Towards a Redefinition of Critical Literacy: conflict and meaning

making

Lynn Mario T. Menezes de Souza

University of So Paulo

(Translation from the Portuguese Para uma Redefinio de Letramento Crtico in :

Maciel, R.F & Arajo, V.A. (2011) (orgs) Formao de Professores de

Lnguas: ampliando perspectivas, Paco Editorial pp.128-140)

Thecontemporaryglobalizedworldfostersaclosenessamongandjuxtaposition
ofmultipleculturesandpeopleveryofteninsituationsofconflict.Ifallparties
tosuchconflictsmadeanefforttocriticallyreadtheirsituations,andsoughtto
understandtheirownpositionsandthoseoftheiropponents,thehopearisesof
transformingthepotentialforviolentandbloodyconfrontationsintooneof
moreproductiveandmutuallybeneficialoutcomes.Insuchacontemporary
context,thepedagogicaltaskofpreparinglearnersforconfrontationswith
differencesofallkindsthusbecomesanurgentneedthatwebelievecanbe
achievedthroughcriticalliteracy.

Thereareseveralexistingproposalsforcriticalliteracy;thisproposalhowever
seekstoredefinetheconceptof"critical"focusingandemphasizingitstemporal
andhistoricalaspectsanditspoliticalandethicalroleineducation.

Westartwiththeresumptionoftheconceptofconscientizaoorawarenessof
PauloFreire:"Thisawarenesswasnothingbuttheeffortofunderstandingthe
socialhistoricalworldinwhichoneisinterveningorattemptingtointervene
politically.Thesameoccurswiththeunderstandingofatextfromwhose
inventionreaderscannotescape,eventhoughthymayrespecttheworkdoneby
itsauthor.Therereallyisnoeducationalpracticethatisnotalreadyanactof
knowledgecreationandnotknowledgetransfer.Anactofwhichthelearneris
oneofthecriticalsubjects"(2005:242).

Whatreallydeservesattentioninthislatestreaffirmationofanoldconceptof
Freiresistheconnectionpointedoutbetweentheunderstandingandthe
inventionofatextbyareader.Byappointingthereaderasacriticalsubject,

Freireemphasizestheimportanceofwhatthereaderbringstotheactofreading
andmeaningmaking.InthissenseitisworthrememberingFreire'sprevious
reflectionsontherelationshipbetween'word'and'world'.

Freire(2005:151)spokeof'naive'waysofreadingtheworldbasedoncommon
sense,wheremeaningsaretakenas'given,natural,undisputedandrepresenta
formofknowledgedrawn"experience.Freirecontraststhisformofnave
knowledgewithwhathecallsamore"rigorous"andanalyticalknowledgethatis
producedbycriticalreflection.By"rigorous"Freiredoesnotmeanalogical
scientificmethodologicalrigorbutratheraconstantanddialogicalprocessof
criticalreflection:"Thismeansthatcuriositywill"becomeevermorerigorous",
thatis,itwillbecomemorerigorous,moredemanding,moremethodical
becauseitalreadyismethodical,evenwhennaive.However,itwill"become
morerigorous"initsmethodofapproachingtheobject...onethingistoexercise
mycuriosityabout[anobject]inanaivewayandanotherthingistopursuethat
curiosityaboutthesame[object]inamorerigorousmanner,critically"
(2005:151).Thekeymomentofthis"rigorous"processistheperception,onthe
partofthereader,oftherolethatcommonsenseplaysintheapprehensionand
constructionofmeaning:"Iknowit'scommonsense,soIcanovercomeit"(ibid.
).

Inthisprocessofthepedagogicalneedtopromotethediminishingandexpulsion
ofnaivereadingsoftheworldinordertodevelopmorecriticalreadings,Freire
emphasizestheroleandimportanceoflearningtolisten/hear.Freireremindsus
that"...deepdown,itisnotbyspeakingthatwelearntospeak;itisbylistening
thatwelearntospeak"(2005:157).

