson (2004), ‘‘Because of the
legacy of racism, schooling is problematic for African-American students,
particularly those students attending predominantly White schools…. For such
students, feeling culturally alienated, being physically isolated, and remaining
silenced are common experiences’’ (p. 26). When white teachers, however well
intentioned, avoid addressing topics pertaining to race, it only serves to ‘‘stifle’’ the
voices of students of color (Sue et al. 2009). As educators, we must do better to
address student racial and cultural alienation in school.
Most educators are not trained to talk about race, but being culturally responsive
is about more than being colorblind, read being ‘‘nice,’’ to one’s students and
treating students ‘‘equally’’ (Nieto 2008); these notions suggest colorblindness and
‘‘colormuteness’’—where a silence around race and racism exists. Talk about race
and racist talk must be distinguished (Pollock 2004; Schultz et al. 2006). However,
in schools ‘‘colorblindness’’ is normative.
Colorblind and colormute ideologies condemn any words or language that may
relate, signify, or give meaning to race; in reality, it perpetuates racism, denials of
institutional or structural inequality, and the myth of meritocracy. CRT challenges
this through counter-narratives that build awareness of the reality of racism. To be
anti-racist, we need to not only acknowledge racism, but also to acknowledge
people’s lived experiences. When given the opportunity to talk about race in
schools, students can have salient conversations (Pollock 2004). However, students
are not often given these opportunities in schools. I wanted to give my students the
opportunity to talk about race in critical ways by intersecting out-of-school literacies
(hip hip) and in-school literacies (Huck Finn) and by relating the two through
language, e.g., usage of the ‘‘N’’ word.
Webb (2001) argues that readers’ cultural backgrounds influence their interpretations and responses to Huck Finn. This is interesting in light of the fact that the
majority of those making curricular decisions are white. Regarding how the issue of
slavery is presented in the novel, Fisher Fishkin (1995) argues that history books
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
249
teach of the evils of slavery, but it is literature that ‘‘require[s] you to look the
perpetrators of that evil in the eye and find yourself looking at a kind, gentle, goodhearted Aunt Sally…. the ordinary folks, the good folks, the folks, who did nothing
more than fail to question the set of circumstances that surrounded them…’’ (para
9). It is the case that evil lingers when good people do nothing, and this is one of the
subtle lessons of Twain. But does culturally responsive pedagogy outweigh Twain’s
relevancy to today’s high school students, many of whom are people of color? There
is an absence of scholarly dialogue on the teaching of Huck Finn using the lens of
critical race theory, although the novel is still taught in the most high schools
throughout the US. This study, in part, seeks to redress this silence.
Examining the language used in various student-selected songs, particularly the
‘‘N’’ word usage in its different contexts served as a unique window to the novel and
its usage of the ‘‘N’’ word. As Chaisson argues (2004), ‘‘It is through a critical
examination of their own historical location among the relations of power and
privilege that students can gain an appreciation for the principles of justice, liberty,
and equality’’ (p. 356), and this was my hope. I sought to determine how an
examination of a literary narrative, and, by extension, an examination of their own
narratives, as well as their self-selected narratives (hip hop songs) could inspire
shared struggle and an appreciation for social justice ideals. My ultimate goal was to
facilitate the development of critical engagement with classroom text in my
students, the purpose of which was to ‘‘serve the cause of liberation’’ (Freire 1998,
p. 70) beginning with the notion that a critique of language is an integral part of
social and political engagement.
Teaching Huck Finn, which was required of 10th graders in my district, is among
my most difficult teaching experiences: it is complicated; the students tend to resist
it. Students who had traditionally not experienced school success populated my
classroom, housed in an alternative high school for students labeled ‘‘at-risk’’ for
school failure; some were intentional non-learners because of this. Most did not like
school, and all had previous negative experiences with/in school. Thus, reading any
text could be difficult. When students stayed at the school over a few years, most
found a level of academic success and were less resistant to academic work.
Because of these reasons, I moved the novel to a 12th grade course.
My hope for teaching Huck Finn through CRT and progressive hip hop
consciousness was that students would be less resistant to the novel through
discussions about race in school and in their lives using both in-school and out-ofschool texts. I also hoped that this approach would serve the cause of liberation by
broaching difficult and complicated conversations about ‘‘N’’ word usage within the
school, within popular culture, and ultimately create a commitment to social justice
and anti-racism through the understanding of non-majoritarian discourses.
The Students
There were 13 participants in this study: 61 % male (n = 8), 39 % female (n = 5),
in grades 11–12 who self-identified their race as follows: 38 % African American
(n = 5), 16 % Multi-racial (n = 2), 46 % white (n = 6). Participants chose their
123
250
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
own pseudonyms for the purpose of this study. All participants in this study attended
an alternative high school in the mid-west. This school was labeled 100 % at-risk.
The population consisted of students removed from traditional high schools because
of behavior and attendance issues. The school had a soft cap population of 80
students. The most common reason for attendance was conflict with other students
(both physical and nonphysical).
Historically, the school serving as the research site for this study, and the district
in which it is a part, has had a majority white population, approximately 65–70 %.
In recent years, as the district became more diverse, the alternative high school’s
level of diversity increased faster than the rate of the district, which raises the red
flag of why a disproportionate amount of African American students are being
referred to the alternative high school. In 2012, the African American student
population at the alternative school was almost 50 %. There was an overall
unexamined privileging of whiteness throughout the district, which may have
contributed to the disproportionate referrals of African American students to the
alternative school.
The privileging of whiteness was of also a factor in the ‘‘othering’’ of some of my
students: many white students would claim access to the ‘‘N’’ word because ‘‘if they
use it why can’t we?’’ African American students were not immune to it; some
students would ‘‘blaze’’ (crack jokes on) other African American students based
upon the ‘‘darkness’’ of their skin, the implication being: ‘‘light makes right.’’
According to Chaisson (2004) and Dyer (1997) the identity of whiteness is neither
‘‘problematized nor particularized’’ in racial discourses because a sense of normalcy
is presumed. That is, ‘‘The racial identities of minority group members are centered
in the discourses on race, but whiteness remains largely unexamined as a racial
identity. This non-particularity or normalcy of whiteness makes it ‘transparent.’ It
circumvents the questioning of whiteness, in effect legitimizing it as normal’’
(Chaisson, p. 347). The unmarked nature of whiteness was ever-present in the
school and contributed to the difficulties of teaching, learning, and language.
