Hello, everybody. Long-time reader (especially during elections), very occasional commenter, first-time diarist. Among other things, I teach college English at a large state university in the capital city of a fire engine-red Midwestern state. Last spring, during the primaries, many of my students (and myself) openly mocked Trump in class; the sole open Trump supporter proclaimed him “hilarious” and appeared to greatly enjoy his classmates’ scorn. I suspect he simply relished pissing off his liberal friends.
This fall has been, as they say, a different story. I was cautious during the first few weeks, when tensions at school and elsewhere were palpable. During my first round of individual conferences with students, I asked most of them where they stood, if they stood. I heard at least twenty different versions of “Yeah, Trump is pretty bad/crazy/etc., but Hillary has murdered hundreds of people/is the biggest liar in recorded history/has never uttered an honest word or undertaken a worthwhile action”, etc., etc., etc. Etc. I confined myself to gently suggesting that they do their own research and make up their own minds. In one especially affecting conference, a very sweet and diligent young man from rural Iowa thanked me for bringing it up, as his family and friends all love Trump and he has no outlet for his own distaste.
As this semester has progressed, it’s become difficult if not impossible to avoid the literal elephant in the room. My freshman comp classes consist of three units; the first is a set of personal essays as common reading. The second unit is Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, a dystopian speculative novel in which the US government is overthrown by a brutal theocracy and fertile women are forced into ritualized sexual servitude. The third unit is Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death, a work of media criticism that indicts the celebrity/entertainment focus of our media at the expense of depth or substance. Both books are thirty years old, and they’re at least a hundred times more relevant now than they were in 1986. Hillary Clinton referenced Postman in a recent NYT interview, and when I read that reference on this very website, I took it as a sign. I finally decided that, um, pussyfooting around the election in class was no longer an approach I could stomach.
This week, I decided to start addressing the election directly in my classrooms, offering opportunities at each class meeting for students to talk about it if they were so inclined. Without indulging in direct advocacy, I mention a random fact—for example, #Repealthe19th, which sparked an interesting exchange, or the Supreme Court vacancy. I think some light bulbs went on when I told them that Scalia was unanimously confirmed, in stark contrast to the way judicial appointments are (mis)handled now.
I don’t know how this is going to go. If the classic purpose of a university education is to develop critical thinking and other components of being an informed, engaged citizen, then I’m doing no one any favors with any pretense of neutrality, or simply ignoring an election that really would change their and their children’s lives.
I could go on and on, but I think this will do for a first diary. I know there are many other educators on this site, and I welcome any comments, suggestions, or commiserations. Wish me luck.