[The film can be viewed here: https://www.nfb.ca/film/everybodys_children]
This will probably offend some people. I'm having a very hard time writing this response. I've stopped myself half a dozen times now, erased everything, pulled my hair in frustration, and came back to nothing again. So I'm just going to rant. I'm going to say some things that I'll probably regret, but whatever, it's probably the only way I'll get anything down and not immediately erase it. This is going to be a lot of pent up frustration. A lot of anger and bile and self loathing. I don't know how people can watch “Everybody's Children” without feeling incredibly angry, ashamed and depressed. I guess maybe if you shut out everything else in the film, and just focus on the personal progress of these two individuals, you might be able to say “Yeah, they're doing well, their lives are improving.” But that would be ignoring every other facet of reality around them. You would have to ignore the horror and absolute sadness of the lives they come from, of how messed up our world is to allow those situations to exist. You would have to ignore the reality that they are two extreme cases of chance and good fortune, that they got out, had people help them, somehow managed to escape, and not get sent back, and are resourceful enough to keep working, keep fighting, and survive. How many others in those situations are left behind, currently still suffering, without any chance of relief or change? How can you not think about that and not get extremely depressed and want to yell and cry about it? I know I can't. How can you watch this film without feeling guilty? Guilty for our privilege (I hate that word right now) that we take for granted everyday. Guilty for never considering how lucky we are, fortunate we are, to have basic things, safety, food, education, loving families, friends, freedom to speak, walk, act as we want? Dress as we want, believe what we want? I know we're not supposed to feel guilty for everything, that those are simply facts of life and beyond our control, but that doesn't stop that feeling deep in the pit of my stomach which turns and knots itself within me. Don't you get that feeling watching this film? Don't you feel guilty that this is probably the first time you ever thought about what a refugee might actually face coming to Canada? No support, government aid, language help, nothing? Just get off a plane and start being questioned? And here we talk about how amazing Canada is as a bastion and sanctuary for people. We (general opinion as far as I can tell) look down upon countries like America, who refuse more refugee's than us. Yeah ... aren't we great. It feels like that's such a hollow gesture, an image we propagate to make us all feel good about ourselves, a nice pat on the back, 'We're Canadian, did you know how amazing we are? We help people all over the world.” And yet none of us know the reality of that situation unless you've lived it. It almost feels like this giant collective lie we buy into, just like our amazing “multiculturalism” that we sell every chance we get. Hey, I don't mean to be completely pessimistic. Yes, we are better than some countries when it comes to helping others. Yes, we do some good things. And even if it's the bare minimum, I guess that counts for something, right? But it makes me feel ashamed that we could be doing so much more, and whats worse, is that we care more about selfish interests; music awards, celebrity gossip, fashion, all those other distractions that mean so little when you think about it, but spend zero time thinking about people on the fringes of society. People who genuinely need aid, want to be Canadian, dream of having the same opportunities as us. What bothers me even more is that I know, in a day, two days from now, I'll go back to all those other distractions. Because that's how easily it is to just forget these issues. Why be reminded of the ugliness and struggle of life when we can watch a movie, download a tv show, go shopping, indulge in gratuitous, instant satisfaction? Take pictures of our meals, check how many likes our posts get; all the ways in which we dull our minds and engage in this new pop culture consumerism. Our lives are built around ease and excess, and anything that doesn't fit in nicely conveniently gets ignored and brushed aside. I know I'm passing judgment on everyone. I know that's wrong of me as well. Who am I to decide what people should be concerned with? How full of myself am I to presume to know better, to understand what a meaningful life should entail? And you'd be right to call me a hypocrite and a liar and delusional. I'm just as bad as everyone else. If not worse. I sit at family dinners, Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter, and listen to my own family members criticize and degrade refugee's and immigrants here in Canada. I hear some of my own friends generalizing them, calling them lazy, freeloaders, drains on the economy. It makes me so mad, because they say these words while sitting a few chairs away from my grandparents, who came here to Canada, with nothing, taking low, manual labour jobs, struggling day in and day out, who were themselves targeted as dirty 'wops' or 'daigo's by established Canadians before them. My own grandparents came to Canada under the exact same circumstances. From war torn Europe after World War II, with nothing; no money, no English, no education, my grandmother couldn't even write her name. She simply signed with an 'X'. And now people who are suffering, from another region in the world, from another war, are being treated just as ignorantly, just as callously. Here are people I love and normally respect, pretending like we have some right to be here over anyone else. It makes me disgusted and frustrated and honestly, it makes me hate this idea of being a proud Canadian. People always talk about the “Canadian” identity. How it has become some hard to define idea because we are so multicultural now. I don't believe in that. Yes, we are a mix of cultures, and within that there is a lot of hatred and loathing and jealousy. Each new wave of immigrants and refugee's is targeted by those here before them. No one wants to give away their part of the pie. We are all selfish, and that's part of human nature. But we Canadian's love pretending we're different. 