Because white privilege had been largely unexamined within the school, the issue
of accessibility to the ‘‘N’’ word was a hotly contested space. One element within
the context of white privilege deals with language, and, by extension, the privileging
of certain forms of discourse over others; likewise, the novel uses the language of
degradation, and illustrates the societal privileging of white discursive forms.
Reclamation of the ‘‘N’’ word was widespread within the African American school
community; seeping into the language of white students, it exacerbated the already
growing separations based upon racial identifications.
In general, I had many concerns about how issues of perceived racial identity
were impacting my students and the school: there was more segregation based upon
race in non-structured areas. For example, I observed more segregation by race in
the cafeteria and other non-structured areas with the recent change in demographics,
whereas previously students would integrate themselves; historically, there was not
a clear divide based on race. School identity groupings were beginning to be based
on ‘‘racialized’’ categories and not on other commonalities students shared such as
geographical proximity and ‘‘at-risk’’ student status. In various ways, the ‘‘othering’’
of my students was of great concern: from within and from without. There was great
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
251
prejudice against this group of students within the district and the surrounding
community because of the ‘‘at-risk’’ label; however, students were not bonding over
this marginalization as they had commonly done in the past.
The Classroom
In my public school teaching environment, the only required novels about the
African American experience for the district high school curriculum, with the
exception of A Raisin in the Sun (1994), are written by white authors and tell stories
through white protagonists: To Kill a Mockingbird (1982), Mississippi Trial 1955
(2002), Huck Finn (1996). Moreover, the latter three texts detail racism, lynching,
and slavery. A tradition of culturally unresponsive pedagogy/curriculum exists
within the district in general, but for pockets of periodical daring. The staff is not
diverse. In fact, of 31 English teachers in two traditional high schools and one
alternative high school, only one is a teacher of color.
To prepare students for the discussion of whether or not they felt Huck Finn was
relevant for them to read in its original form, students researched the history of the
author, the novel, and the controversy. Students also watched a Sixty Minutes (2001)
episode showcasing the controversy of Huck Finn with interviews with Randall
Williams (editor of NewSouth books, who published the revisionist version of the
novel), and David Bradley of the University of Oregon who argues that the novel
should be read in its original form. I showed the documentaries The ‘‘N’’ word
(2004) and Beyond Beats and Rhymes (2007), which examines the use of the ‘‘N’’
word in hip hop and popular culture. Students then analyzed and discussed hip hop
lyrics for varying usages of the ‘‘N’’ word and discussed the purposes and
implications of ‘‘N’’ word reclamation for people of various racial identities.
My goal with these pop culture connections was to inspire students to connect the
historical use of the ‘‘N’’ word with current usage in popular culture and to
problematize the concept of reclamation. In general, the students reflected on their
own use of the word, and on their experiences in school with language, culture, and
race.
Narrative Inquiry
As previously stated, the main question that guided this study was as follows: How
would the analysis of race and racism in students’ lives contribute to a more deeper
and critical reading of Huck Finn? I examined this issue through narrative inquiry in
order to present a heteroglossic picture of the classroom experience, my insights as a
teacher of anti-racism, and the experiences of the students as a result of their
participation in this project.
Narrative inquiry, still a controversial method in educational research, can
provide the reader with a rich and proximate look into teaching and learning. As a
process, it forces the participant researcher to make sense of the whole of the
classroom experience, which can result in more questions than answers, as opposed
123
252
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
to reaching a singular conclusion. Narrative inquiry also embraces contradictions
(Schaafsma and Vinz 2011).
According to Coulter and Smith (2009) narrative research lives in an intangible,
interpretive space and ‘‘strives to portray experience, to question common
understandings’’ (p. 577). Narratives paint pictures and create dissonance in the
reader and potentially inspire them to: question phenomena, question our
understandings of the world, and act. In general, narratives bring together reason
and emotion (Schaafsma and Vinz 2011) and thus are powerful for teaching and
learning (Milner 2007; Rushton 2004). We teach others by telling and reflecting on
our stories and gain tremendous personal insight from this process that can lead us,
teachers and researchers, to reconceptualize our work. Barone (2009) argues for the
necessity of telling the stories of the marginalized through research; it is this telling,
however imperfect, that is important to document the experiences of non-white
populations.
Narrative inquiry also represents a unique role for the researcher: that of
questioning her own standpoint and position of privilege. Narrative research does
not result in one singular answer but instead creates the potential for new questions
and modes of thinking for the reader (Coulter and Smith 2009; Schaafsma and Vinz
2011). In this context, knowledge is constructed by describing interactions between
the researcher, the participants, the social context, the evidence, etc. The process of
conducting narrative research could be best described through postmodern literary
theory, particularly the idea of heteroglossia (Bakhtin 1981). Bakhtin (1981) calls
the multi-vocal approach ‘‘heteroglossic.’’ According to Coulter and Smith (2009),
‘‘The term suggests that different characters view the action differently or see
different parts of the action portrayed. Such an approach suggests greater
complexity of interpretation…’’ (p. 583). In essence, the sum of the parts can
represent a more complex, or whole, picture of the classroom. The heteroglossic
approach to describing the classroom is a pastiche of smaller units or portraits. I
chose this approach in order to provide a complex, ‘‘non-othering’’ retelling or
‘‘storying’’ of our classroom experiences of reading Huck Finn through the lens of
critical race theory and hip hop consciousness.
Rationale and Analysis
The idea of this research study sprang from my personal creative non-fiction writing
about this experience. Although I collected classroom data throughout the
experience of teaching Huck Finn, I did not know it would grow to a research
study. Because of the experiences I faced through this teaching experience, I desired
to write about my challenges and shortcomings in a reflective narrative. In so doing,
I came to the realization that there were fruitful conclusions that would benefit other
teachers and teacher educators. Thus, I sought to include my own narrative as well
as the narratives of my students in order to portray and deconstruct the teaching of
this controversial text. According to Schaafsma (1993), any narrative runs the risk
of doing violence to the ‘‘other,’’ that is, the subject, or participant. To honor my
classroom and to avoid the creation of a ‘‘master narrative,’’ participants embed
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
253
their voices at all levels of this work: in the telling and in the analysis; thus many
data sources are included in this study as well as constant member checking.
