Current Forum: Session 1: Images and Representation	Read 15 times 	
Date: 14-Jan-2001 10:31:56	
Author: THOMPSON, GREGORY J. <gjthomps@garnet.acns.fsu.edu>	
Subject: Necessity vs. Gullibility 	
 [Remove]	
		
       There are, I believe, two important characteristics of the term, “stereotype,” that must be remembered. First, that it is a form of classification or categorization that makes for ready 
identification. The second is that it is a preconceived idea about those categories. It is the second part of the definition that gives humankind its greatest difficulty. I believe Lippmann 
makes reference to these elements when he discusses that, in an increasingly mobile and fast-paced world, the short hand of stereotype is a virtual necessity. As Lippmann states: "But there 
are uniformities sufficiently accurate, and the need of economizing attention is so inevitable that the abandonment of all stereotypes for a wholly innocent approach to experience 
would impoverish human life."  By this I take the passage to mean that highlighting differences allows one to enjoy those differences and to make life more interesting. The cliché 
of course is: "Variety is the spice of life." Lippmann goes on to state that "what matters is the character of the stereotypes and the gullibility with which we employ them." Again, the point is not the fact that there are differences and that we might highlight them but that we must take pains to assure that those stereotypes are understood not as pejorative short-hand but 
as a positive economy of words or images. 
       Occasionally it is possible for the gullibility to occur to the other extreme.  By this, I mean that those looking for the pejorative can occasionally over-read a situation that may not be truly negative typing. The example I think of is the character of the Mexican in Elderbush Gulch. Discussion among graduate students in past classes has seemed to indicate that the Mexican 
is being pressed into service by the dominant white male hegemony. That is, the claim is made that the Mexican is forced to put his life on the line to alert the white army of the Indian attack. First of all, would we know for certain that he is Mexican or Latino if the title card did not 

tell us so? He is not dressed in overtly stereotypical "Mexican" garb. Furthermore, he volunteers for the mission; he is not thrust into the role. In fact, when he reaches the army they prepare to take off in the wrong direction and it is the Mexican who must inform them of the proper way to go. 
       We must be careful, I believe, to not reduce the positive aspect of differences that make humankind interesting, while simultaneously assuring that those differences are not used 
in oppressive political ways. This should be among our primary goals in our philosophy of teaching.