Inthisprocessofdevelopingacriticalperceptionofthewordworldrelationship,
onemovesfromaphaseofnaveconsciousnessandcommonsense,ofsimply
"beingintheworld"towardsanawarenessoftheconnectionandthedifference
betweenbeingintheworldandbeingwiththeworld.

Whereasacommonsenseawarenessleadsustobelievethatwelearnto"speak
byspeaking,"thecriticalperceptionofbeingwiththeworldisacquiredthrough
asocialandcriticalawarenessthatweareneveraloneintheworld.ForFreire,
theselfperceptionofoneselfasan"Iresultsfromthesimultaneousawareness
ofa"nonself"fromwhichtheindividualizedIarises,fromwhichit
distinguishesitselfandtowhichitremainsconnectedinordertobecomethe
individualizedI.

Thus,thesociohistorical"nonself"atthesametimeisdistinctfromand
constitutesthe"I"ofsocialidentity:Imean,itwasexactlytheworld,as
opposedtome,whosaidtomeyouareyou"(Freire2005:252).This
interweavingandmutualconstitutionof"self"withthe"nonself"thesame
withthedifferent,theindividualwiththecollectiveisemphasizedinan
unprecedentedwaybyFreire:"ItisnotbystartingfrommyselfthatIknowyou
...itisactuallytheotherwayround.Itisstartingfrommydiscoveryofyouasmy
nonself,thatIturntomyselfandperceivemyselfasanI;andatthesametime
asIseemyselfasanIofmyself,Ialsoseemyselfasayouofyourself.Itis

exactlywhenmyIbecomeshisyouthathediscovershisownI(Freire
2005:149).

Akeyphasetocomprehendtheconnectionbetweenthecollective"nonself"
andthe"I"intheeducationalprocessofdevelopingcriticalawarenessisthe
alreadymentionedimportanceoflearningtolisten/hear.Bylearningtolisten,
thelearnermayperceivethathisworldandhiswordi.e.,hisvaluesandhis
meaningsoriginateinthesociohistoricalcommunityinwhichhewasbornand
towhichhebelongs.Thetaskofcriticalliteracywouldthenbetodevelopthis
insightandunderstanding.

Thismeansthatitisnotenoughforareadertounderstandcriticalliteracyasa
processofrevealingorunveilingthetruthsofatextconstructedandhaving
origininthecontextoftheauthorofthetext.Wenowunderstandthatthe
processisbroaderandmorecomplex:boththeauthorandthereaderareinthe
worldandwiththeworld.Boththeauthorandthereaderaresocialsubjects
whose"Is"originatedinandareconnectedtononselvesofsociohistorical
collectives.Thisnotonlycreatesasenseofidentityandbelongingforasocial
subject,butalsocreatesanawarenessofHistory:"...morethanbeinginthe
world,itisbyremainingwiththeworldthatwecreatetime;westartmaking
history.Aswebegintomakehistory,historyinturnbeginstomakeusanditwas
exactlythisthatfosteredthepossibilityforustohaveanawarenessoftheworld
andanawarenessofourselvesthemarchoftimecreateshistorywhichinturn
fostersandrecreatesus(Freire2005:252).

Itisthereforeimportanttounderstandhowthisprocessaffects,influencesand
contributesbothtotheproductionofthewritingoftextsaswellastothe
productionofreadingsoftexts;inotherwords,howitcontributestomeaning
makingingeneral.

Criticalliteracycannolongerbecontenttounderstandhowthetextisinthe
world;itmustalsounderstandhowthetextandthereadingofthetextareinthe
worldinFreiresterms.Inotherwords,theprocessofreadingcriticallyinvolves
learningtolistennotjusttothetextandthewordsthatthereaderisreadingbut
alsoandperhapsmorecrucially,giventhecontemporaryworldofconflictsand
differenceslearningtolistentotheirownreadingsoftextsandwords.This
meansthatwhilewearelearningtolisten,wemustalsolearntolistento
ourselveslistening.

