One thing I have learned about social change writing is that it can manifest in a variety of different ways. It is written in many genres, targets disparate groups of people, and works towards enacting different levels of social change. I previously had a more narrow conception about what social change writing meant, which was more strictly tied really to protest movements and motivational pieces.

I am wondering how authors of social change texts like to measure their success. One obvious way would be by measuring literary awards/accolades, but I am wondering if there are are other metrics specific to pieces with implications for social change and what those metrics may look like.

Process notes: I decided to put these slogans in a circle because they are sayings with circular meaning. They are moving counterclockwise to symbolize they are moving back in time. I was inspired by Layli Long Soldier’s “choose your own adventure” poem; there are several ways you could read this.

The pieces for this week demonstrated a wide variety of mechanisms for constructing social change. The Old Art of Puppetry in the New World Order and the 40 How Tos both had multiple levels of interpretation. They both had the appearance of having a simple meaning that could be grasped simply by looking at the illustrations, but they also obviously had meaning beyond their images. I liked the dual messaging because it forces the reader to engage with the pieces on multiple levels; it is hard not to look at the images before reading the text.

The Truth Pageant, which was artistically impressive and elaborate, made broad claims of society, but only attracts a not so large group of left-leaning, Vermont-friendly liberals. Even though the Truth Pageant would probably like their message to be consumed by a wide variety of audiences, it won’t be because it only appeals to some. I particularly enjoyed the sketch about the Supreme Court because of the humor it added to an otherwise often dry but important topic. Brecht and Bentley’s piece on alienation in Chinese acting, reminded me that even in the Truth Pageant, despite its attempts to frame itself in the global context, was presented with geographical and cultural biases.

The Chicago Economic Experience is open 9:00am – 5:30pm, Monday – Friday in the Saieh Hall for Economics. There is no cost to enter.

Walking through the exhibit feels like stepping back to a time when no one would blink an eye at a deified poster of twelve white men. In the center of the circular, singular room is a pillar highlighting the honors and accolades of University of Chicago economists.

Video interviews run continuously in the background, even grabbing the attention of an unobservant guest. Speakers hang on the ceiling and make the voices sound as if they are coming from inside your head.

The most thought-provoking part about this exhibit, however, is what it neglects to mention.

Some section headers read: What is Chicago Economics?; Economics Everywhere, All the Time; The Influence and Impact of Chicago Economics. I thought here I might find what I was looking for. But no.

They talk about investment in human capital

They talk about the principles of agriculture

They talk about the Great Depression

They talk about “Enduring Influence”

Not the human capital disappeared during the Dirty War

Not the reversal of agrarian reforms across Latin America

Not shock treatment during Chile’s military dictatorship

Not Bolsonaro’s Minister of the Economy

The Chicago Boys

Saieh’s shrine has no room for this distinction.

Process notes: I did not know what I would find in this exhibit. I thought there might be some mention of the commonly known epithet: The Chicago Boys, which refers to the Chicago economists that consulted for fascist dictatorships in Latin America primarily in the seventies/eighties. The absence made me want it to be the focus of the piece.

Footnote: Alvaro Saieh is also an economist who studied at the University of Chicago.

I was impressed by Boyer’s ability to write in a way that is so deeply personal and reflective, and yet also technical and didactic. This is a difficult combination because these types of writings usually take the form of different genres. The Undying, which is a memoir/novel, at points reads like poetry and at other moments like more of a historical account. In the beginning in particular, I was reminded of Layli Long Soldier’s Whereas because of Boyer’s repetition of phrases and her intentional placing of words on the page.

The story Boyer is sharing with her readers is especially impactful because she takes the readers through her medical and emotional journey. The readers learn information at the same time the narrator does, however, the readers benefit from years of the author’s reflection. Even though the debilitating effects of breast cancer are discussed at length, Boyer still manages to be empowering and thoughtful in contextualizing her story in a larger story of breast cancer as a global phenomenon. I am wondering how she balanced recounting her in the moment feelings with hindsight reflection, and what this balance meant for the readers’ experience.

Dear Dr. Krogh,

Over the last several decades, your contributions to Eastern European scholarly literature, particularly with regard to Hungary, have been greatly impactful. Both inside and outside of the historical discipline, you have deepened our understanding of a variety of social phenomenon, repeatedly pushed back on conventional wisdom, and brought forward new archives that have shed light on your research and that of researchers who have followed in your tracks. Your last book deserved all of the critical acclaim it received. It is for these reasons that your recent suspension from travel to Hungary is most unfortunate.

The travel ban has made it clear that Hungary’s constitution can no longer protect you or any freedom of speech under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government. When you signed the Academic Alliance for Hungary’s petition last month, it publicized your position in opposition of Orbán, and sealed your fate on the travel ban. Orbán’s efforts to silence criticism and his inclination towards self-preservation is scarily reminiscent of a time in Hungary’s recent history that we know you are very familiar with.

The cost of the ban on your research is not measurable. For the sake of the future Hungarian scholarship, we encourage you to spread your story so that other academics in similar positions may consider the consequences of signing political petitions. If there is anything that we can do to aid you in your future endeavors, please do not hesitate to reach out.

