Literacy brought to you by....EVERYONE? EVERYTHING?

[“Sponsors are any agents, local or distant, concrete or abstract, who enable, support, teach, model, as well as recruit, regulate, suppress or withhold literacy—and gain advantage by it in some way. Just as the ages of radio and television accustom us to have programs brought to us by various commercial sponsors, it is useful to think about whom or what underwrites occasions of literacy learning and use. Although the interests of the sponsor and the sponsored do not have to coverage and in fact my conflict sponsors nevertheless set the terms for access to literacy and wield powerful incentives for compliance and loyalty. Sponsors are a tangible reminder that literacy learning throughout history has always required permission, sanction, assistance, coercion, or at minimum contact with existing trade routes. Sponsors are delivery systems for the economies of literacy, the means by which these forces present themselves to—and through—individual learners. They also represent the causes into which people’s literacy usually gets recruited.”(Brandt,556).]

After reading the essay, it seems that Brandt thinks of literacy as a product that is distributed to consumers by way of sponsors. These sponsors can be just about anything that teaches or withholds literacy and gain something from their sponsorship in some way.

My literacy has been sponsored by many influential people my whole life.  If I begin to think back, I would say that the first sponsors of my literacy were my big sister Michelle and my maternal grandmother. I know that most people would list their parents as sponsors of their literacy and as being their first teachers in life, however I have almost felt that my parents were anti-sponsors of literacy. By Brandt’s definition however, my parents are in-fact sponsors. My grandmother began to teach me sounds and words starting as soon as I was born.  She continued to teach me how to speak, then how to read, how to be imaginative, how to act out stories and communicate.  My sister was also influential, being a teacher herself, she often would correct any grammar mistakes I made and explain why it was incorrect. 

I mentioned that I think my parents were sponsors of literacy in an anti-literate way.  This is not something that was obvious to me growing up; however visiting my parents now shows me ways in which my literacy was suppressed. I will not assert that education is the only pathway to literacy. That being said, my parents are minimally educated. They do not speak grammatically correct. As I was growing up, they did not invest in teaching me. They did not sit with me and work with me to learn my sounds, my words, or books.  As I got older, my parents did not really invest in my education. I do not hold this against them or blame them in any way. They didn’t really have the time or resources to do so. I can remember by the time I was in 4^th grade, the curriculum was already beyond what my parents could help me with.  They were also very busy with their jobs. I remember being home by myself often. 

My dad taught me to be literate in his way. Because of my father, I am very literate in farming.  I can discuss things in terms of acres, head of livestock, and many other things.  I also give directions by landmarks thanks to my dad.  For example, “Old man Bill lives about 14 miles away. Take this road until you come to a big red barn, take a left and go until you pass three silos, and it will be the fourth house on the right by the pond.  On the way you will pass Tobin’s, Johnson’s, and Anding’s. Bill has 350 acres and about 2500 head of hogs.” That is something not everyone could follow, but none of this helped me advance in school. None of this helped me get friends.

I consider other sponsors of my literacy to be television shows such as Sesame Street.  Shows like that were influential in teaching me sounds and words.  Books have always been a huge sponsor of my literacy and continue to be now.  Books keep my mind sharp and are always taking me on an adventure, often increasing my vocabulary and expanding my imagination.

Brandt’s definition says that sponsors of literacy gain advantage by it in some way.  In terms of my literacy, my close personal sponsors gained personal happiness and satisfaction in personal achievement by teaching me and helping me to learn. Others who helped me along the way were teachers, and although good teachers will take a personal investment in teaching others, the real reason they are doing it is because it is their job. The bottom line is that they will receive a paycheck for the work that they do.

In discussing this topic with my husband, and thinking of books as a sponsor of our literacy, he thought perhaps that it was the author of the books that was the actual sponsor. I argued with that idea, saying that the book was the direct sponsor. It is the tangible object which I am holding and am connecting. The author is the indirect sponsor by way of creating the book. The author is the sponsor that is profiting from me using their book.

If we zoom out a ways from the close up of a book, our society as a whole is a sponsor of literacy.  Our society profits off of a population of literate people.  Literate people become avid consumers in our society. As a literate consumer, I buy into the latest electronics, television programs, books, music etc.  I am constantly searching for more things to stimulate my mind.

If we go back to the first posting of this class, we were asked to list the ways in which we think ourselves to be literate.  Upon listing texting, (Sponsors: phone companies, phone makers, app makers); cooking, (Sponsors: food stores, cook book writers, book distributors, baking supply distributors). There are limitless things people can claim literacy in, and each item will come with a list of sponsors who have a stake in people wanting to become literate in their products.

Almost everything we do or see somehow sponsors our literacy. We never stop learning or evolving. Advertisements on billboards we see will teach us something new or alter our perspective in some way.  There is no way to have a complete list of all of our sponsors of literacy. There would just be too many. I think I have a concept of the most influential, but certainly not a complete list.

It is really those first personal sponsors who get us ready to accept all of the other sponsors in our lives.  Without a basic understanding of a language, we would not be able to be the consumers our societies need to be profitable.  Literacy is the baseline for society. I really wonder if our society could function without literacy. What would illiteracy really look like if we consider it to be so inclusive? If literacy is so much more than simply reading and writing, what does being illiterate look like? Brandt says that literacy is sponsored by all of these things around us, including people, and Gee says that literacy is an all-encompassing social act, literacy really is everything. It is all around us.  I really, really wonder if it is all of this, can any person really be illiterate? Doesn’t it just become a “more-literate”/ “less-literate scale”? How do we measure such a thing?  The more I read, and the more I consider literacy, the more complicated and messy it becomes.