Dear Editor,
I have a vast admiration for those Guyanese who are speaking up at this very critical point in the formation of a national identity. Money will make available many, many opportunities for defining identity in terms of social, economic, political innovation or fine tuning. So, congratulations to those who risk communication in this volatile scenario.
The elected leadership on both sides needs to be supremely aware of their need for a critical process that vets what they are putting out as valid public opinion. Before sharing congratulations on all sides for what is put forward as innovative or an advance over what previously obtained there needs to be performance indicators for what merits congratulations.
I want to use as an example the letter in yesterday’s Stabroek News of Ryhaan Shah about the Atlantic Reader Book One. I see the long list of persons credited with producing or advising on this publication. I am wondering if this is a case of the ‘emperor’s new clothes’. One person likes how it looks, another sees it as innovation, another wishes to make the authors feel appreciated and all agree to acclaim it a magnificent work. The Minister of Education endorses it.
The writers of this Reader are to be congratulated for their commitment to education. The endorsers, because there was no, or a deficient critical process, threw the writers under the bus. They are now open to ridicule for producing a learning instrument which is seriously deficient according to one at least who by her writing is clever and educated. She did a critical assessment. I wonder why no one else detected the potential objections to this instrument of instruction for young minds.
I do object to Ms Shah’s description of Mashramani as a display of ‘vulgarity’. There is much to admire in the artistry of costumes, in the local music in the exuberance of celebration. A critical assessment imparted to the students will help them to reject what is demeaning and to nurture and participate in what is uplifting. Critical awareness is crucial to the future of Guyana so teach it in primary school and upwards. If this is not done, Guyana will have its identity defined by those who do not know how careful the process of defining an identity has to be.
Critical does not mean bad, just as negative does not mean bad. This new publication was a wonderful chance to instil national pride in children. Please continue the critical analysis started by Ms Shah. Re-assess the book. Examine the validity of her opinions. And rename the book, please. What about the ‘Guyana Reader’ if this name is not already taken?
I suspect that it is too much of praise to call the team of producers ‘progressive literacy experts’ The multi-cultural context of any instrument of instruction which seeks to form opinion in the minds of children has to be carefully represented or it will produce offence and distrust, as this reader has done. I would hesitate to call anyone a ‘progressive literacy expert’ unless I could prove it. Has this opinion been proven by the endorsement of the Atlantic Reader?
However, the writers must forgive their advisors and all those who jumped to congratulatory mode. Re-call the book. At the expense of the authorities re-design and re-publish the text. This will be a winning book. The idea was great. Guyana needs adventurous but careful writers who have great respect for the wonderful blended identity of a great country.
Unless the peoples of Guyana hold together in a blended and harmonious identity then the country will be lost as Guyana opens its borders to many nations of the world. Anything that lessens the national identity must be treated as dangerous. Thank you Ms Shah for sounding the alarm!
So I say!
Gabriella Rodriguez
