Reading James Baldwin: A Student Guide, pt. 2
One of the interesting features of Baldwinâs essay is the breadth of scholarly and cultural knowledge it displays, and at the same time expects of its readers ââ without ever becoming a piece of either literary criticism or cultural theory itself. Besides the initial plunge into an ongoing argument over âthe use, or the status, or the realityâ of what Baldwin is calling âblack Englishâ (a construct not readily reducible to the more familiar category AAVE), Baldwinâs opening paragraphs also immediately position his essay within ââ and in some ways as counterpoint to ââ the discussions that were circulating in French intellectual circles at the time of his writing (1979).Â
Sidenote: Despite his association with the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S., Baldwin spent a substantial portion of his career living and writing from within the French-speaking world.Â
Itâs probably instructive to take a quick look at some of the ideas and conversations that were floating around in French philosophy in the years leading up to Baldwinâs âIf Black English Isnât a Language...â essay:Â
Late 1960s: Jacques Derrida publishes a series of works developing the âdeconstructivistâ approach for which he is primarily known. These works, broadly speaking, post a poststructuralist challenge to basic Saussurian linguistics by troubling the nature of the relationship between the âsignifierâ (typically a word or gesture) and the âsignifiedâ (the thing you mean when you say the word or make the gesture). In particular, Derrida questions whether any two participants in a conversation (in linguistics, âinterlocutorsâ) can ever truly be referring to exactly the same signified. That is to say: can different people ever truly share a meaning? The answer has implications not just for the efficacy of communication, but for the stability of identity: what is the relationship between what we mean and who we are?Â
1972: William Labov publishes Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular ââ the first major linguistic study of the English spoken by urban African Americans and, in its day, a groundbreaking study whose political and cultural ramifications were further confirmed by Labovâs own opinion piece on âAcademic Ignorance and Black Intelligence,â published in The Atlantic in June of the same year.Â
1972: Also in 1972, Algerian-born French theorist Louis Althusser publishes his famous essay on âIdeology and Ideological State Apparatuses...â in which he elaborates the notion of interpellation. This concept, which describes the way a subject (in philosophy, âthe subjectâ often refers not to the topic of conversation or to the subject of a sentence, but rather to an individual, self-aware and socially-located sentient being) is positioned by all the structures and dynamics of power in which they are embedded or enmeshed, quickly becomes influential within French Marxist philosophy.Â
Sidenote: In 1960s-1970s French theory, the term âMarxistâ did not have quite the negative connotations that it holds for many people in the U.S. today; thatâs important to keep in mind as we attempt to understand the cultural significance of these discussions and the terms used within them.Â
1978: Edward Said publishes Orientalism. Another paradigm-shifting text, Orientalism draws on poststructuralist understandings of subjectivity (the individual conscious beingâs sense of self as a distinct entity) as a process and product of discourse to articulate his concept of âthe Otherâ as a point of contrast and a social position to which (white, European) colonialist narratives continually relegate the inhabitants of colonial empires. Very briefly, in Saidâs telling European narratives build subjectivity through repeatedly constituting North African and Middle Eastern subjects as exotic, alien âOthersâ against which the European subjects can then be contrastively defined.Â
1979: James Baldwinâs essay âIf Black English Isnât a Language, then Tell Me, What Is It?â is published in The New York Times.Â
Reading Baldwin against the backdrop of these ongoing cultural tensions and debates helps us to get a better handle on where his own argument âfitsâ: where his thesis is coming from, and where his reasoning is headed. Â
Labovâs work doesnât necessarily initiate the conversation around âthe use, or the status, or the realityâ (Baldwin 762) of what Labov calls the âBlack English Vernacularâ so much as it crystallizes the terms of the debate so that they can be articulated (maybe even interpellated) and addressed. Derridaâs questioning of the fixity or idiosyncrasy of the relationship between signifier and signified is the intellectual shot that was heard around the world; its implications will be debated for decades, even among people who have never heard the name Derrida. Â
If you happen to be familiar with both Derrida and Labov ââ as I would suggest Baldwin, at the time of writing, clearly is ââ then Althusserâs claims about the function of interpellation in reinforcing social hierarchies and maintaining the status quo immediately emerges to the fore as a means whereby linguistic variation (Labov) and unstable/non-universal signifieds (Derrida) make it possible to call forth some subjects and impossible even to recognize others (a point Baldwin will raise in the course of his essay). Similarly, within this context the practices that Said calls âOtheringâ form a particularly glaring usage of this Althusserian deployment of language, in use, as a tool of ideology and, thus, of power.Â
Itâs worth returning, at this point, to the final sentence of Baldwinâs opening paragraph. Even without the benefit of the cultural and intellectual history I have just outlined, we could probably make a broad guess at his meaning ââ but if we read the passage again with the context just established in mind, I think we can see him linking together Althusser and Said: âthe otherâ as per Said (Baldwin 762) âis refusing to be definedâ (Baldwin 762) as per Althusser (although Althusser himself would probably reject the idea that any subject could effectively refuse interpellation) âby a language that has never been able to recognize himâ (Baldwin 762) ââ Baldwinâs own intervention into the conversation, and a way of turning the problem on its head: If non-white colonial subjects are perpetually defined as âOther,â exotic, alien, then by necessity they are always being positioned as outside the known parameters of English.Â
It is Baldwinâs recognition that interpellation means not just submitting to definition by language, but also the ability to use that definition and positioning as oneâs own point of entry into conversation, that leads to his further framing, in the next paragraph, of the price of language as âthe acceptance, and achievement, of oneâs temporal identityâ (Baldwin 762).Â
Annnnnd thatâs where we pick up with our discussion!Â