• View
• Edit
• History
• Print

Kermit Campbell Annotated Bibliography Works by Campbell

Campbell argues for the necessity of recognizing and teaching what he terms “black vernacular” in schools and universities, paying particular attention to the role of rap and hip-hop music in modern pop culture. He points to the history of African American oral traditions to illustrate that black “vernacular is more than just language […] it is rhetoric, a highly developed discursive system […]” (3). He examines the debate in the 1990s over whether to recognize and teach Ebonics in public schools, arguing that providing instruction in the language many students speak and express themselves is not only necessary, but is a way of resisting the dominant, white standards that dominate academia. Invoking Gloria Anzaldua, Campbell calls black vernacular “our mama’s tongue, America’s mother tongue” (21), thereby implying that a rejection of this language amounts to a rejection of a student’s sense of self. He also discusses the use of “signifying” in black vernacular, tracing elements of this representation and self-assertion through several ancient African cultures. He moves on to a discussion of rap and hip-hop music and the way in which these genres make use of these traditional oral methods of signifying and representing, pointing out that what many academics and proponents of “standard” English only may view as incoherence or incorrectness is actually a robust representation of ideas that can do anything from asserting identity to challenging aspects of the dominant culture. Campbell discusses specific examples of traditional characters such as Stag-O-Lee and the Signifying Monkey (who, respectively, represent toughness and trickery) and the move from these types to the “gangster” in much of today’s hip-hop and rap music, all while examining the rhetorical aspects of what these characters say and signify. Campbell is careful, throughout the work, to make his distaste for the frequent misogyny and homophobia in music lyrics known, but proudly asserts the value and depth of other aspects of hip-hop and rap music, always in reference to rhetorical value and the power and legitimacy of black vernacular. He gives examples of student writing from his own classes, pointing out that he is most interested in black male students who are seen by society and their universities as “at risk.” However, in the end he posits that “Hip hop music and culture should figure into literacy studies and composition pedagogy for all (that’s right, all) students” (127), thus expanding the scope of his studies and theories from speakers of black vernacular to every student. He also ultimately admits that vernacular has limitations as well; while he encourages his students to write in their familiar vernaculars if they so choose, he admits that it is not a substitute or sufficient cover for “bad” writing or lack of ideas. Nonetheless, it is a valuable and valid form of speech and writing and should be treated as such.

Campbell explores the use of African-American vernacular by students in writing courses, arguing that the use of such vernacular should be encouraged by school systems. He discusses the use of the term “nigger” and “niggaz” in speech and writing, pointing out that by replacing the “-er” of the derogatory word, African Americans “affirm absolutely and positively hard-core blackness with the corresponding denial of anyone or anything that poses a threat to blackness” (68). Similarly, by using other examples of vernacular, African American students should be able to establish themselves in writing with an authority and sense of self that defies traditional claims to the superiority of “standard” or traditional English. Campbell argues that the use of vernacular in writing allows African American students to “affirm” their “social and cultural identities” (69). He uses several examples of students’ writing (black, male students in particular) to examine the ability of students to use this vernacular to construct literary figures of speech that proponents of traditional English only have asserted could not be done. In addition to arguing for the use of vernacular in student writing, Campbell further argues that to not allow this amounts to a negation of the student as an individual. Pointing out that “society has defined or constructed a black male identity largely through negative images and exclusion,” (71) he further reasons that this is glaringly evident in the rejection of black vernacular in student writing. Campbell describes several writing assignments he has given students, pointing to the value of asking students to examine and write about their experiences with their various vernaculars, thus showing them that they possess literary power even without conforming to the standards of traditional English academic writing.

While pointing out omissions and biases in Kennedy’s work, Campbell praises the book as a whole for its breadth of subject matter and its inclusion of non-Western rhetoric. Campbell delineates Kennedy’s methodology in looking for both “universal and distinctive rhetorical features” in each culture studied, pointing out that it is then up to the reader to apply Kennedy’s resultant general theory to current theory and practice. He points out that Kennedy even directed his studies toward animal communication, though he argues that the structure of the book which proceeds “up the evolutionary chain,” with animals at the bottom and literate cultures at the top, could have biased implications. Campbell, however, ultimately lauds Kennedy’s work for its vast diversity and its attempt at a universal theory, asserting that it is a valuable piece for discussion, critique, and analysis.

While acknowledging the importance of studying the rhetoric of “non-Western” societies, including ones in Africa, Campbell argues for the importance of not limiting these studies to “modern cultures” only. Citing work from Ruth Finnegan, who published findings that ancient African cultures used “Aristotle’s three kinds of rhetorical speech: deliberative, judicial, and epideictic” (256), Campbell focuses his attention on exploring the rhetoric of several African cultures. He also includes a study by George Kennedy, who worked to compare the rhetoric of eleven African cultures to “classical rhetoric” (256), while paying special attention to the misstep of categorizing societies as only “oral” or “literate” in an “either/or” fashion. Campbell goes on to detail the history of a selected number of African cultures, particularly those from Nubia, Mali, and Ethiopia, and then excerpts several discovered texts and examines the rhetorical elements employed in them. Ultimately, Campbell acknowledges the need for a wider variety of such texts to study.