Toreadcriticallythenimpliesbeingabletoperformatleasttwosimultaneous
andinseparableacts:(1)toperceivenotonlyhowtheauthorproducedcertain
meaningsthatoriginatedinhiscontextandinhissociohistoricalbelonging,but
atthesametime,(2)toperceivehow,asreaders,ourperceptionofthese
meaningsandtheirsociohistoricalcontextsisinseparablefromourownsocio
historicalcontextsandthemeaningsthencefostered.Bylearningtolistentoour
ownreadingsinthisway,wemaybeabletoappreciatethefullnessthe
complexityoftheroleofsocialoriginsandhistoryinFreire'swordworld
relationship.

Thisredefinedmeaningof'criticalliteracy'asanactthatdoesnotsimplyreveal
orunveiltheconditionsofproductionofthetextbeingreadinturnrequiresa
redefinitionoftheconceptof'criticalincriticalreading',infavourofonethat
bringswithitahistoricaldimensiontocomplementthesocialdimensionalready
implicitinit.

If,accordingtoHoy(2005),thetraditionalconceptofcriticismreferredtoa
processthataimedatattaininganunambiguousandclearunderstandingoftexts
tobeobtainedthroughtheunmaskingofunderlyingandhiddenmeanings(all
seentooriginateinthesocialcontextinwhichthetextwasproduced),anewer
conceptofcriticismthatHoycalls"postcritical"emphasizesthefactthat
boththewritingandthereadingofatextareactsoftextualproduction(where
textsareseenasunitsofmeaning).Fromthisperspective,both,authorand
readerareproducersoftextsandproducersofmeaningthroughlanguage.

If,asexplainedabove,ourmeaningsandvaluesoriginateinthe
collectives/communitiestowhichwebelong,thenapostcriticalanalysisisone
thatfocusesonthegenealogyorhistoricaloriginofthemeaningsweassignto
textsandofthereadingsweproduce,asauthorsandreadersoftexts.This
genealogyfitsperfectlywithFreire'sconceptionofhistoryinaredefinedconcept
ofcriticalliteracy.

TheconceptofgenealogycomesfromthetheoriesofNietzscheandFoucaultand
doesnotrefertoaprocessofgroundingmeaninginultimateandcertainorigins
orsources;itrefers,ontheotherhand,toaprocessofrecognitionandanalysisof
theprevioustextualproductions(inthedoublesenseoftheauthorshipand
readershipoftexts)towhichagivenauthor/readerhasbeenexposed,mayhave
participatedinandwhichmayhaveinfluencedhimandmaythusplayanactive
roleinhisprocessofmeaningmakingofyetunread/unwrittentexts.Inshort,
thisinvolvesrecognizingthatasauthors/readersweareinfluenced(thoughnot
fullydetermined)byourhistoriesofreading/writing,giventhatthesehistories
arealwayscollectiveandsociohistoricallylocated.

AsFoucaultwarnedus,ourgenealogyandouruseoflanguagehastobeseenin
thelightofthepowerrelationsthatgovernussocially,asymmetricallyand
unequally.However,itisworthrememberingthatourstoriesaresocialand
collectivenotinthesensethatwecannotproduceanythingindividuallybutin
thesensethatevenwhenwewriteorreadindividually,weareusingaccording
toBakhtin,words,meanings,textsandreadingsthatprecededusandthat
constituteboththecurrentconditionswithinwhichtextsareproducedaswellas
thosethatconstituteusasauthorsorreaders.

Thereistheriskofunderstandingthatseenfromthisgenealogicalperspective,
meaningmakingmaybeoverdeterminedexclusivelybythepast,andthatthis
mayexcludethepossibilityofvariationsinthereadingofthesametextby
readersofthesamesociohistoriccollectivity.

