Analysis Of Seeing And Making Culture: Representing The Poor By Bell Hooks

Bell Hooks makes the claim that the poor are misrepresented in the mainstream, which bolsters a low value on our self-worth which we assign to ourselves. In the essay Seeing and Making Culture: Representing the poor by Hooks, we see how there is misrepresentation of the poor through the perspective of the author, she often weaves her personal narrative into the evidence and observations of the general population. One of the things Hooks mentions early on is that "When contemporary Left intellectuals talk about capitalism few if any attempts are made to relate that discourse to the reality of being poor in America."(Hooks). The statement sets a foundation on which the rest of the essay is being built upon, because even if the liberals are not

including the discussion of the poor then they who are poor are being misrepresented. While many people would agree that striving for the best out of oneself, which usually involves a monetary enrichment, Hooks claims that integrity and morality are some things that the poor can have, even if the popular idea of them is a negative one.

Hooks introduces us to her life during her childhood, quickly painting the picture of her background, she says that "...we were working class, because my father worked as a janitor at the post office, however the fact that there were seven children in our family meant that we often faced economic hardships in ways that made us...think of ourselves as poor." This statement very hastily sets up our sympathizes for her, we see that she has come from where she writes about. We instantly give her some credibility in the topic because of her personal experience. The personally history is helpful in some ways but is more damaging in that with seven kids in the family there is some blame on the parents for their situation. While I would agree with most people in saying that family choice is a personal one, which everyone has the right to decided for themselves, I believe that one needs to take a look and analyze their situation before deciding on such a large family. Because a large family is helpful within a farm but is probably less helpful and a greater burden in an urban setting. Hooks continues with her child hood in saying that

"As children we knew we were not suppose to see ourselves as poor but we felt poor" which is fine but is somewhat contradictory to a part of her argument, that is that the negative views of the poor are social. That the poor receive such negatives views about them because of how they are misrepresented. But it seems to be that her learning of the shame that people may feel from being poor was taught to her directly from her parents. Hooks says that they never talked about being poor, but a couple paragraphs later says that poverty was not disgraceful in their house and that they were socialized early that no ones value was tied directly to their material standards(Hooks). Which would be a weird thing to discuss if they were not talking about themselves, it would sort of blur the lines, because she as a kid felt poor yet the parents did not talk about being poor but taught them that it was ok and should not impact a persons sense of value. I think not talking about their own situation would caue a stigma about it and in turn teach the kids that it was actually not an alright thing.

It seems like Hooks believes that there are multiple sets of realities, which is something I also believe in.

For instances, there is the reality of home and the reality of everything outside of that. At home she was taught that there is no implication of lowered value in being poor or from a lower class. This sets up the reality that everyone is morally and socially equal. This is the reality she grew up in until she transitioned into another one which was college. Hooks says that she "began to see myself as poor when I went away to college." And this is the second reality, the reality in which the popular culture stats to make poor people feel devalued. Hooks even writes that the Untied States misrepresents the poor often not exhibiting them as having integrity and dignity. This creates a sort of dichotomy within her life, of the two realities, one is of the home and her learned values growing up and the other is leaving small town America and joining the bigger world. She gives evidence in this by saying that "Television shows and films bring this message home that no one can truly feel good about themselves if they are poor."(Hooks) we see here how fully she believes that a part of the negative self identity of being poor is a social construct. She points to films that represent the poor and their struggling to do anything to escape their situation, one of the films is Menace II Society, and while I believe it is important to discuss how so many films represent the poor

like this I think it is unfair to speak about the positive perceptions that films can help bring forth. The film Boyz in the Hood, shows the majority of the stereotyping that we as a culture have about the poor, but it also shows, through Cuba Gooding jr's character, that there are those who resist the idea of being poor but at the same time do no fall into the trappings of it. Some of the trappings are things hooks writes about such as when "deprived teenagers kill for tennis shoes.."(Hooks). It is saddening to not have her write on the will to survive by any means, she completely avoids the fact that some poor people will act with a criminal nature to survive. And since we are aware of this will to survive we are quick to assume that people who maybe struggling to keep their heads above water might fall into this behavior. She also says that poor people are "socialized by film and television to identify with he attitudes and values of the privliged classes in this society...people who are poor, ...internalize fear and contempt for those who are poor" which is the opposite of her rearing that taught that being poor did not mean that she was without value. There were two realities, and she chooses to live in one because we pick our beliefs that's what makes them beliefs.

While there are a lot of authors she pulls from to support what she is saying and believes in, there is very little evidence from the other side. Hooks writes that "Progressive intellectuals from privileged classes who themselves obsessed with gaining material wealth are uncomfortable with the instance that one can be poor, yet lead a rich and meaningful life."(Hooks). But who exactly are the intellectuals she is referring to? The statement makes a good point and is easily digestible for anyone reading, especially since she herself says she writes to be accesible, there is a sort of lacking feeling when reading this. It seems to me that this is anecdotal, in that this is probably her own personal belief about how the wealthier classes view poor people. And maybe she is correct in thinking the poor suffer from internalized contempt, which she could be experience by projecting her beliefs onto the upper class.

While I agree with what hooks says about the role of self identity while being poor and the misrepresentation of it, I thought that there were a lot of one sided thoughts. As well as an over abundance of personal experiences and views. She claims that the poor are misrepresented but does not write about the reasons why there may be those views of the poor. But the totality of her essay is correct, there is a misrepresentation of the poor, one that teaches young people that they are of lesser value than those who are not poor. And that we need to change this systemic belief. In America it seems that it is okay to do anything to win, but not okay to do anything to survive, because then you will be viewed as shady or underhanded. Hooks says that we need to be "changing ways the poor are represented in every aspect of life..." and that it will "... challenge everyone to look at the face of poverty and not turn way."(Hooks) which I believe is true and if we can accomplish this maybe be the motivation we need to truly start helping the poor, by seeing them as valued people.