Prior to writing my creative non-fiction narrative, I collected field notes on a
variety of experiences including personal reflections as well as informational
feedback from students, both verbal and non-verbal, that I recorded daily.
Additional sources of data included student artifacts such as journals, formal
essays, and class assignments.
In addition to my field notes, I took ‘‘artifact notes’’ on other data sources. I then
crafted a series of narrative portraits interweaving various perspectives to present a
series of snapshots of the pivotal moments and tensions during our classroom
experience. Participants were involved at every stage of this experience, in
classroom decisions and in research decisions; their narratives served to mediate my
retelling of our classroom experiences. They read and commented orally on my
retelling of our shared experiences, providing me with a more authentic portrait of
the classroom experience as a whole. This decision to complicate the research
process with continual member checking and revising was informed by Bakhtin’s
notion of the centrifugal text, which is polyphonic, varied, and imperfect (1981). I
wanted to avoid the ‘‘politics of the gaze’’ and to instead include traditionally
silenced voices, not only in my telling, but also in the process of coming to
‘‘storying’’ the classroom experience. Participant telling of and reflection upon their
experiences in our classroom helped to inform my retelling and my own analysis of
this classroom experience. I asked participants questions to prompt their own
written narratives, which ultimately informed my retelling. Participants were also
involved in the process of data analysis, where they checked and rechecked their
portrayed perspectives.
My process of data analysis involved transcribing my field and artifact notes into
a Microsoft WORD document. I used this document as a working analysis tool
through which I grouped textual excerpts by commonalities. I used critical event
analysis (Webster and Mertova 2007) in order to create a ‘‘discernible narrative.’’ I
ultimately grouped data into categories based upon the salient questions or problems
that resulted from critical events in the classroom. I then crosschecked data falling
within each critical event category using constant comparative analysis (Lincoln and
Guba 1985). The critical classroom events are represented by the following category
titles: Reclamation?, Cultural Connections, School Connections, Substitute, and
White Privilege.
Throughout all stages of analysis, I crosschecked respective student representations
within the data with participants in order to verify point of view, clarity of language,
and consistency of text with category. Students read drafts of my writing and
commented in one-on-one conferences with me. I made revisions, corrections, and
deletions based on these member checks that I conducted at each stage in this process.
The concept of reflexivity is crucial to this analysis at every level. My personal
evaluation of what occurred through this teaching process and through the analysis
of these data is present throughout this writing. Interspersing participant voice
throughout this analysis not only honors their experiences, but it also serves as a tool
to keep me thinking about and critically questioning my values, beliefs, ideologies,
and privileges (Schaafsma and Vinz 2011).
123
254
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
Reclamation, White Privilege, and a Difficult Lesson
Several weeks before opening Twain and much time spent on the background of
novel’s controversy and the revisionist version, the participants and I discussed
whether they felt the novel, in its original form, should be read. The overwhelming
majority of students argued that they desired to read Huck Finn as Twain intended.
Our experiences throughout this journey of reading Twain are organized by the
pivotal events and controversies that occurred in the classroom.
I begin or conclude each discussion with a summary portrait based upon my
critical examination of data; these provide the reader with either an introduction to
or a reflection on the students, the school, and/or myself. Portrait 1: Background
begins the conversation by creating a backdrop of my observations prior to the Huck
Finn unit, and provides an introductory examination of students’ language usage
and their impressions of reclamation.
Portrait 2: Race(ing)/Erasing Our Lives describes a disturbing conversation I had
with a student who had internalized racist stereotypes. It falls under the theme of
Cultural Connections where students attempt to make sense of their language and
the language of others in terms their perceptions of popular culture and their own
cultural identities.
Portrait 3: Blazing recalls put downs that students revealed to me that they had
used toward others. It falls under the theme of School Connections where students
attempt to reconcile their own thoughts and feelings with others in the school
context.
Portrait 4: The Substitute describes my feelings, my sadness and my anger, as a
result of a substitute’s actions during the Huck Finn unit that was mentioned at the
beginning of this discussion. It falls at the end of a more general discussion of the
students’ perceptions of the same experience (although they were there and I was
not).
Portrait 5: My Privilege began as a piece of my original creative non-fiction
classroom story—it is both mea culpa and an explanation of my actions. It falls
under the theme of White Privilege. Some student responses pertaining to white
privilege reveal student privilege, their ignorance of their privilege pertaining to
classroom experiences, reflections on the reading of Twain, and other thoughts on
language usage/reclamation.
Reclamation?
Portrait 1: Background. Upon seeing my anthologies of African American
literature, Mexican–American literature, Asian literature, among others on my
bookshelf, a white student asked me, ‘‘Where are the books on white
literature? I pointed to the Holt Elements of Literature textbooks for 10th and
11th grade, American and English literature respectively. ‘‘Most everything
contained in those, and probably most everything you have been asked to read
until now,’’ I replied. The student thought about this and nodded.
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
255
This portrait is not unrepresentative of the discourse of white students newly
exposed to non-majoritarian texts. It speaks to the unmarked nature of whiteness
and to my sense that many of the students, particularly white students, are not only
uncritical of their school experiences in any collective sense, but also do not claim a
standpoint of social justice. Most of my white students had not previously been
asked to move beyond their personal experiences and question why they would
expect only to read themselves in their classroom texts. This privileging of
whiteness was reflected in the school culture, with some white students’ confusion
about their access to the ‘‘N’’ word, and some African American students
internalizing white ‘‘superiority’’ and reflected in statements used, however
unconsciously, to diminish those with darker skin. Dialogues about race, racism,
and identity through language, literature, and our lives were needed in the
classroom. Many students were taking in-school texts: cultural and literary, at face
value; they did not view themselves either as interpreters or creators of texts.
Before our reading of Huck Finn, the students and I engaged in many discussions
of language usage. Student access to the ‘‘N’’ word and the distinct difference
between ‘‘nigga’’ and ‘‘nigger,’’ highlighted in hip hop consciousness were salient
discussions that all students were engaged in both in their writing and in their
conversations. Josiah implicitly highlights this distinction:
The ‘‘N’’ word has not been put to rest no matter how much we wish that it had
been. Every day I hear black and white students use this word. I understand
that many see this word to have a whole different meaning behind it now, but I
still don’t think that makes it right. In the classroom the same students who I
hear in the hallway using this word with their friends are the ones who are
saying they don’t understand why this book isn’t banned.—Josiah, 16, African
American male
Josiah indicates that the ‘‘N’’ word is not only ubiquitous but also dichotomously
divisive. Although some have reclaimed the term to use in various contexts and with
multiple meanings, it still can wound.
