In reading Nancy Tuana’s “The Speculum of Ignorance,” I
gathered that the term “the epistemology of ignorance” is the attempt to understand
why there is a lack of knowledge or a
refusal to learn certain practices or phenomenon. Tuana argues that this
refusal to learn and inform is a method used by those in power to retain their
power while keeping others subsidiary and unaware. Cataloging the different
types of ignorance, Tuana applies them to the women’s health movement and how
subjects such as male contraception, birth control, the female anatomy, and
incest were ignored and undiscussed. She also applies “the epistemology of
ignorance” in issues such race and the presence of racism. For these issues, we
see the concepts of “willful ignorance” and “loving ignorance” take shape. She
describes “willful ignorance” as the “systematic process of self-deception, a willful
embrace of ignorance that infects those who are in positions of privilege, an
active ignoring of the oppression of others and one’s role in that exploitation”
(Tuana 11). Conversely, “loving ignorance is [thus] a recognition that are
modalities of being exceed our own and cannot be fully comprehended” (Tuana 16).
Though “loving ignorance” is arguably the lesser of the evils, Ortega’s “Being
Loving, Knowingly Ignorant” argues that this “loving ignorance” leaves women of
color “ignored, homogenized, and misunderstood” (Ortega 67).
In finding other examples of “the epistemology of ignorance,”
my mind immediately turned to the Tuskegee syphilis experiments of 1932-1972.
Similar to the involuntary sterilization for women of color, doctors conducting
the experiment exploited the lack of knowledge and resources of rural, black
farmers. Moreover, these experiments lasted nearly forty years with no
intervention by those in power.
For Further Information on the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments:
This may be a bit of a stretch, but then thinking about “loving
ignorance” and “appropriating others’ identities through [a] desperate rush to
find similarity,” I thought about the controversy surrounding the white Australian
rapper, Iggy Azalea (Ortega 67). Nominated for this year’s “Best Rap Album,”
Iggy Azalea has been criticized in the media for appropriating American black
culture for profit, yet not addressing issues that affect the black community.
Many argue that she mimics black culture, but retains her privilege in the
music industry because she is a white female.
For Further Information about the Iggy Azalea Controversy:
I love that you brought up Iggy Azalea because I talked about hip hop as well. It is precisely because of appropriation that I have a problem with loving ignorance. Not only do those two terms seem diametrically opposed to me but it seems like it takes the responsibility off of the appropriator and lessens the offense. Tuana says that loving ignorance is the acceptance that there are experiences that we cannot share, there is supposed to be some sense of humility there. Where I feel like Iggy Azalea diverges from this is that she refuses to acknowledge the struggle and history at the very core of hip-hop. She doesn't seem invested in the issues that plague the community of the genre that she is a part of. She has failed to acknowledge her difference, which I think is the key to loving ignorance. Therefore, to me this issue falls under “knowing that we do not know, but not caring to know”. Tuana says that this is due to the knowledge not being tied to current interests. For Iggy, being conscious of the culture she is appropriating does not need to concern her. She is making money regardless. She can crossover to pop so she doesn’t even need a hip-hop fan base. I think she also couples this with willful ignorance; she does not want to know. An example in hip-hop that I think would fall under loving ignorance is Macklemore. I can't recall the source but, he has acknowledged the fact that he has a wider audience in hip-hop because his privileged position allows him to crossover into a white middle and upper class fan base that isn’t present for other hip-hop artists. He spoke from a position of understanding the history behind that. Such acknowledgement makes it a little easier for me believe that there can be such a thing as loving ignorance. But then I see that as paradoxical because such an acknowledgement points to an understanding and enlightenment that to me eliminates ignorance an applicable term. I love that you brought up this point!!! I would love to hear more of your thoughts on this!!
ReplyDelete