'We don't do that! Not in this great Country. We don't have racism or sexism!' If you want to see the real Canadian identity, you have to look at what actions we have done as a Nation, that truly defined us. That doesn't mean just the things we're proud of. I don't want to take away from them. Just a few days ago, Kenneth Taylor passed away, and I was struck by how few young Canadians know about him, about how his actions helped to cement our international identity as a country that cared about others and did the right thing. I think about my godfather, Alex J. Simmons, who lied about his age to fly in World War II as a tail gunner in a Lancaster. I can still hear him describing how it felt to feel his hands freeze as they flew over the Atlantic, how he survived being shot down into the ocean, and swam for a day before being picked up by an Allied boat. And more importantly, I remember how his voice would sink away and fall silent when he got to the people who had died next to him, about the horrors he had seen and how war wasn't all heroics and bravery. A lot of my identity as Canadian comes from people like my godfather, from my grandparents, from the celebrated elements of our countries history, and the ugly truths as well. Maybe that's why I'm soo messed up and I can't simply believe in one thing. Maybe that's why I get so incensed when I see movies like this, that show the harsh realities of people who truly love our country, and how poorly we treat them, the adversity they face, and how much ignorance and delusion everyone else lives with. I know I've gone way off track, and ranted and raved about issues maybe not even in this film. But it brought them all to the fore for me. This film really wasn't about education for me. It was about a deeper, more intricate issue, one I've struggled with for as long as I can remember. It's about life, and how unfair it is, and how some people can go about their everyday lives and never have to face that reality, while others will stare it in the eyes each and every day. And perhaps even more controversially, should everyone even have to? Should people who are safe, and well off, and living happy lives, do they need to feel guilty? Do they need to be brought down and forced to feel responsible or liable? How do we reconcile anything in a world where nothing is fair, and we don't even know if it's supposed to be? I remember, during the scene at school, where Sallieu is talking to his classmate about mental training, the other boy says something along the lines of “I don't even know if I should tell you, because this is serious stuff”. It made me so angry, for this other kid to judge Sallieu, treat him as if he was inferior, like he didn't have the mental toughness to do this ridiculous mental training, when he had been through soo much. Someone who had seen his village attacked, his own mother killed in front of his eyes, and some Canadian kid in his class is lecturing him on mental toughness? It made me want to scream. But even then, I catch myself, because I know we can't count people's suffering and experiences like points that add up. You can't assume that because someone hasn't seen as much hardship, or suffered as much, that their views or experiences aren't worthwhile. Because that's its own kind of ignorance and bias. How amazing does that make Sallieu? To not be bitter and angry about things? To move on from those experiences and be able to still listen to others, to not be jaded and feel entitled? I know I wouldn't be that strong. I know I couldn't accept the world and hold onto hope as he did. Maybe that's what I'm really angry about, maybe that's the real issue. Deep down I know I come from a “privileged” background. I haven't had to suffer like my grandparents or parents did. My life hasn't been easy, but it's nothing compared to the stories and experiences of soo many people around me. It's almost like survivors guilt, where I can't stand myself for being the exception, for being one of the lucky one's who didn't have to earn everything through blood, sweat and tears. To be honest now, at the end, I don't know what I was supposed to get out of that film. And I don't even know what I did get. I still feel angry. I still feel wrong. I want to erase all this and start again, and maybe if I did, I would write something completely different. Maybe I would try to look at something positive from this film. Both Joyce and Sallieu really are amazing people. I'm blown away with how resilient their spirits are. Seeing their suffering and struggles makes me want to be a better person. Maybe that's the take away message. That there are people in life, from any background, any situation, who are constantly striving to improve, to make a difference, to be good people. Those are the kinds of lessons you wish you could inspire, share in, develop, as a teacher. Right now, I don't feel very optimistic that I'd ever be able to do that. In fact, I feel exactly the opposite. I feel drained and helpless, depressed and lost. Where do you even start? How do you fix a system that is so complicated, so broken, so broad, that we can't even make sense of where to begin? I don't know. What's worrying me most about this whole process, about becoming a teacher, is that it's looking more and more that those questions that haunt me, aren't going to be answered, and that really, there are no answers for these problems. It's just life. And I'm not even sure I know what that means to me. Alright, I'm lost, and frustrated and just going in circles. I'm sorry if you read this, because I don't feel like I got anywhere. I just complained and whined and griped, and I feel like a brat. To be honest, I wish we had watched this film as a group, and sat down after for an hour or two, and just talked. These responses and responding are great, but its a sad excuse for real discussion and real sharing. I guess that's something I can take away from all this... Anyways, I'm done for now, thank you for listening. Hope I didn't offend anyone too much.