A lot of people think that it is okay to use the ‘‘N’’ word if it is used in the
‘‘friendly’’ way. A lot of people use the word toward their friends and people
they care about. I feel that the two words are too closely related and neither
should be used. The ‘‘N’’ word has a harsh and hurtful background and many
people are still hurt about it.—Quan, 17, African American male
Quan notes the multiple meanings of the ‘‘N’’ word—that many people use it in
an affirmative manner. However, like Josiah, he focuses on the harm it can cause,
despite the user’s intent.
The ‘‘N’’ word shouldn’t be thrown around as it is nowadays. Many people
still take great offense to the term. It shouldn’t be used at all! The word was
meant to degrade. When slavery was abolished, the derogatory term should
have gone with it. The word is and will always be a racist term and shouldn’t
be used!—Juan, 15, African American male
123
256
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
Juan is adamantly opposed to the use of the ‘‘N’’ word in any context and
represents the strongest advocate of the students against its usage in any context. He
is also the one student who desired not to read Twain in the original.
The ‘‘N’’ word is used frequently, most often by people who say this word is
degrading to them but who call their own brother and sister this word. These
days everyone uses the ‘‘N’’ word; not just black people but also white people
use it. I like to think that white people use it more often than black people.—
Romel, 17, African American male
Romel describes the dichotomous and complex nature of the word: that some
black people simultaneously see it as degrading but also use it to toward their loved
ones. Romel indicates that he feels whites use it more frequently than blacks,
perhaps highlighting the racist component that cannot be separated from the original
usage of the word—compounded by the fact that ‘‘N’’ word usage of members of
the white masses (the white privileged) is often not informed by marginalized
identities/experience.
All students felt that the ‘‘N’’ word is used often in popular and school culture.
However, who truly has access to the word is important. The majority of students
felt that only African American students should have access to the word. Some were
critical of their own usage of the word. Again, many differentiated between the
word ‘‘nigga,’’ which was acceptable, and the word ‘‘nigger,’’ which should never
be used. One hundred percent of the African American male students indicated that
they either used the ‘‘N’’ word sometimes or frequently. Fifty percent of the white
students indicated that they used the ‘‘N’’ word sometimes; however, all of these
white students qualified their usage as ‘‘nigga.’’ For example, as a multi-racial male
indicated, ‘‘Nigga is basically just slang. Nigger is a racist term and should not be
used. Nigga is more acceptable. I use nigga because this term is acceptable.’’ And,
as an African American male stated, ‘‘I am not caring about blacks saying it, but I
do care about anyone else saying it, except those who grew up around blacks.’’ In
our conversations, students began to wrestle with their own language usage and the
language usage of others. They indicated that no one had previously ever asked
them to do this. At this stage of the analysis, it was clear that ‘‘N’’ word reclamation
was a contested space informed by one’s personal standpoint.
Cultural Connections
Portrait 2: Race(ing)/Erasing Our Lives. ‘‘Section 8, crack cocaine,
committing crimes, killing innocent people… I feel bad that white people
have to drive through those neighborhoods scared and have to look at that,’’ X
stated. I paused, ‘‘I want you to think about and research the percentage of
people on assistance, and living in poverty, and about what are known as
‘welfare myths.’ I think you have internalized some very racist stereotypes.
Let’s talk more about this. Why do you think this?’’
Josiah and X, both African American males, taught me much about internalized
racism. I shared my thoughts with them. The most startling thing was when X stated
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
257
that he could understand why white people felt negatively about black people.
Although X was not a member of the class that read Huck Finn, he was interested in
the topic and engaged with dialogues with me, which is where the above exchange
stemmed. I encouraged X to do more thinking about the stereotypes he held by
incorporating his ‘out-of-school’’ literacy. He indicated that hip hop, depending
upon the lyrics and personae of the artists, can do much to either perpetuate or
problematize these stereotypes.
In general, students saw many connections between culture and text; they
responded readily to our discussions of language representations in hip hop, in the
media, and in the larger culture in general. They indicated that media affects culture
and creates an atmosphere where negative reclamation is permissible.
The media puts out derogatory videos and information and what can be
considered insulting language. ‘‘Nigga’’ in society is not considered insulting;
it is used a lot by people in public. The blame of influencing violence in youth
cannot be all put on hip hop; TV. and other forms of entertainment also have a
role in influencing negativity.—Quan, 17, African American male
Quan discusses the media’s influence on our language, particularly language used
to degrade. He defends hip hop, which in much mainstream media still often bears
the brunt of the responsibility of perpetuating negative stereotypes of African
American communities.
The ‘‘N’’ word is used all around these days. I hear everyone around me using
the ‘‘N’’ word. Rappers use it, I use it, people on TV use it, people in Japan use
it. The ‘‘N’’ word was once off limits to white people. Now you hear white
people use it more frequently as a gesture of hello, as in, ‘‘what up nigga!?’’—
Josiah, 16, African American male
Josiah broaches the notion that the ‘‘N’’ word is becoming more ‘‘acceptable’’ in
terms of mainstream usage, something that was once viewed as off-limits to whites,
and often still is. The notion that people use the ‘‘N’’ word only to convey
intentional racism is breaking down. It is now more acceptable, particularly with the
millennials, for whites to use the ‘‘N’’ word, particularly if qualified as ‘‘nigga,’’ as
opposed to ‘‘nigger.’’ ‘‘N’’ word reclamation certainly does not occur across the
board in hip hop, but it is not uncommon. Either way, it is a dangerous qualification
and a slippery slope to unexamined historical and linguistic marginalization.
