This is a clip of Sudhir Venkatesh on The Colbert Report discussing his new book, which focuses on his research on gangs in Chicago. This research was previously discussed in Freakeconomics.
What is interesting about this clip is that Venkatesh, who has spent a year working with economically deprived individuals, goes on television to promote his book (which I'm sure he will make a tidy sum of money from) and garner some laughs at the expense of his research subjects. Furthermore, his description of the questions he asked the gang members at the start of his research project are ridiculous. He asked them how it felt to be "black and poor", but said that they could not answer. Someone who is a doctoral student at the University of Chicago ought to know better!
Throughout the interview, Venkatesh reinforces stereotypes about inner-city gang members and does not question why police choose not to intervene in conflicts in these neighborhoods. In fact, he seems to enjoy the attention he is receiving for his research intuition. I mean, because sociologists never research poor people or non-white people. Again, this is an example of the 'sociology of the marked', the desire of sociologists to question and research that which is exotic to them. Furthermore, Venkatesh's ability to gain access to this population and publish a book about them highlights the legitimacy that social scientists (and other formally educated individuals) are given in our society that is not given to other people, such as gang members. How would Venkatesh feel if gang members decided to follow him around for a year in an attempt to understand the life of doctoral students? Because as members of the social world, aren't we all sociologists?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
So is this a manifestation of "Dr. Phil Syndrome" in sociology? I imagine he fancies himself more along the lines of Hunter Thompson in his Hell's Angels days. Now he just needs to catch a beating from his subjects and he'll be set.
I am so thankful to have found some thoughtful commentary on Venkatesh.
I am painfully making my way through “Gang Leader for a Day.” I say painful because so far, Sudhir Venkatesh’s unyielding naivety is heartbreaking.
The book is filled with his pie-eyed descriptions of aggressor tactics used in daily ghetto life. The individuals he describes each enjoy the pleasures of predation while at the same time being randomly preyed upon by the “higher” aggressors. Wow no way!
He is amazed to discover that even the elderly ladies in the building weren’t above shaking-down families and acquaintances discovered to have engaged in activities of economic gain; giving haircuts and home perms in their kitchens for example.
He describes one 55-year old woman engaged in shake-downs of this type as the “local IRS.”
Local IRS? Oh please.
It seems to me that Venkatesh’s strong libertarian sympathies conflict with what could have been true scholarship.
Post a Comment