Arabella Williams

In an open letter to communities, Tuck (2009) examines the implications of damage-centered research. She argues that by trying to hold oppressors accountable through highlighting the suffering experienced by disenfranchised groups, the oppressed become marked by merely the injustices they went through (Tuck, 2009). Even though the intention of these researchers is to help, they actually inform deficit frameworks and reinforce a notion that these individuals need help because they are weak, broken, and hopeless (Tuck, 2009). Tuck (2009) offers a desire-based alternative, one that acknowledges the traumatic social realities of these groups but balances them with wisdom and hope. She describes how desire-based research intends to understand the “complexity, contradiction, and… self-determination of lived lives” (Tuck, 2009, p. 416). Dominguez et al. (2009) actualize these ideas of desire-based research with an account and analysis of a performance by Students Informing Now (S.I.N.). By having AB 540 students proudly claim their undocumented status in front of other UCSC students and administration, this theatrical performance intended to create a counternarrative and reframe how immigration and education are viewed in the United States (Dominguez et al., 2009). 

 

To me, Tuck’s (2009) ideas of what constitutes desire-based research can be found readily in Dominguez et al. (2009). According to Tuck (2009), desire-based research entails shifting implicit narratives and depicting disenfranchised communities as more than weak and broken. This occurs all while still acknowledging painful social and historical truths for the oppressed, as such experiences have the capacity to provide hope and wisdom (Tuck, 2009). S.I.N. accomplishes this by recognizing the struggles that undocumented students face, while acknowledging that such experiences have inspired them to fight back and become living counternarratives (Dominguez et al., 2009). Faced with assumptions of being ‘illegal’, systematic racism, and ineligibility for financial aid or student housing, these students created a counternarrative “organically from the necessity to survive, heal, and reclaim their humanity” (Dominguez et al., 2009, p. 440). Their performance brought this counternarrative to life, with theatric testaments from AB 540 students regarding their complex realities of survival and humanity (Domniguez et al., 2009). S.I.N. asserts that only the students themselves can affirm who they are and not the dominant narratives pushed by the media (Dominguez et al., 2009). This reflects Tuck’s (2009) ideas of provoking underlying narratives and rewriting them to include the complex lived realities of the marginalized. 

 

Reading these articles really inspired me to think deeper about the power research has in changing lives. Being a psychology major, I engage with thoughts like this a lot. However, I had never critically reflected on the systematic capabilities of research before reading these articles. In particular, I was really intrigued by Tuck’s (2009) suggestion that damage-centered research “intends to document peoples’ pain and brokenness to hold those in power accountable for their oppression” (p. 409). On first read, this appears positive, but as Tuck (2009) describes: centering the oppression of these individuals “reinforces and reinscribes a one-dimensional notion of these people as depleted, ruined, and hopeless” (p. 409). This made me consider, is it even possible to hold those in power accountable for oppression without centering it? In other words, would those in power actually be prompted to change without being confronted with the suffering they have caused? These are ethical questions that do not have a simple answer. However, one step in the right direction is to change harmful dominant narratives, such as was the goal in Dominguez et al. (2009). Reading about these students’ use of counternarratives to “challenge racist ideologies that shape education and immigration issues” at UCSC inspired me, and encouraged me to reflect on my internalized beliefs regarding these issues. It also made me wonder, how could such a counternarrative be instilled beyond the Santa Cruz community level?

 

References

 

Dominguez, N., Duarte, Y., Espinosa, P.J., Martinez, L., Nygreen, K., Perez, R., Ramirez, I. and Saba, M. (2009), Constructing a counternarrative: Students Informing Now (S.I.N.) reframes immigration and education in the United States. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52: 439-442. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.52.5.8

​

Tuck, Eve. (2009). Suspending damage: A letter to communities. Harvard Educational Review, 79.3,  409-427.

​