The ‘‘N’’ word is used internationally as a way to get with American culture
and to fit in with us. But, as many Americans know, the word offends a lot of
people. The ‘‘N’’ word shouldn’t even be used by African Americans. If they
believe it is an issue for someone else to say then they’re just contradicting
themselves if they do.—Edward, 17, white male
Edward’s comment indicates that the international use of the ‘‘N’’ word as used
by other cultures, particularly outside the US, is an attempt to relate to popular
culture based hip hop sensibilities. However, his uncritical white identity is telling
in that he instructs what people should and should not do (i.e., to not use the ‘‘N’’
word). Edward simplifies the issue by conveying a singular way of viewing the term
123
258
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
and perpetuating victim blame in that when people use it in any context, they should
not be offended when it is used toward them in any context.
Some consider words bullets, and the ‘‘N’’ word was made to be mean and
hateful. I think that hip hop has a lot to do with the reclamation of this word.
Musicians use the word trying to defend it and make it ok.—Cameron, 17,
African American female
Cameron ties the reclamation of the ‘‘N’’ word to hip hop and the justification for
its continued use. Students indicated that the ubiquity of the ‘‘N’’ word throughout
popular culture normalizes it to the extent to which many students do not think
about the implications of their speech. Most students were thinking and speaking
critically about language, particularly in their observation of how many people use
the word to ‘‘fit in’’ or because it is popular. Many communicated that they are not
critical enough about their own language usage in general.
School Connections
Portrait 3: ‘‘Blazing.’’ Many students in the school engaged in ‘‘blazing,’’
competing over who can spin the best put-down with some delving into
internalized racism or denigration based upon skin tone. I heard such phrases
as ‘‘In the dark, I can’t see you unless you smile,’’ ‘‘You look like a glass of
grape Kool-aid,’’ ‘‘You look like a doo doo stain.’’
As a self-proclaimed ‘‘language activist,’’ I often speak to students about their
language usage and the implication of their choices. Through this research process I
had more opportunities to talk with students both in and outside of the class about
issues of race and language. I engaged in a long conversation with Craig, an
18-year-old African American student who was not a member of class reading Huck
Finn, in order to determine why he engaged in ‘‘blazing’’ and if he had ever thought
about the implications of internalized white superiority reflected in language. He
responded:
I thought the jokes were funny. And the reason it is used more toward darker
people than lighter people is because society gives an impression that the
darker you are the uglier you are and the opposite with lighter people. I never
looked at it like that. I just always thought ‘‘dark jokes’’ were funny and there
are more ‘‘dark jokes’’ than ‘‘light jokes.’’ Nobody has ever sat down and
talked to me about this topic; that is why I always thought these jokes were
harmless. This is the first time anyone has asked me why I blaze darker people
and have had a discussion about how society looks at the color of people’s
skin.
Many students’ experiences with racially charged language (as with sexist and
homophobic language) is largely unexamined in schools. Most students indicated
that they had not been challenged in a school context to think about the implications
of their language choices.
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
259
Before, during, and after their reading of Huck Finn, students connected the use
of the ‘‘N’’ word within their school culture. This usage often created misunderstanding and anger.
Students in my school don’t have problems with the [‘‘N’’] word itself,
because I hear it being said daily.— Alice, 17, white female
Alice assumes students are not troubled by the use of the ‘‘N’’ word—even by
their own usage. Although she reports on her experience with the word, she is not
tremendously critical. Perhaps this is because it does not affect her directly, she only
hears it used and because she hears it assumes it is not also simultaneously
problematic.
I hear people at school, people in movies, even white people these days say the
‘‘N’’ word like it is something cool. I have used the ‘‘N’’ word, but in a way to
express myself.—Sal, 17, multi-racial male
Sal illustrates the different usages of the ‘‘N’’ word; he presents it as a complex
term, one that he admits to using himself but in a creative manner: a distinction that
Edward does not relate to. Edward, conversely, as previously indicated, refuses to
step outside his own experiences in an attempt at understanding. Juan has a
completely different take on the ‘‘N’’ word. He sees reclamation as a concept that
confuses whites and fuels their sense of entitlement:
That same word that white people used to put us in our place is the same one
that rappers and people around the word use today. Even on Xbox I hear this
word being used frequently to put down black people because other races
know that this word is something that black people dislike. Then the argument
comes up that we do it all the time, so why can’t we say it and you guys can?
Black people around the world have taken this word and put pride in it. That
was once something that no white person ever wanted to be called; now it’s
something that is cool to them.—Juan, 15, African American male
Juan indicates that the argument, if ‘‘they’’ [blacks] can use it, why can’t ‘‘we’’
[whites]? is a simplistic one because it does not take into account identity,
experience, historical or current experiences with racism. Juan highlights the
implications of this belief.
Other school connections with language involved teasing: what students refer to
as ‘‘blazing,’’ joking, or ‘‘the dozens,’’ When asked why students ‘‘blaze’’ on one
another using jokes that degrade based on darkness of skin, they indicated that they
had not thought of the implications of this type of speech. After several in-depth
conversations with students, Josiah indicated, ‘‘After seeing black face comedy, I
realized that it was an internalization.’’ I then asked, ‘‘Do you think you need to
change your language, or educate people on these issues? He replied, ‘‘Innovators
do not make it past 50 these days.’’ Another student, X, stated, ‘‘I know it’s bad, it’s
wrong, but I was raised on the word. What can one man do? It’s not going to go
away. Everybody is gonna say it eventually.’’ A goal of social justice education and
anti-racist teaching is to inspire an activist component. My goal is to impart to
123
260
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
students that they can do small things in their personal lives that can have great
impact.
Substitute
As indicated at the beginning of this analysis, the classroom atmosphere was
impacted when an African American substitute entered the classroom and made
seemingly uninformed judgments about what was occurring in the classroom, both
before and during the Huck Finn unit. Although her reaction clearly comes from her
experiences, I cannot speak to what those were or to her intentions when speaking
out in this manner. This section details students’ perceptions of this experience.
We had a sub the last day of reading the book, and I think that some of the
things that she said were wrong. The sub may not have thought that it was
right for us as high school students to be reading a book with such overt usage
but she should have went to the office and talked to the principal if she was
uncomfortable with what this class is doing. This sub got me mad because this
book is a book for mature students to read but how can students be mature
enough to read this book when the sub is not? —Alice, 17, white female
Alice indicts the substitute for what she deemed to be unprofessional behavior—
addressing her thoughts about the curriculum with a group of students instead of
bringing up the matter with administration. She equates one’s disagreement with the
decision to read Huck Finn as originally intended with immaturity. In essence,
Webb’s (2001) finding, that a reader’s standpoint has everything to do with one’s
response to the novel, holds true in this case.
