Abstract

Nancy Isenberg sums up fear of terms such as “white trash”: “‘white trash’ remind[s] us of one of the American nation’s uncomfortable truths: the poor are always with us.” Understanding culture as a narrative formation, which “means that it cannot be regarded as an isolated, or isolable, entity” (Lindquist 5), places “the poor” directly in relation to American academic culture. Sande Cohen’s true, yet much to be desired definition, “To say there is such a thing as ‘academic culture’ means that the processes of knowledge-production, socialization, labor distribution … and professionalization are in dispute,” provides backdrop for discussion. Specifically, “dispute” leaves room for stories that encourage discussions about cultural rhetorics, or “embodied practices of the scholar,” that connect “those who study it and those who live it,” beyond acknowledgment. The goal is to foster a learning environment in which students recognize that “becoming a responsible language user demands an understanding of the ways language inscribes difference” (Jarratt). Ultimately, I aim to highlight where and how discussing cultural rhetorics can reveal weak spots in educational institutions that are trying to diversify by connecting my cultural experiences as both “the poor” and someone within the institution.