In my last blog, I examined Bracher’s view of how historicism is an impediment to identity formation. While I did not agree with this view, I nevertheless concluded that his assertion might be right after all, and that his views may actually explain why racism and prejudice will continue to thrive within the society (Ayo Aladejebi, Blog 5, 2012).
Over the past weeks, I have been struggling to understand how an individual’s identity is impacted and defined by the society. I have tried to analyse how an African proverb, “a tree cannot make a forest”, fits into this phenomenon. Assuming this proverb is accurate, it is important to explore how it interfaces with the concept of identity as presented in both Bracher and Wenger.
Bracher defines identity as “one’s sense of oneself and, more comprehensively, the sense of oneself as a force that matters in the world” (Bracher, 2006, p. 6). Bracher’s definition explicitly revolves around the notion of self and the individual. Bracher, right from the onset, dissociates his definition of identity from membership within the social setting of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, social class, nationality, age and religion. He goes on to present certain factors – “continuity, consistency, agency, distinction, belonging, and meaning” – which he describes as “distinct qualities” that an individual must experience in order for their identity to be fully validated (p. 6).
Wenger’s identity position, on the other hand, subscribes to the belief that identity is a “pivot between the social and the individual” (Wenger, 1999, p. 145). He explains that identity formation is not exclusively a concept of the individual and neither is it entirely an object of the society. Wenger contends that identity is, essentially an abstraction of both – the individual and the society. He explains that while it is important to acknowledge the individual within the construct of identity, it is also prudent to understand that the individual is an active participant within a shared community. He argues that separating the individual from the collective can be an arduous task as both concepts intertwine and the existence of one is not independent of the other (p. 146).
Comparing Wenger and Bracher, and their views of identity takes me back to my opening paragraph about the statement that “a tree does not make a forest”. Critically examining this proverb, I quickly realize the absence of a crucial piece which should be an addendum to the statement. It is apparent that Bracher, with the mind of a psychoanalyst, sees identity as starting and ending with the individual (Bracher, 2006, p. 14) while Wenger, a social learning theorist, sees identity as a continuous flow between the individual and the social, and often, with an obliterated boundary.
My postscript to the African proverb, “a tree cannot make a forest” would read something like this: but continuous cutting of the tree can create the demise of the forest. One of the unique features of Africentric learning is the recognition of the individual within the collective. It is also grounded in the belief that neither is of more importance than the other. Merriweather Hunn (2004) explains the interdependency of the individual and the community:
Communalism is expressed in an African proverb that says that a stream will never rise higher than its source. The individuals represent the stream, and the collective body represents the source. They are intricately connected and bound to each other. There is a sense of accountability and respect for each other (Merriweather Hunn, 2004, p. 69)
Wenger, stating his position on identity, is quick to distant himself from the opinion that “there is an inherent conflict between the individual and the collective” (Wenger, 1999, p. 146). He also reiterates that, to say that the individual is a symbol of “freedom and creativity” while the collective is seen as imposing “constraints and limitations” or vice versa, would be tantamount to an erroneous assumption (p. 147). Bracher’s argument that identity bearing within the collective is constricting raises the question of what is real and what is not. He explains that collective identity gives an individual a false sense of self. He argues that an individual becomes disengaged with his or her true identity, and automatically assumes the identity of the group (Bracher, 2006, p. 114).
Critical view of both assertions – Bracher’s and Wenger’s – will reveal that one position is not necessarily better than the other. My identity as an individual has changed periodically depending on context and location. I have assumed the identity of a son, a husband, and a father. This does not change the fact that I am a student, an employment specialist, and it does not minimize the fact that intertwined within these listed identities lies the fact that I am a Christian, a Nigerian, an African, a Canadian, an African Canadian and an African Nova Scotian.
While there are instances where these identities conflict with one another and sometimes make me question my true individual identity, they are nonetheless an integral part of my being. It is also worth noting that sometimes, I have had to assume some of these identities in order to conform to societal perception of who I am or should be. A case in reality is the fact that I became a Canadian citizen over a decade ago, but I am still required to answer the omnipresent question: where are you from?
Going back to the idea of a tree not being able to declare itself a forest, and a forest not being able to exist without trees, it becomes apparent how intricate the identity of an individual is linked to the society. Looking at identity from the lens of Africentrism, one can see a parallel between the analogy of a “river not rising higher than its source” (Merriweather Hunn, 2004, p.69) and Wenger’s assertion that:
We cannot become human by ourselves; hence a reified, physiologically based notion of individuality misses the interconnectedness of identity (Wenger, 1999, p. 146).
