I came across this feature by Crocker Stephenson in the July 4th edition of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. It's the second of two parts on woman named Rhea Estelle Lathan
Stephenson writes:
"She was a drug addict. A high school dropout. Her son and daughter lived with their fathers' families. She was banned from any contact with her daughter. She had been convicted of forging checks. She was divorced and had alienated her family. She slept with men for drugs and money....Near the end of that year, Rhea was caught stealing from her employer, a downtown hotel. She was given a choice: Go to jail, or enroll in a residential treatment program through an agency now called Wisconsin Community Services."
Now if you guessed this was yet another dramatic life-turnaround story, you'd be right. What caught my eye were the last lines of the article:
"Rhea Estelle Lathan, PhD, will begin teaching this summer at Michigan State University, where she will be a tenure-tracked assistant professor of writing, rhetoric and American culture."
"So. What do we make of Rhea's story?
"Do we say: Here is proof that people who work hard enough can liberate themselves from even poverty and addiction?
"Or do we say: Here is proof that, with the right programs and services, we can liberate people from the worst social afflictions?
"Or perhaps we listen to Rhea's story and say: Liberation requires both willingness and opportunity. Both."
That's some nice framing there. Nothing very groundbreaking, but it adds a little kick to what could have been just a fluff piece, and leaves readers on both sides of the individual responsibility/community responsibility unable to dismiss the conclusion. Now, since I've spent all this time on this post, what I really should do is email Stephenson this feedback, right?
Stephenson writes:
"She was a drug addict. A high school dropout. Her son and daughter lived with their fathers' families. She was banned from any contact with her daughter. She had been convicted of forging checks. She was divorced and had alienated her family. She slept with men for drugs and money....Near the end of that year, Rhea was caught stealing from her employer, a downtown hotel. She was given a choice: Go to jail, or enroll in a residential treatment program through an agency now called Wisconsin Community Services."
Now if you guessed this was yet another dramatic life-turnaround story, you'd be right. What caught my eye were the last lines of the article:
"Rhea Estelle Lathan, PhD, will begin teaching this summer at Michigan State University, where she will be a tenure-tracked assistant professor of writing, rhetoric and American culture."
"So. What do we make of Rhea's story?
"Do we say: Here is proof that people who work hard enough can liberate themselves from even poverty and addiction?
"Or do we say: Here is proof that, with the right programs and services, we can liberate people from the worst social afflictions?
"Or perhaps we listen to Rhea's story and say: Liberation requires both willingness and opportunity. Both."
That's some nice framing there. Nothing very groundbreaking, but it adds a little kick to what could have been just a fluff piece, and leaves readers on both sides of the individual responsibility/community responsibility unable to dismiss the conclusion. Now, since I've spent all this time on this post, what I really should do is email Stephenson this feedback, right?
Comments