Rural "Othering"

Ever seen the show “The Big Bang Theory”? One of its running gags is the character Sheldon's strained relationship with Nebraska-native Penny. At one point, after Penny has tried to illustrate an argument using her teen years in Nebraska, Sheldon remarks that he'll remember her speech if he's “ever nominated for the hillbilly peace prize.” That Penny's home state is part of the Great Plains is irrelevant; the understood merging of her (un-intelligent) rural background with Appalachia is understood.

Kim Donehower argues that rural stereotyping in America is traceable to stereotypes of Appalachia, in that “the American people cut their teeth on stereotyping rural regions through the demonization, and celebration, of Appalachia” (39), the result of which is that rural becomes equated with a stereotyped Appalachian culture. She roots much of the cultural stereotyping of Appalachia—and by extension, rural America—in the positive/negative paradox: either the angelic Waltons or demonic psychos of Deliverance, Appalachians are positioned as the “other” against which mainstream America positions itself. Literacy sponsors from outside the region have, in Donehower's view, approached the region as a “problem” to be solved in one of three ways: modernization, preservation, or urbanization.

I was interested in Donehower's theory of rural othering as connected with perceptions of “'pure' Anglo-Saxons living in the style of their Scottish and Irish forebears” (42). She connects this perception with an essentializing, preservation-based move on the part of outside literacy sponsors struggling with their own identities. However, I don't think she necessarily problematizes, or historicizes, this perception enough. The Scottish and Irish (who did make up part of Appalachian settlement though were, as she notes, by no means the sole cultural group to do so) were neither ethnically or culturally Anglo-Saxon, a status recognized by the early, largely English-descended populations along the east coast (the University of Tennessee’s Encyclopedia of Appalachia project offers extensively researched explorations of early class and cultural dynamics in pre- and post-colonial America.) In fact, the Scottish and Irish Celtic cultures that these early immigrants brought with them had endured centuries of oppression by the Anglo-Saxons and their English descendants. The initial “othering” in pre-American European society was an othering of the Celts by the Anglo-Saxons, an “othering” that was maintained in the early settlements of what became the United States. While Donehower raises the racializations of Appalachia, she neglects to consider the early racializations of the Celtic “others,” a system that continues to trouble relations between modern day English and Irish, Scottish, and Welsh cultures. Additionally, much of Appalachian culture emerged from amalgamations of Scotch-Irish, Cherokee Federation, and African-American peoples and cultures, making Appalachian peoples and cultures more unique among American cultural groups; Donehower does little to consider the othering of modern Appalachia as rooted in these dynamics, not just in any mistaken impressions of an Anglo-Saxon cultural root. While this perception, if truly widespread outside the region, could account for preservationist desires on the part of Anglophiles, I'm not convinced of its role in the region's initial othering. There are simply too many candidates. Donehower perhaps simplifies the roots of Appalachian othering too much, and seizes on an explanation that isn't necessarily a singular historical cause.

I also want more consideration of Donehower's arguments against “preservation” based approaches to “solving” the Appalachian issue. My concern with this is her silence regarding traditional rhetorics in many Appalachian regions that are in some ways preservation-based, intended to preserve family history and promote the sustenance of cultural values. I'm unclear as to whether Donehower's issue is with preservation itself as a way of life (which, if this is the case, could lead to negative cultural disruptions) or with the concept of outside voices choosing what should be preserved.

This confusion is compounded by my confusion as to how Donehower is positioning herself in this essay. She doesn't seem to position herself as Appalachian (which she is), and writes instead from a position of an academic (“us” as she says on page 46). Why? I would like to know Donehower's reasons for her subject position choices in an essay that could well have benefited from this clarification.

 Donehower's raises a need to consider the “problem” of Appalachia from inside, and well as outside, points of view. How do Appalachian peoples position themselves? What are their thoughts on the ways they have been defined by outsiders? How would they like to see education and literacy working in the region? Very few other scholars have done any work from an insider view of these issues, Katherine Kelleher Sohn being a notable exception, and I'm wondering how much the reason for this might have to do with a fear of what the insiders might say. [I'm thinking here of the section in Sohn's book-length study, Whistlin' and Crowin' Women of Appalachia, in which she points out the many Appalachian women who, having had academic literacy “touted” to them as a way of changing their lives--”solving” the Appalachian problem—decide that “what they have is better” (14)...thanks but no thanks.] The implications of Donehower’s argument, for teaching rural students to appropriate other literacies without being assimilated by them, are worth considering.

*What are your thoughts on Donehower's choice to not position herself as Appalachian? What are the effects of this choice? How could this essay have been different if she had claimed positionality as Appalachian?

*Is it problematic to her argument that Donehower poses academic “culture” (singular) as a force in the othering of Appalachia? Does this potentially silence academics who consider themselves also part of Appalachian culture?

* Do you read Donehower as finding the positioning of Appalachia as culturally distinct to be problematic? Do you agree that it is problematic? Problematic for who? What are the alternatives?

* How would you define the discourse on Appalachia at OU?

*In what ways have rural cultures/literacies been merged with Appalachia?

*What effects can Donehower's work have on the experiences Appalachian students encounter in our classrooms?

*Donehower recalls having to encourage and convince rural students to write about their home knowledges in the college classroom. Thoughts? Is there a point at which this encouragement risks becoming a sort of reverse prescription?

*What are the potential risks and benefits inherent in cultural outsiders acting as literacy sponsors to underprivileged groups? What are the potential risks and benefits of cultural insiders acting as literacy sponsors?

*Along the same lines as Anzaldua’s mestiza rhetoric, what might Appalachian-influenced academic literacies be like?