2 Comments
So reading through Ayers Chapter 3, on creating a classroom environment was interesting, and filled with a lot of wonderful ideas, and yeah ... yay? I don't know how much more I can say. I think the only real issue is when you get a classroom, what limitations, structures, budget, guidelines are you forced to deal with and how can you go from there? Making it engaging, warm, inviting, open, creative, unique, personalized, interesting, malleable, spontaneous, etc etc, are all wonderful. Sometimes I do wonder why our classrooms get progressively less interesting and more ordered as we age. I definitely was not any wiser/more organized as I grew up, and my methods of thinking, interests and personality are just as chaotic as when I was a child, so why not allow that to continue? A lot of this relates to a podcast that I really enjoy; and this particular episode (found here: Katy Says Nature School podcast) deals specifically with Nature School, where the guest, Katy Bowman, a prominent biomechanical engineer, sends her children. Her whole philosophy on life is incredibly interesting to me, and one of the aspects she deals with is returning to nature and living a holistic lifestyle that is aligned and well. The nature school her children attend actually teaches everything outside, no classrooms, and has the students out and interacting with nature ALL THE TIME (yes even taking a portable little potty with them for natures call :p). It's a pretty drastic change from our normal schools, but it definitely has HUGE benefits. Students are taught the same kinds of things, but instead of playing with colorful toys and sitting on a carpet, they are walking in a forest, counting berries or pine cones, and being engaged with real life. I'm definitely in love with the concept (I follow a lot of her cool ideas, or at least, try to) and would love to move my own teaching towards this kind of mentality. Chapter 3 from Hopkins, on the Five Key Themes for Creating the Restorative Classroom was also very interesting and very ... nice ... Not a lot I could disagree with on that end as well. I'm sure the biggest detractors for this type of class dynamic would point to time constraints, age/maturity level of students, and archaic arguments like "Well that's just not done!! That's not practical!" which don't hold any water.
What did interest me most, and which was not mentioned in any way, was how closely modeled this approach is on traditional forms of conflict resolution, especially those employed by tribes in Papa New Guinea and the surrounding Islands. I read a lot of incredible examples from Jared Diamond's amazing book "The World Until Yesterday" which analyzes indigenous peoples from around the world and identifies the lessons, practices and truths we can learn from them (and things that we shouldn't learn!) in contrast to our Westernized view of everything. It is a wonderful book, filled with incredible lessons, but like the restorative classroom, I'm sure that seeing it's lessons in practice is a truly humbling experience. Jared identifies that small tribes and communities, usually less than 200, do not use judge based or rights based conflict resolution strategies like we do, and people are not obsessed with wrongs being righted or the idea of "justice" being restored. Similar to what Hopkins outlines, questions such as "What do I need to move on from this?" are asked in community settings, with everyone having a unique voice, and from there, actions are decided upon in order to allow everyone to redevelop relationships and move on. No one demands retribution (well, I guess they could, but it's not common), and relationships are often mended and grief shared. There are of course downsides, such as generational grudges and inter-tribe warfare that can consume cultures. I'm guessing a lot of those issues could affect restorative classrooms as well. If students hold grudges and don't want to move on, you can't really force them. In a top down system, you can just have them swallow their pride and move on, arbitrarily assigning a sense of closure, which isn't possible in a restorative/tribe council type of way. I do think the emphasis on "harmonious" is a little too optimistic for me. Tension, conflicts and division are natural elements of being human, and more importantly, almost ALWAYS present in communities (at one time or another). Trying to expect them to be eliminated by any system is naive. Why not use them as an advantage? By focusing more on working relationships, rather than harmony, we can teach students to develop skills to cooperate and accept others, without it having to be perfect. Indigenous cultures often left relationships in an imbalance, and used them in the future for favors or trade, because they realized that imbalances in relationships were inevitable, and as long as they were working towards keeping a relationship, they could co-exist. I know the word "restorative" is getting a lot of airtime these days, and I wonder when exactly came into vogue, but I do like how Hopkins piece, and the related ideas behind Ayers, tie into age old customs and practices which have proven to be effective for centuries. I would love to find more ways in which traditional cultures and knowledge are reflected in our pedagogy and how we can implement other effective examples and techniques :) Entre Les Murs
