Royster

Jacqueline Jones Royster's "When the First Voice You Hear is Not Your Own" looks at the problem of hearing others voice views which pertain to a category to which you belong and how to cope with the feelings that is brings about. She explains that she is often compelled to listen as others claim authority on a topic that concerns her, as an African American. The others are assuming the authority, which many of the researchers we have read thus far assert is necessary in order to become a part of an academic discourse community. Still, as Royster listens, she explains that she gets impatient because the outsiders do not really understand what they are talking about. I think this is a problem that works on many levels, with outsiders claiming a subjective position, but because they are not an insider, they cannot completely understand that position.
In one of my other classes, we were talking about the issue of racism in American and watched a clip where a white man and a black man did a series of errands in St. Louis, including car shopping, shopping in a music store, and trying to get their keys out of their locked car. The black man was treated completely differently than the white man. Our professor, who himself is black, posed the question to a girl in the class who is white, as to whether or not she believed the was the salespeople treated the black man was on purpose, or subcontious. When the girl said she believed it was subcontious, our professor sounded shocked and retorted "really, you believe that?" This created tension in the classroom, but after reading Royster's essay, I think the reason this happened was in part because our professor, like Royster, was listening to an outsider try to take an authority position on an argument in which they had no real experience or complete understanding. Royster asserted that "when the subject matter is me and the voice is not mine, my sense of order and rightness is disrupted" (613). Our professor went further, explaining instances that he had experienced in which he felt discriminated, othered, or simply profiled. He clearly felt a need to "right" this outsider's perspective, or at least fill in the gaps in understanding. According to Royster, the challenge is to teach and speak with the Others with the intent of understanding their interpretation and that is just that - their interpretation.
Royster also looked further at the idea of "voice" and made the claim that all of her voices are "very much authentic voices, even when it's difficult for others to imagine a person like me having the capacity to do that" (619). Everyone enters discourse communities with their own subjective views and their voice might surprise you, but is nonetheless, their voice. Furthermore, Royster got at the idea that we need to acknowledge the voices of others and really bridge those gaps with others. We should not talk for, about, or around the boundaries, but rather embrace them. I think Royster was trying to assert that we need to really listen to others when they are professing their interpretations, so that your reaction might be better formed. Royster concluded her essay with the idea that "voicing at its best is not just well-spoken but also well-heard" (622). I agree with that statement, and have learned in many communications classes the power of listening, and that listening is even more important in communication than speaking. If you are not listening, but rather just waiting to talk, you will get nowhere and a true, productive discourse cannot take place.
Overall, the ideas that Royster was getting at were easy for me to relate to my experiences and I think she makes a good point that we need to bridge the gaps between those who are simply assuming a role of authority within a discourse community and those who actually have some claim to that role in a particular discourse community.