Still A Scholarship Boy At Heart

Richard Rodriguez plays two roles as he writes about Richard HoggartЎЇs writing: that of a reader and a writer. The roles of a reader and a writer are very closely related; ÐŽoStrong readersÐŽ¦remake what they have read to serve their own ends, putting things together, figuring out how ideas and examples relate, explaining as best they can material that is difficult or problematic, translating phrasesÐŽ¦into their own terms. At these moments, it is hard to distinguish the act of reading from the act of writingÐŽ± (17). In order to be a good writer, one must use proper reading skills. ÐŽoReadingÐŽ¦requires a difficult mix of authority and humility. On the one hand, a reader takes charge of a text; on the other, a reader gives generous attention to someone elseЎЇs (a writerЎЇs) key terms and methods,ÐŽ¦examples,ÐŽ¦languageÐŽ± (pg 10).ÐŽ± This demonstrates reading with and against the grain. Another way that one can distinguish a strong reader from one that is not, is his or her ability to make a mark on the reading. ÐŽoReading is not simply a matter of hanging back and waiting for a piece, or its author, to tell you what the writing has to sayÐŽ¦.you are in a position to speak back, to say something of your own in turnÐŽ± (1). Through reading Richard RodriguezЎЇs The Achievement of Desire, one can get a good sense of what kind of a reader Rodriguez was, and that in turn reflects on what kind of a writer Rodriguez is in this piece. Rodriguez does not make a mark in his writing, but instead allows HoggartЎЇs concept of a scholarship boy to assume the authority, showing that Rodriguez is still very much a scholarship boy.

RodriguezЎЇs inability to read against the grain demonstrates that Rodriguez is still a scholarship boy. According to Hoggart, a scholarship boy ÐŽolearns how to receive a purely literate education, one using only a small part of his personality and challenging only a limited area of his being. He becomes an expert imbiber and doler-outÐŽ¦but will rarely be accompanied by genuine enthusiasmsÐŽ± (577). Imitation does not allow room for RodriguezЎЇs own opinions. Through this, Rodriguez is limiting himself as a writer and fails in doing his job as a writer and making a mark. However, Rodriguez displays a lot of reading with the grain. For example, Hoggart states ÐŽoWhen he brings those books into the house they do not take their place with other books which the family are reading, for often there are none or almost none; his books look, rather, like strange toolsÐŽ± (572). Through personal example, Rodriguez reiterates that any literature brought home by the scholarship boy stands out from the literature usually found in the home: ÐŽoTheir [his familyЎЇs] reading only consisted of work manuals, prayer books, newspapers, recipesÐŽ± (572). Rather than challenging the point brought up by Hoggart, Rodriguez uses his personal experience to validate it. This is evidence that Rodriguez views Hoggart as an authority figure. Rodriguez does not reach any new conclusions of his own showing his lack of originality in his writing. Rodriguez is a weak reader in that he seems to draw no new conclusions or connections in his writing, and is therefore failing to make his mark on the reading.

Most of the explanations following quotes from HoggartЎЇs writing consist of summaries of what Hoggart was saying. Hoggart mentions the various distractions for the scholarship boy: ÐŽoMother is ironing, the wireless is on, someone is singing a snatch of song or father says intermittently whatever comes into his headÐŽ± (565). Rodriguez also states: ÐŽoPerhaps as early as the night he brings home an assignment from school and finds the house too noisy for studyÐŽ± (565). One can see this simplistic summation of HoggartЎЇs ideas demonstrates that Rodriguez fails to read actively against the grain. Rodriguez does not explain how his personal experience might supercede Hoggart but rather, uses it to simply support HoggartЎЇs assertions. He does not take time to extending or further clarifying what it is that Hoggart is saying. However, it is necessary for Rodriguez to break away from HoggartЎЇs understanding of the scholarship boy in order for Rodriguez to make his mark on the reading.

Another indication that Rodriguez is not a strong reader is his use of quotes. Throughout the text, the reader sees huge blocks dedicated to quoting Hoggart. A strong reader would incorporate the quotations more effectively into the reading. One would do this by breaking the quote down into pieces which would make it much easier for the reader to digest. Furthermore, as a writer one strives to stay consistent with the flow of a reading. With the quotes in huge chunks like on page 572 in Ways of Reading, there is an interruption in the smooth transition of the reading. It is also difficult for the reader to conceive which parts Rodriguez had meant to focus on. If these blocks are broken up and certain aspects that interest Rodriguez are focused on and analyzed, it would show that Rodriguez is indeed a strong reader. However, RodriguezЎЇs version of textual analysis consists only of recapping HoggartЎЇs text. There