References
Bracher, M. (2006). Radical Pedagogy: Identity, Generativity, and Social Transformation.
Psychoanalysis, Education, and Social Transformation, New York, NY: Palgrave
Macmillan
Merriweather Hunn, Lisa (2004). Africentric philosophy: a remedy for Eurocentric dominance.
New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education (102), 65-74.
Wenger. E. (1999). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge,
Mass.: Cambridge University Press.
Ayo; I have throughly enjoyed your critic and comparison of Wenger and Bracher's interpretation on identity and the development of identity. You have given me a bit more to digest in terms of our assigned readings. Gladly I will review as you have posed insights, especially in regards to Africentrism that I had not considered. That is the missing piece in the learnings we have gained. I totally agree with your point about our identities changing due to the context, location, or situation that we are in. I truly relate. It would be interesting to further discuss what the implications are for African Nova Scotian learners as we continue to face, as all humans do and certainly African Nova Scotians, the ongoing conflicts with societal interpretation versus our own. Rosella
ReplyDeleteChairman, I agree with you on the plausibility of Wenger’s position on identity, especially, his meshing of the individual and the collective in the formation of identity. Even though he does not place great emphasis on race, there is an intended extrapolation that can include race based identity. But I will like to explore and extrapolate from your analogy of the tree and forest,especially as it applies to the African identity.
ReplyDeleteThere is another African proverb – an Akan one – that says the extended family is like a forest; when one is close, he/she sees the individual trees and yet from afar it becomes a monolithic dense mass. This proverb has been explained in terms of the strength and unity of the individual and the collective just as you have explained in your blog above, but judging from the time this proverb was popularized in Akan culture, I have a different spin on it that you may find interesting because it speaks to some foundations of current black or African identity.
I believe the proverb addresses the break down in traditional African communalism and solidarity during the era of the slave trade. Casely-Hayford, a Fanti scholar writing around the turn of the 20th century states that it was not uncommon during the period of the slave trade to have a father sell off his children, or siblings sell of other relatives into the slave trade. In short the familial ties that bound traditional African society were rent asunder.
One difference in the transition to private property, from communalism, between Europe and Africa was that while armed men seized the bulk of the land in Europe, in most of Africa the transition was along egalitarian lines. The slave trade halted these largely egalitarian transitions and broke the spine of family solidarity.
So then when the Akan person says the extended family is like a forest; the closer you are, you see the individual trees and from afar it looks like a monolithic mass, what he/she means is that the extended family unit looks so close and together from afar, but up close are the individual selfish people who pretend to be together. It was an era where we were transitioning into a vicious individualism that continues in Africa till today. Is it any wonder that the biggest rapists of the continental wealth are our own African leaders?
Ayo, your blog is incredibly insightful and well written. You have allowed me to view Bracher and Wenger, in a new light. I really enjoyed your comparison and appreciated the clarity in which you write. I also appreciated the analogy you used when you stated, “a tree cannot make a forest…but continuous cutting of the tree can create the demise of the forest”, this addendum to the African proverb you quoted, speaks volumes about the racism and oppression Black people have faced throughout our history, and the cutting down of our spiritual beings and the loss of our dignity. It makes me consider what has happened with Treyvon Martin, and how his death has impacted the way in which Black people throughout North America have been experiencing grief due to his murder and it has caused us to relive the victimization of our people, and recognize how far we have yet to go. Treyvon was just one tree in a forest of Black people, and simply due to his appearance was taken all too soon from this world, relaying the message that we as Black people are yet again not valued. The roots of Treyvon’s tree are interwoven with the roots of the surrounding trees that being the Black community, which has caused each tree in the surrounding forest to be impacted and touched by its loss. Thank you for this thought provoking analysis.
ReplyDeleteAyo, I found your blog to be very insightful. You have done an amazing job comparing Wenger and Bracher’s ideas around identity. I also like the way that you were able to bring these readings back to the topic of Africentrism, you have made these arguments much clearer for me. Your use of African proverbs gave your blog a very interesting dynamic that I really enjoyed. Your writing is so clear and concise, which is refreshing after reading so much Bracher.
ReplyDeleteTrev