Spelman Narrative Analysis

The revolution will not be televised and the revolutionary will not be heard. The voices of the discontented; individuals who find themselves weary of the systematic, patriarchal, and capitalistic control of society; will be silenced. Yet the historical narrative of Spelman College, that is indirectly told to students is one of intellectual and communal, organized revolt against this same oppressive system. Spelman students are often proudly told about the formation of SNCC (Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee) and of the immense involvement of Atlanta University students in the civil rights movement. However, many scholar activist students on campus, find that there is a large disconnect between activism (the revolutionary) and the general

This paper will analyze the socio-historical background of the Spelman narrative in regards to the formation of the college and social activism, examine whether the narrative is of the school fosters intellect or intelligence, and positions Spelman’s role in creating a black, female intellectual class based on a capitalistic society. For the purpose of keeping this paper organized and focused, the main social movement that will be examine is the Atlanta Washerwoman strike of 1881, which the same year as the formation of Spelman College. This paper will position the scholarly text of C. Wright Mills, Richard Hofstadter, and Patricia Hill-Collins as the basis of comprehending intellectualism, capitalism, and the revolutionary. This paper seeks to examines Spelman’s historical and ideological narrative in regards to social activism and intellectualism. This paper is also using a feminist approach to examine the role capitalism, sexism and racism played in creating or hindering the intellectual atmosphere of Spelman

One of the main concepts of this paper is intellectualism. Intellectualism is characterized by two spheres; one of intellect and the other intelligence. Although these words are similar in origin and appearance, it is only when they are examined internally that the difference is made known. The article, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life by Richard Hofstadter (1963) explains, “Intelligence is an excellence of mind that is employed within a fairly narrow, immediate and predictable range... Intelligence works within the framework of limited but clearly stated goals, and may be quick to shear away questions of thought that do not seem to help in reaching them. Intellect, on the other hand, is the critical, creative, and contemplative side of mind. Whereas intelligence seeks to grasp, manipulate, reorder, adjust, intelligence examines, ponders, wonders, theorizes, criticizes, imagines. Intelligence will seize the immediate meaning in a situation and evaluate it. Intellect evaluates evaluations, and looks for the meaning of a situations as a whole. Intelligence can be praised as a quality in animals; intellect, being a unique manifestation of human dignity, is both praised and assailed as a quality in men” (Hofstadter 1963:25). What Hofstadter is establishing is that intelligence is an academic, regurgitation of already established ideas that neatly fit into the ideologies of society. Intellect on the