I am very excited about our readings this week, particularly Elaine Lawless’ “I was afraid someone like you . . . an outsider . . . would misunderstand.”  Questions of academics’ subject positions, lack of acknowledgement of background, and/or possible and sometimes blatant bias have been my academic obsession this semester.  I was impressed with Lawless’ willingness to actually “put her money where her mouth is” and take her work to her subjects for discussion.  That is my fear for my own work, that I will come to an understanding of the inherent and multiple shades of the power position of the academic (namely, myself), but will be unable to follow through.  That following through would involve the rigorous self-interrogation of my work and my own subject position as well as the offering up of that work to the scrutiny of my “subjects.”  

Having grown up in a conservative, rural, Pentecostal town in Oklahoma, I agreed with Lawless’ interpretations of the female pastors.  I was not surprised at all at Sister Anna’s concerns over Lawless’ analysis.  Her concerns are not based solely in religion, but also in the general social attitude toward women that can come out in rural/small town areas.  Schools and communities may pay lip service to equality for women, but the general “feeling,” attitude, perhaps habitus, is that you (as a woman) find a man and marry after high school.  Your individuality terminates there.  I saw classmates go through this feeling that to want more was to ask too much, to be too prideful.  Yes, it has roots in religion, but it is not all religious in how it bears out in people’s lives and psyches.  This is the only little issue that I had with Lawless, that she forgot that she was a feminist scholar, influenced by other such scholars.  She even notes that she LEARNED to take pride in herself as an individual and in her work as a scholar.  When it is the habitus (I hope I am using that word correctly) to value the lives and needs of men over those of women, you learn it because you live it.  It was not surprising to me that Sister Anna, despite her position as a pastor, would feel part of this atmosphere and be bound by its restricts without ever seeing them as restrictions, but as the way things are.  

Specifically on the issue of reflexivity that Barbara Babcock was discussing, a song kept playing through my head:  “White and Nerdy” by Weird Al Yankovick!  In this song, the character of Weird Al describes with extreme self-awareness, and NO unhappiness whatsoever, why the gangsters won’t “roll” with him.  The character (which is the singer’s persona in songs and on-stage) says I know how the gangsters perceive me and I OWN it.  I am sure pocket protectors, Star Trek, and rolls of bubble wrap were not what St. Augustine had on his mind.  But, Weird Al perceives the perceptions of himself and also shows how he perceives the gangsters’ perceptions of him.  Here is the link to the video:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9qYF9DZPdw.   This video features Donny Osmond in his own self-reflexive moment, dancing in the background.  At least this is how I perceive Osmond’s appearance.  

Plus, we could always talk about how the entertainment industry LOVES when older male stars “humorously” reflect on their own roles later in their careers.  William Shatner, anyone?  Ha, ha, ha.  I made it back to Star Trek.  Sorry, Kirk, I really do prefer Picard.  Make it so (by pressing the publish post button). :)