Letter to the Editor

Culture part of personal identity

To the Editor: 

Individual identity and cultural identity are not at odds. They are interdependent senses of personhood. To sense individual identity, one need look no farther than utterances of "I am." To sense cultural identity, one need look no farther than utterances of "we are." It would be difficult to find any individual person who is not also connected with some community. To be sure, every time people write their first and last name, they are speaking to their sense of individual and cultural identity.

The assertion in the Nov. 14 issue of The Breeze that celebrations of cultural identity on campus somehow hinder or interfere with celebrations of individuality is false. This is akin to saying that family rituals are an affront to the individuality of persons in those families. Moreover, if celebrations of culture hinder an appreciation of individuality, then celebrations of individuality hinder an appreciation of community. I can think of no better celebratory ritual that disproves this assertion more than a birthday party among close friends.

What the house editorial fails to realize is that for many people, individual and cultural identities are not seen at odds with each other. Like many people on campus, my sense of individual and cultural identity helps make up the whole of my person. To see me only as "Latino" and not as "Carlos" certainly disregards my personal being. But to see me only as "Carlos" disregards my sense of person no less.

I can hear it now, "Ugh! We're damned if we do and damned if we don't." Well, "damned" sort of exaggerates the issue. But if you're going to be damned, then it might as well be for allowing those individuals that you seek to emancipate from the so-called tyranny of their ethnic identity the opportunity to speak for ourselves. Some of us will tell you that we don't see our families as hindering our individuality.

The house editorial states, "Culturally speaking, JMU does not seem to be diverse." By looking at utterances of "we" as signifying cultural identity and how many times the word "we" is used in the editorial to speak for "us," then the collective voice of the editors certainly is correct. There definitely is a lack of appreciation for the diversity of ways in which personhood and respect for that sense of personhood 0 is defined at JMU.

Carlos Galvan Aleman
assistant professor
communication studies