Thisdoesnotoccurduetoasimplereason:inFreiresexplanationabove,the
nonselfthatproducestheIisneverhomogeneousandreductive.Infactthe

"nonself"isconstitutedandtraversedbyacomplexheterogeneityof
communitiesandgroups(socialclass,gender,race,religion,ageetc.),each
withitsownlanguageandvalues;nevertheless,allthesecommunitiesare
interconnectedandconstitutelargercommunities.Thereforeeach"I"isborn
intoacomplexandinterconnectedsetofcommunitiestowhichitremains
connectedandfromwhichitstandsout.Thus,atthesametimeaseachI
belongstodifferentsetsofcommunitiesthatdifferentiateone"I"fromanother"
I"andgenerateanillusoryindividuality,eachIremainsconstitutedbyits
originsinandbelongingtocollectivesetsofcommunities,suchthateachIis
necessarilypartofasetofgroupsofnonselves.

Intermsoftheprocessofmeaningmakinginthereadingandwritingoftexts,
thismeansthataparticularI,belongingtoaspecificlargercollective,may
differinhisproductionofmeaningsandvaluestoanotherIbelongingtothe
samelargercollectivity;thiswilloccurduetothefactthatthatparticularImay
belongtodifferingsubgroupssuchasthoseofgender,social,class,religion,
agegroupetc.whichcomposethelargercollectivity.Paradoxically,then,a
postcriticalgenealogicalconceptionofcriticalliteracymayexplainnotonlythe
similaritiesofreadingsintermsofsociohistoricalbackground,butalsousethe
samesociohistoricalbackgroundtoexplaindifferencesinreadings.

Thus,inthispostcriticalconceptionofcriticalliteracy,characterizedby
genealogyandbytheprocessoflisteningtooneselflistening,itbecomes
importantforthereader/writertoengageinaprocessofawarenessoftheirown
selfgenealogiesatplayintheactofproducingatext(eitherreadingorwriting).
Itisworthrepeatingthatthisimpliesperceivingtheconnectionbetweenthe"I"
anditsoriginsinthe"nonself";italsoimpliesinperceivingthatalthoughthe
authorshipandreadingofatextmayseemindividualand/orwilfulactsthey
aresociohistoricallyconstitutedbythecommunitiestowhichonebelongsand
theprevioushistoriesofmeaningmakingofthesecommunities.

Aswehaveseen,forFreire,criticalliteracyshouldpromoteanawarenessofthe
roleofhistoryandthetemporalityoflanguageandknowledgefocusingontheir
origininthehistoryofthewholecommunitytowhichtheybelong.Critical
literacythenshouldpromotearesultingawarenessthatsuchahistory,farfrom
over,continues,constitutesandaffectstheperceptionofthepresent.Once
broughtundercriticalreflection,thisperceptionoftheroleofpastactionsinthe
productionofmeaninginthepresentcancontributetothetransformationofthe
possiblenegativeeffectsofcurrentmeaningproductionandsubstitutethiswith
morepositiveanddesirableeffectsforthefuture:"Menrelatetotheirworld
critically.Theyseizetheobjectivedataoftheirrealitythroughreflectionandnot
byreflex...intheactofcriticalperceptionmenfindtheirowntemporality.
Transcendingasingledimension,theyreachbacktowardsyesterday,recognize
todayandcomefacetofacewithtomorrow"(Freire1990:3).

Both,Freiresproposalofreadingthewordworldasanactoflearningtolisten
critically,aswellasHoysproposalofapostcriticalselfgenealogyemphasizethe
situatedandspecificconstructionofmeaningandtheroleofthe'I'ofauthors

andreaders.That,initself,maylooklikeaproposalofcompleterelativismin
whichanyreadingofanytextcanbeequallyvalid.