So coming into this movie I had some preconceived notions to deal with. One being that I've seen some other foreign films about education, and they never end well or have a nice warm feeling to them. Also, this was chosen for us as an assignment, so obviously it had some kind of value, purpose or lesson that we should take away from it. That being said, I did enjoy the movie, but probably for reasons which most people would have hated. The film starts with a seemingly positive beginning. Teachers bantering about, meeting each other and starting the new year off on a positive note. There is however an undertone of the coming problems, as teachers share tips on good or bad students, labeling and stereotyping them right from the beginning. Now, having known “good” and “bad” students, is this a negative thing? Shouldn't teachers share and learn from each others experiences? I guess if you use that to blind yourself and to dismiss students, then of course its bad, but I found myself in a difficult position, would I do that myself? Or would I dismiss those comments and be mature enough to enter the classroom with a blank slate? You also get the sense that there is a real tension with the teachers, and they see themselves as a group separate and opposed to the students. A real 'Us' vs 'Them' mentality seems to be emerging. As for Mr. Marin himself and his class, he seems to have his heart in the right place, but his methods and persona are a little hard to watch. He engages his students, and you can see he cares, he doesn't let them slack off, but he is also struggling to acknowledge them and feels threatened when his position as the 'Teacher' is challenged or threatened. Sarcasm, belittling them or singling students out are unfortunately staples of his teaching style. Again he is reinforcing the 'us' vs 'them' mentality, even though he does want them to succeed. This is where the real genius of the film is shown, as it creates this uncomfortable, icky feeling for the viewer, where you are torn between wanting to like Mr. Marin, wanting to fall into a nice, warm, fuzzy feel good movie plot where the teacher helps the poor ignorant inner city kids, but it doesn't let you. It allows you to identify with him, laugh sometimes, feel good, but then immediately pulls that away, and showcases how selfish, petty and strict Mr. Marin can be. The students are also not one dimensional characters, neither wide eyed, hopeful youth, nor hardened, heartless thugs. They're a wide mix of personalities and backgrounds which further confuses the situation. So what do we end up with? A real, complex, confusing, chaotic, sometimes wonderful, often difficult classroom, with a teacher who feels like he wants to help his students, wants to connect, but can't handle losing control or authority. Entre les murs literally means, between these (the) walls, and I guess most people would see it as a take on classrooms and schools, and seeing the life therein, however I feel the title relates much more profoundly to the idea of being stuck, of being pressed between two harsh realities, and not knowing how to deal with that. For the students, it's stuck between expectations, rules and the teachers, and trying to grow and develop and learn about themselves. For the teachers, it is being stuck between good intentions, wanting to help, and the reality of not knowing how to do that, having to follow the rules and curriculum, and being part of a large machine that you have no control over. Race, gender, social status, religion, these are all issues facing the students, teachers, everyone in the film, and they have to navigate those “walls” as well. When I found out that Mr. Marin is played by the actual author of the film, François Bégaudeau, and that his story is a reflection of his own experiences, my respect for the film definitely grew. Not because I thought he was an amazing teacher, but rather because I was impressed by how honest and realistic the story is. Mr. Marin loses control, shows his pettiness and lashes out at his students. He is human, and it takes A LOT for a teacher to not only recognize those flaws, but to put them on display. He targets the students, harbors genuine malice towards some of them, and even though he wants to help, cannot put their needs above his own. Even with those faults, he represents a kind of middle ground and compromise in the teaching staff, as we see other teachers breakdown, lash out and completely attack the students. The pressure and strain of teaching at this school are real, and very palpable. Even the other teachers who seem to have it under control are really only using coping mechanisms, distancing themselves from the students, or relying on the rules and regulations to admonish them of responsibility. The atmosphere and situation is quite toxic and negative. The school community is dominated by their obsession with punishment and respect. Students are forced to act in a way deemed acceptable by the staff, treating them as beyond the laws that apply to the students, and to accept judgment as something beyond reproach. All infractions must be punished and this clearly sets some students on the road for disaster. Even cases where merit is earned, the encouragement is strictly related to performance and grades, with no exceptions or efforts made to reward poorly performing students for their efforts. Mr. Marin seems to want to reform this and allow at risk students a chance to participate, but that gets lost in the day to day battle he conducts in class. Sadly, as I'm sure is the case in a lot of schools, solving the issue with punishment and teacher mentality is given less priority than the coffee machine in the staff room. Perhaps the most bizarre scene of the film was the teacher discussion (with student reps) of the students, comparing notes and determining which students require punishment or not. In what world is it a good idea to tear into and insult students in front of their classmates, allowing them to take notes and report on it? Why would you even want other