We recently had a substitute teacher who took great offense to the novel. She
felt as though our teacher may be racist or not understand the context of the
book. She said that we should protest against the novel and take it to the board
of education to have it banned. She was making the class rowdy over a topic
that we have discussed numerous times in class.—Victoria, 16, white female
Both Alice and Victoria defend me and my curricular choices in their responses
as do Josiah and Ashley. However, Josiah and Ashley were in the minority of
students of color who chose to defend the class and, by extension, me:
[The sub] said that the book was banned and it wasn’t right for us to be reading
the book because blacks made the majority of our class. I don’t think it’s right
for a sub to come in and try to tell us what were supposed to be reading when
she doesn’t even have her facts straight.—Josiah, 16, African American male
Josiah reports on the factual inaccuracies of the substitute while Ashley indicts
the substitute’s action.
The students were prepared for what we were about to read. When [the
substitute] heard the word ‘‘nigger’’ she got very offended and gave us her
opinion on how she feels about Huck Finn. She said, ‘‘Your teacher must be
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
261
white.’’ I was offended by her words and actions.—Ashley, 18, African
American female
In general, these students reported on and assessed the substitute’s evaluation of
why I had chosen the novel—that I chose it only because I am white. Initially this
statement angered me, but after some critical distance I agree with the question.
Yes, I was attempting to broach CRP and anti-racist pedagogy through this analysis,
but the fact remains that although all students reported to feeling prepared for this
undertaking, some students had to steel themselves more than others: some were
more affected by my curricular choices. The sub was affected also, which was
where her reaction came from.
The substitute teacher came to our class and was speaking real to the class.
She was relating to me when I say the book was very racist. But the real reason
why it should have been banned is because racism should’ve been forgotten a
long time ago. But with us reading this book still to this day it’s making
African Americans think back to those days when we was in slavery. All
books that have racism should have been banned by now. But I don’t blame
our teacher for trying to have us read this book so we can see how it was back
when Mark Twain was writing this book but he didn’t have to use the Nigger
word as much as he did. As black people we feel hurt and feels as like that’s
wrong to our kind, but to Caucasian people they see as if like it is not a big
deal. They don’t feel like we do.—Juan, 17, African American male
Juan highlights the substitute’s speaking truth to power. Time and distance from
this experience has revealed Juan’s comment to be especially salient. He makes
several important points that highlight the tensions and critical issues that arose
through this experience: standpoint largely determines one’s reaction to the novel,
and language matters. Because perhaps I lacked critical distance from this teaching
experience, I was initially angry when I read Juan’s responses. My initial thought
was, ‘‘he is the only one not ‘on board.’’’ But now I think he may have been the
most insightful student. As Kohl (1994) argues, ‘‘Conscious, willed refusal of
schooling for political or cultural reasons is not acknowledged as an appropriate
response to oppressive education. Since students have no way to legitimately
criticize the schooling they are subjected to or the people they are required to learn
from, resistance and rebellion is stigmatized’’ (pp. 28–29). My change in perception
came through critical distance and critical reflection on my own notes and on the
data collected. My standpoint as teacher was automatically more trusted by those
who looked like me. Again, context is everything. The substitute has a point: the
fact that black students made up the majority of the class on that day was relevant.
In general, the white students were quicker to defend me against the protestations
of the substitute. Although she did not sway all of the African American students,
some were more hesitant to continue the book upon my return. I was particularly
affected by Juan’s statement. He was correct in this assessment that the majority of
texts used in this district depicting aspects of the African American experience are
stories only of atrocity. I was also saddened by his statement that whites do not feel
the ‘‘N’’ word is a serious issue.
123
262
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
Portrait 4: The Substitute. This substitute, knowing nothing of me or the
work we did as a class prior to her visit felled the straw teacher that she
thought was me. Yes, some students staged a labor strike, walking out of the
classroom: momentarily a place of hostility. Did the ones who remained value
her words more than mine simply because of her standpoint? Upon my return I
discussed the issue with them at length, but I will never truly know the impact
because some will only ever tell me what they think I want to hear.
Perhaps some teachers would be comforted by the fact that some students walked
out of the classroom when the substitute made indicting remarks about their
curricular choices and about them. However, this brought me little comfort; in fact,
it created additional struggles in my mind and in the classroom. The five students
who walked out, who ‘‘staged a labor strike,’’ were all white students. Upon
reflection, I realized this was because they trusted my curricular decisions and me
more implicitly than my African American students. Although throughout this
process I continually questioned myself, the substitute made the process of critical
self-reflection more pronounced. Perhaps I went too far, asking my students, some
of whom had personal experiences with racism, to deal with this sensitive issue in a
broad sense within a text that the privileged sitting within my classroom never had
to deal with in the same way. Broaching a dialogue of power within a high school
classroom can be dangerous business. But I believed it more dangerous to keep
silent. During and after the experience, however, I questioned whether my students
were both intellectually and emotionally ready for this experience. The truth is we
want students to question our curricular choices; that is what a critical consciousness
entails. We must remember that we can and must learn from our students, even if it
disrupts our plans.
White Privilege
As indicted previously, most white students possessed an uncritical view of their
own privilege. Some felt that the use of the ‘‘N’’ word was one of equity: that if
African American students were using it and then were called it in a way that they
deemed to be negative then that was too bad; they should expect it because their
reclamation confused others. Many white students could not see the difference, and
did not grasp how a history of marginalization could impact such a differentiation:
I would not like being called a ‘‘Cracker’’ or a ‘‘Honkey.’’ I would not expect
people to think that was ok. I would be offended and would expect any African
American would be highly offended to be called that word. It is not okay no
matter how you say it or how it is used.—Victoria, 16, white female
For white students, many thought it was never okay to use the ‘‘N’’ word.
Victoria displays the never and not the dichotomous, complicated, and contested
space that is the ‘‘N’’ word.
Plus I don’t understand why they get mad that it says nigger in the book
because all of them use the word daily. When Mark Twain uses nigger in the
book he’s not using it to be racist; he’s using it to show that back when there
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
263
was slavery people used nigger because that’s how people talked then. There
is no difference between nigger and nigga. People don’t want us using it but
they continue to use it.—Edward, 17, white male
Again, Edward presents the same issue: the ‘‘us’’ versus ‘‘them’’ perspective.