Sincerely,

“The Academy”

Lecture to Scholars of Easter Europe

Globalization has widened the scope of our research, but also has brought some unexpected consequences to academics in our field. Some of you may have heard of the recent travel ban Prime Minister Viktor Orbán instated against anyone who publicly signed the Academic Alliance for Hungary petition last month. The ban affected several of your colleagues including Dr. Krogh.

What is happening in Hungary, and has been the trend globally, is not something our field should take lightly – I know this is not the case for any of you. However, I urge you all to consider the value of your research when making decisions about how you choose to engage with the contemporary political situation. Your work has the potential to be incredible impactful, and the cost of being barred from a country where you do research may not be worth your signature on a petition. Ultimately, this is a personal choice you must make.

Process notes: In these two pieces, I was trying to get at the phenomena of academics hesitating to vocalize their political opinions for fear of being banned from doing research in the areas they focus on. I do not believe in the positions represented, but I thought using a critical tone would better get the point across. Switching from a letter to a lecture forced me to make the content more broad because it was addressed to a wider audience and also changed the message. Also, everything, aside from Viktor Orbán, is not true.

Ruskin’s first lecture has a pseudo-scientific feel, which continued to make me wonder while reading how literally Ruskin was taking his claims about the plague-wind and plague-clouds. His tone varied from persuasive to animated and I think the overall tone would have been more easily gaged in the piece’s intended lecture format. I enjoyed the progression of time subheadings as a literary device. I thought the passage of time displayed in this way allowed Ruskin to appropriately fragment his work and also added legitimacy to Ruskin’s story because the time was carefully measured and documented. More than Ruskin, Baldwin emphasized how his pieces fit into the historical record. It is an interesting question to think about what was gained or lost by the more subtle approach. In both of Baldwin’s pieces, he clearly outlines the problems and contradictions of African Americans in America and gives a call to action of people who are capable of making societal change. I thought Baldwin was able to articulately utilized the letter format such that the piece was both imaginable as a letter to its specified recipient, but also resonated deeply with a wide audience.

Provided that any person belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan…

Provided that the Muslim population does not exist

Provided that the constitution has proven it serves a limited purpose

Provided that there is no regard for freedom from religious discrimination

Provided that this is a façade for continued capitalist exploitation

Provided that intoxicating interests of the people are divided

Provided that India has other problems

Provided that the Ministry of Law and Justice serves the interests of the people

Provided that citizenship is a necessity

Provided that protesters internationally have said “No” to CAA

Be it enacted.

Process notes: The document I chose was the Citizenship Amendment Act which amends the 1955 Citizenship Act in India. The amendment created pathways to citizenship for people of various religious descent, but excluded the prominent Muslim population. I went to a talk yesterday on Emergent Global Fascisms (mostly in India) which provided some inspiration. The “provided” and “be it enacted” is from the legislation.

In Solmaz Sharif and Layli Long Soldier’s poetry, I was struck by the juxtaposition of legalistic, detached text with text that was emotional and personal. This happened not just in the use of “whereas” as a rhetorical device, but also in the content of the stanzas. For example, on page 72, Layli Long Soldier both discusses a text that reads, “the establishment of permanent European settlements” and also writes, “I wished most to kick the legs of that man’s chair.” The “whereas” structure allowed Layli Long Soldier, and also Solmaz Sharif to quickly jump around topics without having the piece feel entirely fragmented, but still the right amount of disjointed. In part II of Sharif’s poetry, when he has definitions on the left side of the page and interpretations on the right, the juxtaposition set up is literally just a divide down the middle of the page. I think these juxtapositions highlight the contrast between the text drawn from official documents, and the text that comes from the poets, thereby emphasizing their differences. This also made me focused on the individual words of the official government documents. I had trouble putting myself in the minds of a reader of the official documents; I would also like to know what the reaction to these poems would be from someone who both appreciates the poetry, but also deals with these types of documents on a regular basis.

A PERSON

How many persons does it take to make an entire group of people feel unwelcome in their own homes?

One to tweet? Several million to vote?

MY HOUSE

At the Thanksgiving table, the family sits divided. There is only one table, but cousins sit worlds apart. This place did not used to be this way.

PLACE

Born and raised. Immigrated. Married in. Everyone has their own relationship to place. For some, their relationship is defined by territorial boundaries or literal roots, for others it is by the climate and things less tangible.

WEATHER

The weather has decided to reflect the mood on the ground: existentially challenged, reactionary, exclusionary.

Does the place change when the climate does? Or is it the other way around?

Process notes: I have vaguely settled on the rise of populism as my topic. I chose to adopt the style and paragraph headings from one of Adnan’s poems; I felt that these headings could be appropriate for my topic and it was easier to work within more specific guidelines, though I did change the order of the paragraphs few times. I connected the paragraphs by including a concept connected to the following paragraph title in the previous paragraph in order to make the poem flow better. The questions at the beginning and the end add parallel.