Speak Parts 2&3

The following passages are all from Chris McGee's article, “Why Won’t Melinda Just Talk about What Happened? Speak and the Confessional Voice”. My comments, whether they make sense or not, are mine, but are subject to criticism or mockery.

“Roberta Seelinger Trites, in Disturbing the Universe: Power and Repression in Adolescent Literature, might describe this relationship as one that delegitimizes adolescence by participating in an ideology that 'directs power away from adolescents and towards adults'.” (172-3)

The relationship the article is talking about is where the author (often an adult) will try to write in the language of a teenager in order to make it more relatable to young readers as well as show adults the inner workings of the minds of teenagers so that they will best know how to repress them. At least that's what I get out of it. Quite frankly, I don't understand what “power” they're talking about and why there seems to be a battle between teenagers and adults. I know a lot of adults might want to control teenagers and, likewise, teenagers will try to rebel against adults in a semblance of control. Is that the power they're talking about? Dang.

“There is certainly something odd, and something definitely worth examining further, in any sort of narrative where adults pretend to be real teenagers speaking to other teenagers about what adults would most like to hear.” (173)

I guess so, but most of the time, when adults want to hear something from their kids, it's about things that are troubling them. In an ideal scenario, there wouldn't be this mistrust between teenagers and adults, where communication could occur and adults could share their experiences with kids and help them with their problems. What are the adults hoping they will find with these tactics, that the kids are getting into stuff they aren't supposed to?

“Its plot circles around a young girl struggling with speaking to others about her own ordeal in the most authentic way possible—in a way that will allow her to heal. Yet its verypresentation raises a series of questions about why adults demand teens speakin the first place, and what they expect to hear when teens finally do.” (173)

Wait...what? Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it sounds like the article is saying that the only way that Melinda is going to heal is by clamming up and figuring it out by herself through a long and painful process. Is that what we really want teenagers to have to go through when they could get real and valuable help with someone they trust?

“...struggling with who she is as she finds the strength to talk about her trauma. It strikes me that this 'empowerment narrative,' as we might call it—this triumphant search for personal identity that Speak presumably offers—is very appealing for many adult readers, and one reason they feel the book is worth recommending to teens.” (174)

Ohhh, I get it, this book is all about a teenager's journey to find her identity. That's the reason she's not talking about her traumatic experience, forcing herself to become ostracized and allowing the perpetrator to run free and hurt other girls. It's all because she can get more power.

“Instead, what these bits of dialogue dramatize is how power is often built into the most everyday bits of communication between adult and teen and works to assign each designated roles and prescribed responses.” (179)

This is referring to the dialogues that Melinda have throughout the book where her response to other people will be like this, “Me: “ I can get what they're trying to say about typical, weak responses not helping a situation, but rather than just keeping silent and letting the world go through its cliched power dynamics, Melinda should use her wit and cynicism to battle back and make powerful responses that would actually help her situation.

“...I’d posit that these gender politics [referring to groups of high school students like the Marthas] are not something that keep Melinda from speaking and finding her voice; rather, not speaking puts her in a particularly good position to notice these things, much like the dead dog without an owner to which she temporarily finds more of a connection than her sympathetic teacher.” (180)

I'll give this to Mr. McGee as well. I was never in any social groups in high school, which allowed me to see how other people dug deeper and deeper holes for themselves as they made dumber and dumber decisions just trying to please their peers. I have no idea what the dead dog part is talking about, though. All in all, I think the book was good, but there are still moments that make me go “Wuh?” and “If you know that saying something is going to be effective, then SAY IT.”

Sheesh. My mom still interviews me about my day. I don't know what I'd be like if I didn't speak up.