Sunglassess of White is an ethnographic survey of two high schools. One. “Valley Groves High School. ” was suburban. and the “whitest” high school in the part. Here the pupil organic structure was comprised of non-Hispanic Whites ( 83 per centum ) . Hispanics ( 7 per centum ) . Asians ( 5 per centum ) . Filipinos ( 2 per centum ) . and African Americans ( 2 per centum ) . The other. “Clavey High. ” was metropolitan and more thoroughly multiracial–African American ( 54 per centum ) . Asiatic American ( 23 per centum ) . white ( 12 per centum ) . Hispanic ( 8 per centum ) . Filipino ( 2 per centum ) . Pacific Islander ( 1 per centum ) . and Native American ( 1 per centum ) .
Perry examines the devising and life of whiteness in school life. inquiring about its formation through white students’ interactions with one another and with equals of colour. In this book the schoolyard is every bit of import as are school course of study. module. and decision makers. Meanwhile. the familial and larger societal contexts from which pupils arrive to finish each school twenty-four hours are deemed non so much stalls. preexistent scenes. as sites in relation to which egos and others must be reconceived and refashion.
Contrasting two really different schools in different metropoliss in the same part. the book argues that white racial individuality formation must be understood by mention to procedures of. “ ( 1 ) association with people of colour ; ( 2 ) ‘us-them’ boundary devising procedures ; ( 3 ) the ways category. gender and other individualities interplay and act upon one another ; ( 4 ) the multi-racial ego ; and ( 5 ) the significances derived from the structural-institutional context” ( p. 180 ) . Perry draws extensively on immature white students’ voices. at times juxtaposing these with the linguistic communication and self-descriptions of equals of colour and of assorted heritage.
The writer deliberately makes room for long citations from pupils. so that readers might follow Perry’s ain interpretative procedure. or so intervene and add their ain. This makes the text thoroughly accessible. non merely to bookmans but to undergraduates and even high school pupils themselves. Whiteness emerges here as more diverse than might hold been expected. Suburban young person did non even “see” their whiteness. sing themselves. whether in footings of race. civilization. nationality. or manner and music gustatory sensation as “American. ” “ordinary. ” or “normal. “
The whiteness of Valley Groves High School pupils was. possibly. to be expected in comparing with earlier work including that of the writer of this reappraisal. ( White Women. Race Matters: The Social Construction of Whiteness. Ruth Frankenberg. University of Minnesota Press. 1993. ) By contrast. metropolitan white pupils had perforce to cultivate complex self-understandings as minority members of a school community while still. of class. portion of the national. dominant racial class.
The chapters and subdivisions on this latter school. Clavey High were striking. as immature work forces and adult females. made to the full cognizant of their whiteness. endeavor to understand ego. other. sociocultural context and even the value of passing four cardinal life-years in a microcosm of the progressively multiracial United States. Across the gamut of the two schools. one sees the scope of whiteness as it is presently conceived in the United States. Therefore. Perry could readily construe the “Homecoming Week” parade as a public presentation situated in an unreconstructed vision of a white dominant U. S. history. wherein there was small meaningful infinite for pupils of colour.
An undisturbed whiteness named by Perry ( to my head problematically ) as “race-neutrality” ( p. 33 ) meant that when Perry did inquire white pupils to self-identify racially or culturally she encountered that which she termed a “cognitive gap” ( p. 77 ) . The challenges of Clavey pupils ( white and of colour ) push the reader to analyze the bound points of modern-day racial thought. Thus. white female pupils reminisced about a seven-day jubilation of race/ethnic belonging. in which all were invited to have on and finish nametags that said. “I’m proud to be________ .
” Conscious of the impossible place in which the racially-hierarchical United States had placed them–discursive dissymmetry meant that “I’m proud to be white” could mean merely white supremacism–they joked. retrieving that one of them had completed her name ticket. “I’m proud to be a virgin! “ ( pp. 86-87 ) . Race was non simple at Clavey High School. To get down with. the Principal had worried that Perry’s presence would “stir up racial tension” ( p. 46 ) .
This did non go on. nor even endanger to make so. Still. throughout this book we see pupils at times debating. at times appreciating. yet at few times disregarding one another’s racial individualities. and the ways in which those individualities mirrored their ain. The Clavey course of study and students’ ain life experiences made all at Clavey aware of the history of racism in the United States and globally. There was. therefore. plentifulness of room for treatment. and for acknowledgment of the absence of any simple replies to issues of race and racism. Yet. strikingly. Valley Groves pupils. one time encouraged to contemplate what they truly felt. were besides in their different ways witting of issues of unfairness and hierarchy.
One learns here. so. that times may so be altering in the racial landscapes of the United States. and even for the better. albeit unevenly and easy. This book will be of great usage to bookmans and pupils of instruction. and for sociologists and ethnographers of race. Perry’s composing manner makes it a book that welcomes the nonacademician. whether high school teacher or as noted earlier. high school pupils themselves. © 2002 American Anthropological Association. This reappraisal is cited in the September 2002 issue of Anthropology and Education Quarterly ( 33:3 ) . It is indexed in the December 2002 issue ( 33:4 ) .
