A String of Thoughts on Robert Brooke's "Underlife"

As I am opting out of the article for this class, I thought I’d discuss my thoughts on one of our readings from this past week.

Robert Brooke describes an “underlife” as having a more complex personality outside that of a defined role—specifically that of student or teacher. He asserts, “Students disobey, write letters instead of taking notes, and whisper to their peers to show that they are more than just students and can think independently of classroom expectations” (721). He says that this concept rests on three assumptions about social interaction: We understand someone based on (1) how they look or sound, (2) what we know about their history, and (3) stances they take towards groups we assume they belong to. Brooke goes on to highlight several different types of underlife that occur in the classroom, the last of which is the most common way that we tend to think about “underlife”—a student’s attention being divided between class activity and something else.

I find his thoughts quite interesting, as I have always typically been a “leave your personal life at the door” kind of person, even as a student. I think there are many ways to learn to be professional in class and showcase your own identity at the same time, though I suppose this depends on the receptivity of the classroom environment. For example, in classes where I have been a student, I have enjoyed expressing my own opinion, but within appropriate reason. I think the classroom provides ample opportunity for students to learn to wrangle their more hostile or unreasonable behaviors when trying to express their ideas; also, students have to learn to pay attention to things they may not even be interested in. If we’re going to look toward teaching what will be relevant to the student, we have to recognize that learning to be professional is relevant to anyone who will have any job. For the most part, your job will not care if you come to work tired or sad, or feel as though you cannot work that day (save for issues with actual sickness). They will not condone your behavior if you do not listen or contribute during meetings. They will not keep you on if you cannot express your opinion in a way that is both helpful and peaceful.

With this in mind, of course we should be doing all we can to encourage voice and identity in the classroom, especially in encouraging our students to see themselves as writers. Brooke describes how most teachers are likely to describe students’ identities in terms of “voice,” a unique stance that an individual takes toward an experience. However, I find it hard to believe that certain forms of underlife, unnecessary distractions (like cell phones), are a firm part of anyone’s identity. If a student cannot part with their phone for the length of a class period, I do not assume that the student is working on something miraculous and technologically innovative, I’m sorry to say. I could be wrong (and the student would be welcome to prove me wrong if they wish), but I assume that the student is texting, or on Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, or one of the other hundreds of potential social media cites. The vision that we have of this generation, that they are more bound by technology than any other generation, is not entirely true in my opinion. I actually think that generations who did not have this technology previously are much more likely to be obsessed with its innovations. For this reason, I am more inclined to think that students’ identities are not wrapped up in technology, especially as writers. Postman’s description of “information glut” always sticks out to me; if we never move past the Internet and what it can bring to the table, students will be so stunted and paralyzed by the sheer amounts of information that they will never feel that they can have original thoughts. I am all for expressing identity in the classroom, but I feel that, to make students feel comfortable as writers, we should have them begin in a somewhat isolated state, unencumbered by the innumerable ideas of generations that came before them. If not, if we want to capitalize on the technological innovations of our time for educational purposes, perhaps there should be a required class before composition that teaches students how to properly navigate the Internet and sort through “information glut.”