FromRortys(1996)perspective,suchrelativismresultsfromthelackofan
external,universalandobjectiveyardsticktogroundandlimitthemultiplicityof
interpretationsorproductionsofmeaningwhichaccordingtohimmakeit
effectivelyimpossibletodistinguishbetweenarightandanotherwrongreading.
Thisviewofrelativismasnonuniversalismwouldresult,forRorty,inanethical,
moralandpoliticalparalysischaracterizedbyasituationinwhicheach
author/readerdefendshisindividual"personalperspective".

However,itisworthrememberingthataswehaveseen,theproductionof
meaningisnotarandomactofwilfulandindependentindividuals:onthe
contrary,theproductionofmeaningisacomplexsociohistoricalandcollective
actinwhicheachproducerofmeaningsimultaneouslybelongstoseveral
differentcommunitiesthatconstituteacomplexcollectivesociohistorically
situated.

Moreover,temporalityitselflaysbareonemorefacetofthecomplexityofthe
processofmeaningmakingincriticalliteracy:itmakeseachconstituent
collectivecommunitychangeableovertime.Temporalitythusfostersthe
potentialcomplexityandmultiplicityofreadings/writingsproducedwithina
givensociohistoricalcollective;however,atthesametimetemporalityalso
reducesthepotentialunlimitedmultiplicityofmeaningmaking.

Thisoccursforthefollowingreason:if,aswehaveseen,theproductionof
meaningalwaysoccursinspecificsociohistoricalcontexts,andistheproductof
particularcommunitiesandtheirstories,eachproductionofmeaning
(reading/writing)ofeachcommunitythenacquiresitsvalidityonlyataspecific
givenhistoricalmomentofthatcommunity.Forexample,if,alongthehistoryofa
particularcommunitymultipleanddifferentmeaningswereproduced,the
validityofeachproductionwouldberestrictedtothespecifictemporaland
socialconditionsofthatcommunity,suchthatthereading/writingofagiventext
producedatagivenmomentoftimeinthedistantpastofthecommunitycan
haveadifferentvalue(positiveornegative)toanotherreading/writingofthe
sametextproducedinamorerecentmomentoftimeofthesamecommunity.

Moreover,whileaparticularreadingmaybevalidforaparticularcommunity
whichcollectivelyconstitutesasocialgroupareligiouscommunity,forexample
thesamereadingmaynotbevalidforanothercommunityorevenforthe
socialcollectiveasawholeconstitutedbyvariouscommunities.Takethecaseof
issueswhichencroachonreligiousvaluesofsomegroupssuchasabortionor
familyplanning;although,intermsoftheoverallsocialcollective,theremaybe
multiplevaluesandvariables(fororagainsttheseissues)coexistingwitheach
other,inaspecificcommunitywhichconstitutesthatsamelargersocial
collectivethevaluegiventotheissueatstakemaybeuniqueandrestricted(for
oragainst).

Therefore,itisimportantincriticalliteracynottoconfusethepotential
multiplicityofreadingsandtheirvalueswithanabsenceoffactorsthatmay
contextualizeandrestrictthismultiplicity,suchasgenealogy,socialbelonging
andtemporality.

Thisconceptofcriticalliteracysituatestheproductionofmeaningalwaysin
termsofthesociohistoricalbelongingofproducersofmeaning,andpositsboth
readersandauthorsasproducersofmeaning;assuch,thisconceptofcritical
literacyrejectsuniversalnormativityandabeliefinuniversaltruths,unsituated
sociohistorically,whichmayservetoground"objective"(i.e.nontemporal
andasocial)"right"or"wrong"readings.Thisrejectionofobjectivegrounding
maymakethisconceptvulnerabletocriticismsthatmaycallattentiontothe
limitationsofitsusefulnessforpolitical,ethicalandeducationalpurposes,asfor
exampleinRorty'scommentsreferredtoabove.

