Sohn Article Response

I'm an overall fan of Katherine Kelleher Sohn. Sohn's work was the first I had ever encountered that dealt with the subject of Appalachian literacies in a sustained way (with a publication date of 2003, this article, which predates her book of the same name by three years, is still comparatively recent.) The questions Sohn asks and the points she makes about Appalachian women as voiced, literate agents are illuminating, but I think what might be most valuable to me as a student of these literacies is the door she opens up for future explorations.  

I've been trying to articulate my perceptions of what Sohn is doing with this article that makes it academically valuable. The participants in Sohn's study upend the perception that Appalachian peoples remain in the hills and hollers because they are, economically or socially, trapped; in fact, the participant Jean perceives a strong desire to remain, as the the area is “like a security blanket, really. You know everybody and get along so well” (425). Sohn expands on this point in the book-length version of this study, finding that her participants actively disagreed with the sense of a “better” world outside the mountains that “many academics tout to them,” because they could “see that what they have is better” (14)--better in the form of cultural values for strong family and place bonds. She also notes in her article that some of the participants could find better economic opportunities elsewhere, but opt instead to remain in the region. Sohn highlights the literate activities undertaken by the women in her studies and their parents, who she perceives as strong formative influences. While none of the participants had parents who attended college, all were in some way interpretable as taking active roles in alphabetic and community literacies, combating the perception that Appalachians somehow choose illiteracy or ignorance. 


Perhaps my favorite point that Sohn makes about her participants backgrounds was the issue of the educational systems in the region; if anything, the public school system actively “marginalized working-class students” (427), in essence “perpetuat[ing] demeaning stereotypes about working-class Appalachian people” (427). Is it any wonder that women such as those in Sohn's study felt silenced by the academic options previously opened to them? 

Sohn primarily explored the ways these Appalachian women have overcome this academic silencing, challenging stereotypes while doing so. What interests me most, however, is not specifically tied to Appalachian peoples achieving academic literacy, so much as what academic literacy can learn from Appalachians. While Sohn demonstrates that each of her participants took something valuable from their experiences learning academic literacy, what, if anything, were they allowed to contribute? This question seems addressed tacitly by Sohn, who observes that her work with Appalachian first-generation college students, particularly women, has been influential in her own conceptions of academia and Appalachia; is there room for a wider influence? Paula Mathieu has put forth that, in order to live as thoughtful, engaged citizens, we need to have the skills to formulate conceptions of place and place ethics...what one might think of as a sense of place-literacy. Sustainability as a whole has become more influential in the composition classroom than it has ever been. Why are we not looking to Appalachia to learn more about these concepts? 

As far as the cultural climate of OU is concerned, I'm attaching links to two youtube videos produced by students in my 151 course, asking fellow students about their perceptions of Appalachia:  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PJZISR4H2g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_7LmNlpLMM&feature=youtube_gdata_player


Additional Works Cited:

Mathieu, Paula, et al. Writing Places. New York: Pearson Longman, 2005.

Sohn, Katherine Kelleher. Whistlin' and Crowin' Women of Appalachia: Literacy Practices since College. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 2006.