Campbell examines the continued use of the ideas espoused in Martin Luther King, Jr.’s famous “I have a dream” speech, particularly in regards to continuing racism and inequality and how America deals with these issues in a post-King time. He discusses King’s stance against “the rhetoric of equality, of sameness, on the grounds that it is unrealistic, not the reasoned judgment it appears to be on the surface” (227), and goes on to briefly address issues of affirmative action before moving on to the crux of his argument, which is situating modern hip-hop lyrics in the ongoing discussion of racial (in)equalities. By specifically focusing on DMX’s song “Who We Be,” Campbell analyzes what he terms the “remix” of King’s message, that is, rap and hip-hop’s use of language to make ongoing inequalities apparent to a society which he argues misses continued oppression in a desperate attempt to profess colorblindness. Campbell argues that despite what conservatives and liberals may want to believe, people are still “judged by the color of their skin” (228), and that “Who We Be” exposes this injustice by rejecting the notion of a homogeneous, inclusive society. By using language such as “we” and “they,” DMX explicitly deals with issues of race and class inequalities, and in a way in which color-lines are not so clearly drawn; Campbell argues that these lyrics may exclude certain upper-class African-Americans while including certain lower-class white Americans.

Campbell explores the action of “signifying,” or “rendering powerless through language an uncompromising oppressor” (463) by African Americans, which he argues is a way by which African Americans can assert their own “identity” in a world of hostility and discrimination. He asserts that while signifying provides this opportunity to African American students, the dominant, traditional English of academia can equally discourage and disparage their language and cultural identities. Because of this, Campbell argues that the use of vernacular by African American students be encouraged—not marginalized—in their academic educations. He explores the idea of signifying by using the example of the African American folk-lore figure The Signifying Monkey, who in poems and stories is able to use language to assert his identity and challenge the power structures he lives amongst. Just as the Signifying Monkey of the stories uses his vernacular to challenge the position of the lion as the most powerful, dominant figure in the jungle, so too can African American students use their vernacular to challenge the power structures of traditionally white academia. He cites examples from H. Rap Brown and Malcolm X to further extend his argument, asserting that by studying the works of such figures, students can learn to move beyond the use of their vernacular in personal settings and extend its use to academic settings, where it should be valued and appreciated.

Campbell addresses the place of hiphop music and culture in American society, particularly the way in which this form of expression has impacted the convergence of white/black, inner-city/suburban, and middle-class/lower-class citizens. He argues that, as rap music and the hip hop lifestyle are increasingly consumed by whites as well as blacks, that hip hop has “humanized” what he calls “ghetto blackness” in a way which allows white suburban students to become exposed to more diverse lifestyles than their suburban upbringing has exposed them to. He explores how these ideas may be applied to the composition classroom, arguing that the traditional middle-class composition instructor should not ignore or attempt to silence student writing which expresses politically incorrect viewpoints, but should use these instances to engage in a dialog in which these issues may be openly discussed. Campbell cites instructors who hold the belief that many white students feel that a discussion of racial issues will lead to a sort of white demonization, pointing out that most people are not eager to question and examine themselves. He uses examples of several notable rap artists, such as Sean “P. Diddy” Combs and Eminem, to explore the interactions between black and white, rich and poor, and urban and suburban, ultimately asserting that rap and hip hop are powerful tools by which these interactions may be studied.

While acknowledging the immense value of ancient canonical works such as Aristotle’s Rhetoric, Campbell argues also for the validity and inclusion of the rhetorical practices of other societies, including the oral traditions of African cultures. He discusses the African “nommo,” defined as “the generative and transformative power of the spoken word” (94), and its importance in all aspects of some cultures’ lives, from medicinal purposes to pre-battle speeches. He relates this tradition to present day Black English (BE), emphasizing the importance of performance and “audience participation,” also known as “call-response” discourse. He discusses the use of Black English Vernacular (BEV) as an assertion of one’s identity or power, using the familiar example of the Signifying Monkey to illustrate the “signifying” that is so characteristic of BEV. Campbell uses examples from the Signifying Monkey tales that he will eventually develop further in other works to emphasize the prevalence of “the ritual of insult” (99) in BEV and its complex rhetorical value.

Campbell details his initial hesitation to seeing the much-anticipated and widely acclaimed Amistad and his reaction to it after finally giving in. He remembered an African-American take on the history of the Titanic involving a character named Shine who swims to safety while the ship sinks, viewing this as an effort by African Americans to write their own versions of a historical event, whether the truth is exact or not. Amistad, rather, does portray a historically accurate example of the experiences of Africans, which Campbell directly connects to rhetoric, oral tradition, and current civil struggles. He argues that the story of Amistad has left such an impact on America because it represented a rare example of a circumstance that was actually heard by the United States Supreme Court. Campbell’s stated goals are to discuss “who we was” by exploring the events of African American history, “who we are” by examining the facts that are left out of current discussions, and “who we gonna be” by forwarding his hope that the future of rhetoric will reflect the hybridity of the African American experience.