After reading the four articles on mulitcultural literature, it is clear that this is a hotly debated topic, one that I never thought was so widely discussed.
For the insider debate, I can understand how they would be able to draw on a topic that is familiar to them. Much the same as I would be better able to write about a topic that I personally experienced to open someone else's eyes. Insider writers are more equipped to be true to the writing and provide more factual information. I know that in my own classroom I would want to include literature of both to show that there are many types of good works out there by insider and outsider authors.
For the outsider debate, they are writers capable of writing great multicultural literature as well. Although they may not be able to draw on personal experiences, they are able to put a different perspective on a certain topic.
In my opinion, I feel that anyone, outsider/insider, is able to write mulitcultural literature. The one staple that needs to be any of the multicultural literature is that it needs to be accurate and relatable. There are certain works of literature out there, as discussed in the readings, that is not true to form which in turn doesn't make the work a piece of multicultural literature.
Some of the questions I would like to raise in class are, is there a biased in a lot of schools and libraries towards insider work? How would I know as an outsider whether or not this book is true to form if written by an outsider?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Great questions! Do you mean "bias" in terms of "preference" or do you mean it in a stronger sense? Is it possible that, without realizing it, schools are more likely to prefer outsider writers?
As for how an outsider reader judges authenticity, we'll talk about that in class today!
Post a Comment