Most of the white students qualify ‘‘nigger’’ and ‘‘nigga.’’ But Edwards takes the all
or nothing approach to the subject.
In general, the white students had little difficulty with the text. Webb’s point that
the cultural backgrounds of readers influence their interpretation of the novel (2001)
was reinforced by this analysis. Discussions of white privilege and its impact on the
classroom, on the school, and on the district as a whole including the historical
curricular choices made were dangerous but necessary conversations. Critical
consciousness is a constant process that requires the analysis of language, culture,
society, the media—of others and of the self. The analysis of the self—of one’s
standpoint and one’s privilege—can be initially ‘‘disruptive’’ to many students
(Chaisson 2004), particularly those of privileged status, as we saw particularly in
Edward’s defensiveness. Such analysis is necessary in order to appreciate the
struggle for justice, for liberty, for equality. These experiences and conversations
created a starting point for many students, particularly white students, being
exposed to non-majoritarian discourses, where their ideas and levels of comfort
were challenged.
Portrait 5: My Privilege. It is true that the majority of my students’ teachers
have been white if their entire school lives have been spent in the district we
now share, and that most of the texts they have read in school about the black
experience were probably written by a white person. To make the situation
worse is that all of these required texts are about the atrocities AfricanAmericans have faced: slavery, violence, and struggle. Until they get to me. I
could have avoided the controversy of Twain altogether. My point was to talk
about race, culture, language usage, and racism: to use Twain as a vehicle for
other texts and to tie them to current social ills such as institutional and
internalized racism and to problematize language in their own lives in both inschool and out-of-school texts. However, my privilege made my decision to
choose Twain less problematic than perhaps it should have been.
Wrestling with issues of privilege is important for all teachers, as is asking that
students do the same. It is important for us to step outside our standpoint and really
question the curricular and pedagogical choices we are making. Talking to students
about their interests and reading culturally relevant materials both inside and outside
of the classroom can contribute to more egalitarian thinking and thus more
culturally responsive choices that will make the classroom environment more
inviting for all. However, I still question my choice of Twain. Although it is a text
depicting historical societal ills, our reading was more painful for some. The critical
conversations were relevant and necessary, but I question whether the pain
experienced by my African American students did not trump this curricular choice:
Twain’s purpose notwithstanding, I had a hard time watching as some of my
students struggled with the text. I wanted my students to develop a more
123
264
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
crucial consciousness of in-school texts, and despite their beliefs that they
were ready, many were visibly wounded by the language.
The greatest lesson reinforced for me as a teacher was that it is important to be
self-reflective and to question daily our curricular choices.
Lessons Learned
Some important findings came from this work. First, echoing Webb’s (2001) finding
I also found that one’s standpoint, informed by one’s level of privilege, affects
reader response to the novel; an extended finding is that standpoint also impacts
one’s viewpoint about ‘‘N’’ word usage. Students of color in general conveyed a
more complex view of the ‘‘N’’ word in terms of usage, access, and meaning. White
students, most who felt they lacked access to the ‘‘N’’ word, either made sure to
qualify the duality of the word or argued that no one should use it at all; likewise,
they were more unquestioning in general about the choice to read Twain.
CRT necessitates the recognition of racism and a critique of western hegemony.
Thus, if one makes the decision to wrestle with a text as difficult and complex as
Huck Finn, one must do so within a broader context of CRP, which has the ultimate
goal of egalitarian transformation, but not within a contested space where
institutional racism abounds for this decision negatively impacts only some.
Another finding is that despite a teacher’s best intentions, even under hypothetical
ideal circumstances, the choice to read such a novel will raise difficult and
sometimes unanticipated issues. Sometimes students’ claims to readiness and
preparedness are very different from how they are personally impacted when they
begin to turn the pages. Resistance to learning in a culturally non-responsive
environment is a healthy way for students to preserve their cultural identities, which
was what Juan was demonstrating. Teachers often mistake these forms of resistance
for insubordination and disrespect, and I was initially guilty of this as well. Time for
teacher reflection and critical distance is crucial in terms of making sense of these
experiences. As teachers, we must make time to embrace this time for personal
reflection.
Finally, the issue of white privilege was relevant to this analysis. White privilege
and internalized racism worked together to keep students apart and maintain the
status quo within the school. My personal privilege, as a white educator, affected
my curricular choices in ways that I did not understand at the start of this
experience. After some critical distance and time for reflection, I learned that within
the cultural context of the school, my decision represented a contested space. Did
my students benefit from the experience, from participating in this type of thinking
and analysis? Undoubtedly. But these topics could have been broached in less
painful ways. However, this experience was enlightening in many ways for
everyone involved. Conducting this study encouraged me to talk more with my
students, in an open manner, about issues of language and race that impact their
every day lives. In light of their previous school experiences, I came to the
conclusion that this text is not an inherently responsible choice. In my teaching
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
265
situation, which is complicated by institutional racism and a non-diverse staff, my
students did not have many positive textual experiences to balance this one, which,
although I would not consider it entirely negative, was difficult, and for some
disheartening. Huck Finn should be reserved for older students and used only if
critical race theory and/or hip hop consciousness are used as theoretical models for
teachers. Additionally, because issues discussed in the novel are so controversial,
this book should be used only in conjunction with texts that portray the black
experience in American as being more diverse than depictions of slavery and
racism. Texts must be included that are written by African American authors.
I thought my students and I could approach the novel intellectually, as cultural
critics. They thought so too, perhaps having been unduly influenced by me.
However, in the final analysis, it was more emotionally difficult for some. The white
students sitting in the classroom in positions of relative privilege did not struggle as
much as did the African American students. When classroom struggle is
disproportionately experienced by a historically oppressed group, then there is a
problem that cannot be ignored. Webb (2001) argues that no teacher should be
compelled to teach this novel and I agree. The classroom should never be a place of
intellectual safety; however, when one group is always privileged and inherently
‘‘safer’’ then changes must be made. Approaching Huck Finn in this way and
conducting this analysis enabled me to have discussions with students about race,
about language, and about their experiences that I would not have normally had with
such frequency. The text provided me with a context and a purpose to have these
conversations. As Fisher Fishkin (1995) argues, ‘‘Novelists, like surgeons, cut
straight to the heart. But unlike surgeons, they don’t sew up the wound. They leave
it open to heal or fester, depending on the septic level of the reader’s own
environment’’ (para. 10). And that is where teachers come in. They are there to
initially disrupt the status quo, to complicate what we take for granted. Their end
goal is to assist students in the development of critical consciousness and in
achieving self-realization. This involves healing and hope. My hope is that my
students’ wounds were healed after this experience.