However,asshownbyWhite(2000)andVattimo(2004),thelackofgrounding
instandardsandcriteriaseenasobjectiveanduniversallyvaliddoesnot
necessarilyimplythetotalabsenceofgroundinginlegitimatedvalues,necessary
fortheimplementationofpoliticalaction.Thisconceptofcriticalliteracydoes
indeedproposegroundingonwhichvaluesandnormsareconstitutedandin
relationtowhichpositiveornegativeactionsmaybeperformed;however,this
groundingissociohistoricallyconstitutedandinternalandlocaltothe
collectivitiesthatproduceit,hencecontingent(notobjective,universalor
permanent)butnolessrealorlessmotivatedforthecollectivityconcerned.

InVattimosterms,inplaceofahardandsubstantiveconceptionofgrounding,
thereisanalternativeconceptionofgroundingwhichisweak(changeableand
contingent,butneverrandom).Ratherthanthenonexistenceofgrounding
associatedwithacertainconceptionofrelativismwhichhinderspoliticalaction,
thisconceptionofweakgroundingpermitspoliticalactionbutalsopermitsthe
critiqueandchangeofthecourseofthisaction,giventhatitisawarethatits
groundingisinfactsociohistoricallyconditioned,specifictoaparticular
collectiveandnotpermanentorunquestionable.

Inconclusion,whatcansucharedefinedconceptionofcriticalliteracycontribute
totheteaching/learningofdealingwithconflictandtheconfrontationwith
difference?Firstly,itproposesthatthetruthsandvaluesofothers,likeours,are
alsoproductsoftheircommunitiesandtheirhistoriesdifferentthereforetoour
truthsandvaluesbutlikeours,alsogroundedandlocated.

Thus,insituationsofconflictwithothersofdifferentvalues,theimportanceof
learningtolisteninFreirestermsacquiresgreatimportance;learningtolisten
notonlyeachotherbutalsotolistentoourselveslisteningtotheother.What
exactlydoesthisprocessoflisteningtoothersimply?Itimpliesaskingourselves
howourowngenealogiesandsociohistoricalinterfereinourprocessof
listeningtoothers.Italsoimpliesaskinghowpowerrelationsuniteusordivide
uswithinourcollectives.How,finallydogenealogyandsociohistoricbelonging
interfereintheprocessofmeaningmakingandintheprocessoflistening?


Thiscriticalfocusoncomplexsocialandhistoricalconditionsofproductionof
meaningonbothsidesinvolvedinconflictsorconfrontationscanhelpto
understandthecomplexityoftheconflictinquestionandtheimpossibilityof
overcomingthedifferencesandhencetheconflict.Criticalitythenisnotjust
listeningtotheotherintermsoftheirsociohistoricalcontextoftheproduction
ofmeaning,butalsolisteningtoheartheother.Theresultofthisprocessof
listeningistheperceptionofthefutilityofwantingtoimposeoneselfonothers,
todominatethem,silencethemorreducetheirdifferencestothesimilaritiesof
ourIs;carefulandcriticallisteningcanleadustoperceivethatnothingofthis
kindwilleliminatethedifferencebetweenourselvesandothers,andcanleadus
toseekotherformsofinteractionandpeacefulcoexistencewiththedifferences
thatwillnotgoawayindirectviolentconfrontationnorinapossibly
harmoniousprocessofelimination.

References
Bakhtin, M. (1978) Marxismo e Filosofia da Linguagem. So Paulo, Hucitec
Foucault, M. (1996) A Ordem do Discurso. So Paulo, Loyola.
Freire, P. (2005) Pedagogia da Tolerncia. So Paulo, Editora Unesp.
Freire, P. (1990) Education for Critical Consciousness. New York, Continuum.
Hoy, D.C. (2005) Critical resistance: from Poststructuralism to Post-Critique.
Cambridge, The MIT Press.
Vattimo, G. (2004) Nihilism and Emancipation: ethics, politics and the law. New
York, Columbia University Press
White, S.K. (2000) Sustaining Affirmation: the strengths of Weak Ontology in
Political Theory. Princeton, Princeton University Press.