students present at that kind of a meeting? Are there no issues with student confidentiality? I just found this ridiculous and hopefully not what's really used. Allowing teachers to openly smear or praise students in front of other staff and students is incredibly damaging and intolerant. Another interesting point brought out at this meeting was the notion of what a teachers duty is. While Mr. Marin is trying to advocate for Souleymane to not be punished, another teacher counters with: “Our job is not to let them sit at the back and not cause waves. It's to bring them out.” This idea shocked me, as I can't imagine any teacher not seeing their primary and driving goal and raison d'être to be educating their students and providing a safe environment. Why would it be any teachers job to bring out the bad students? We are not police. We are not there to weed out the bad kids. How can any teacher defend such a view? It made me sad to see how this mentality would continue to influence the rest of the film and play such a key role in Souleymane's destiny. The major incident scene in the film was like watching a train wreck in slow motion. You had the sense that this was going to end badly, and it quickly escalated out of control. Again, the director deserves credit for creating such a tense, chaotic and natural scene. I would assume that many people would blame Mr. Marin for lashing out, saying such a clearly inappropriate and offense term, and then trying to justify it, taking it out on Souleymane. I don't want to defend him, but I can see how natural his response and anger were. He was actually defending Souleymane throughout that meeting, trying to fight for his future, saying that he displayed real talent and skill, if given the chance. That the two girls would completely blindside him, and take his comments out of context must have been a real stab in the back. And like any normal person, he reacted poorly. He became defensive. His very motives were undermined and his authority clipped, so he lashed out and tried to reassert himself, to save face, to retain power. And of course he lost that very thing. He even knows what he is doing is wrong, but he cannot overcome his own ego, his own shame, and gets pulled deeper into the ground. I really feel for his character because I have lashed out at students before (not physically, and not as badly, but I did call some girls spoiled brats for picking on a poorer classmate and being just terrible), and I knew as soon as the words came out of my mouth how wrong I was, and how out of control I was. And then you immediately go into damage control mode. You back peddle, you try and save face, try to regain control, but unfortunately, as a teacher, you can't take those things back. Even during the hearing, you can see that he wants to defend Souleymane, and give him another chance, but doing so undermines his own position and career, and he remains silent, remains safe. Is it admirable? Of course not. Would I be brave enough to act differently? I hope I don't have to find out. (Also, why was the vote secret ballot?!? That's crazy! A students future is at stake, and you don't have to justify or stand behind your votes? That is ridiculous, I think that student has a right to know exactly who is voting for what, and why.) Finally, perhaps the most moving and interesting part of the film was the final sequence, where one of Mr. Marin's students stays behind, after everyone has shared what they have learned, and confesses she has not learned anything. This is an incredibly powerful scene because she is not just commenting on the French class, nor her tests and homework and lessons. What she is really saying, what these words “I don't understand what we do. I didn't learn anything.” really means is that this school is failing her. The school, the system, the purpose of education in France, it is failing the people who need it the most. She cuts to the core of the big questions we are struggling with in class right now, what is education? Who decides what it is for? How do we teach? What do we teach? What do students need to know? How do we judge them, assess them, value them? All of those questions, to her, they are not being answered, not being addressed. She spent the whole year in the background, on the fringes, watching, but not being taught, not learning, nothing. She came out the same way she came in, just a cog being pushed through. She feels her future is already set, her destiny predetermined; “I don't want to go to vocational school.” She see's that she has no future, no choices, no hope. It's heartbreaking. That is the reality of soo many students. Stuck between those walls, sitting at a desk, just being pushed through. This is what made the movie so powerful to me, it didn't answer any of my questions, it didn't resolve anything. It left a flawed, sometimes well meaning teacher, no wiser, no better, and a class of students, a little older, just moving forwards on a predetermined path, hopefully feeling like they earned something, but really, just pieces of a puzzle. And so, I guess I return to try and summarize and piece together my own chaotic emotions after watching the film. There was a lot more in it that I would love to discuss, but this is what I'll stick to for now. It's hard. It does not make me look forward to being a teacher. And it definitely does not make me think I could do any better. It worries me and makes me question myself. It's unsettling. But unsettling can be good. Comfort is a demon and a siren that is much too dangerous. This movie makes me want to be a better teacher, and even more so, makes me want to learn what a better teacher means. |
Archives
October 2016
Categories |