I desired my study to be revealing and instructive for other teachers in their
practices of every day anti-racism. My hope is that the struggles shared here will
help other teachers wrestling with similar issues in order to better serve all of their
students: to approach canonized texts in ways that are relevant to all students and to
reevaluate traditionally read texts in order to determine if they should continue to be
staples in our classrooms.
References
Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Barone, T. (2009). Narrative researchers as witnesses of injustice and agents of social change?
Educational Researcher, 38(8), 591–597.
Bell, D. A. (1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The permanence of racism. New York, NY: Basic
Books.
Byron, H. (2007). Hip hop: Beyond beats and rhymes [Video recording]. Media Education Foundation.
123
266
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
Chaisson, R. L. (2004). A crack in the door: Critical race theory in practice at a predominantly white
institution. Teaching Sociology, 32, 345–357.
Chapman, T. K. (2007). Interrogating classroom relationships and events: Using portraiture and critical
race theory in education research. Educational Researcher, 36(3), 156–162.
Coulter, C. A., & Smith, M. L. (2009). The construction zone: Literary elements in narrative research.
Educational Researcher, 38(8), 577–590.
Crowe, C. (2002). Mississippi trial 1955. New York, NY: Penguin.
DeCuir, J. T., & Dixson, A. D. (2004). ‘‘So when it comes out, they aren’t surprised that it is there’’:
Using critical race theory as a tool of analysis of race and racism in education. Educational
Researcher, 33, 26–31.
Dyer, R. (1997). White. London: Routledge.
Feistritzer, C. E. (2011, July). Profiles of teachers in the U.S. 2011. National Center for Education
Information. Retrieved April 8, 2013 from http://www.edweek.org/media/pot2011final-blog.pdf.
Fisher Fishkin, S. (1995). Teaching Mark Twain’s adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Huck Finn teacher’s
guide. Retrieved January 2, 2012 from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/teachers/huck/
essay.html.
Flores-Gonzales, N., Rodriguez, M., & Rodriguez-Muniz, M. (2006). From hip-hop to humanization:
Batey Urbano as a space for Latino youth culture and community action. In S. Ginwright, P.
Noguera, & J. Cammarota (Eds.), Beyond resistance! Youth activism and community change: New
democratic possibilities for practice and policy for America’s youth (pp. 175–196). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Freire, P. (1998). The banking concept of education. In A. M. A. Freire & D. Macedo (Eds.), The Paulo
Freire Reader (pp. 67–79). New York, NY: The Continuum Publishing Company.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Ginwright, S., & Cammarota, J. (2002). New terrain in youth development: The promise of a social
justice approach. Social Justice, 29(4), 82–95.
Hallman, H. L. (2009). ‘‘Dear Tupac, you speak to me’’: Recruiting hip hop as curriculum at a school for
pregnant and parenting teens. Equity and Excellence in Education, 42(1), 36–51.
Hansberry, L. (1994). A raisin in the sun. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Howard, G. R. (2006). We can’t teach what we don’t know: White teachers, multiracial schools (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Kohl, H. (1994). I won’t learn from you and other thoughts in create maladjustment. New York, NY: The
New Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1999). Just what is critical race theory, and what’s it doing in a nice field like
education? In L. Parker, D. Deyhle, & S. Villenas (Eds.), Race is… race isn’t: Critical race theory
and qualitative studies in education (pp. 7–30). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Lee, H. (1982). To kill a mockingbird. New York, NY: Warner Books.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lynn, M. (1999). Toward a critical race pedagogy: A research note. Urban Education, 33(5), 606–626.
Neal, M. A. (2003). Songs in the key of black life: A rhythm n blues nation. New York, NY: Routledge.
Nieto, S. (2008). Go beyond niceness: Think critically about what it means to ‘‘care’’ for students of
color. In Mica Pollock (Ed.), Everyday antiracism: Concrete ways to successfully navigate the
relevance of race in school. New York, NY: The New Press.
Pollock, M. (2004). Colormute: Race talk dilemmas in an American school. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Pollock, M., Deckman, S., Mira, M., & Shalaby, C. (2010). ‘‘But what can I do?’’: Three necessary
tensions in teaching teachers about race. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3), 221–224.
Schaafsma, D. (1993). Eating on the street: Teaching literacy in a multicultural society. Pittsburg, PA:
University of Pittsburg Press.
Schaafsma, D., & Vinz, R. (2011). Narrative inquiry: Approaches to language and literacy research.
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Schultz, K., Buck, P., & Niesz, T. (2006). Authoring ‘‘race’’: Writing truth and fiction after school. The
Urban Review, 37(5), 469–489.
Sixty Minutes. (2001). Huckleberry Finn and the N-word. Retrieved March 21, 2011 from http://www.cbs
news.com/video/watch/?id=7360250n.
Sleeter, C. E. (Ed.). (2007). Facing accountability in education: Democracy and equity at risk. New
York: Teachers College Press.
123
Urban Rev (2014) 46:244–267
267
Sleeter, C. E. (2008). An invitation to support diverse students through teacher education. Journal of
Teacher Education, 59, 212–219.
Sue, D. W., Torino, G. C., Capodilupo, C. M., Rivera, D. P., & Lin, A. I. (2009). How white faculty
perceive and react to different dialogues on race: Implications for education and training. The
Counseling Psychologist, 37(8), 1090–1115.
Twain, M. (1996). Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. New York, NY: Random House.
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: US Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany, NY:
State University of New York Press.
Webb, A. (2001). Racism and Huckleberry Finn: Censorship, dialogue, and change. In Literature and
lives: A response-based, cultural studies approach to teaching English. Urbana, IL: NCTE Press.
Webster, L., & Mertova, P. (2007). Using narrative inquiry as a research method: An introduction to
using critical event analysis in research on learning and teaching. New York, NY: Routledge.
Williams, T. (Director). (2004). The ‘‘N’’ word: An in depth discussion [Video recording].
123