Analysis Of Karen Ho's Biographies Of Hegemony

Andrew Simmons published his article for The Atlantic, “The Danger of Telling Poor Kids that College is the Key to Social Mobility” on January 16, 2014, which raises his concerns that higher education is only being promoted as an opportunity to increase their economic status, when it should be an opportunity to experience an education (Simmons). Through the use of students such as Isabella, Simmons disagrees with the way students now look at higher education and blames the educators through the students’ lives for this view. Instead, Simmons views education as an intellectual opportunity rather than a way to elevate ones economic class which is all people see when they see “higher education.” He believes that education, ambition and work ethic is how you have a satisfying life, not with how much you make. He makes the point that when economics becomes the main goal of education it’s all children begin to think about and they might not pursue something that they are truly passionate about or what they want to learn about, which then does not create an intellectually awakening experience (Simmons).

He uses strong diction as he addresses how colleges are increasingly becoming “conventional bureaucracies” because behind every college program is a need for growth (Blank 263). This need he argues is how connections between colleges and outside companies begin to formulate as colleges develop “employment favoring tactics” (263). Thus colleges build up their clientele to help advertise such well known business corporations and offices to advertise “better jobs.” Blank continues by providing the most optimistic statistical evidence which “envision a 14.8 percent slice of 1975 job market, while they bring 31 percent of 18 to 24-year old age into college” (263). This estimates to about 10,664,000 students in college, “therefore, even if every one of the so-called professional and technical jobs were indeed reserved for them (which is itself patently impossible), the number of job openings would still be inadequate” (263). These facts introduce and support the idea that receiving a college degree is not to be associated with the key to “reserving a better job”. The details and numbers build an appeal to logos and impress upon the reader that this is a problem worth discussing, the statistics prove that although there are many students in college, not everyone will receive a job as the number of job openings are

Charles Murray’s essay proposes that American colleges are being flooded with individuals who are either unprepared for higher education or who are simply forced into attending college and can’t succeed because of the lack of certain innate abilities. Murray’s essay goes on to take issue with the idea that the pursuit of a traditional college education is somehow strategically creating a separation of the American class system. While Murray makes many salient points with regards to America’s obsession with college education as a standard into a class of the intellectual elite, the essay fails to take into consideration the various motivators that can lead to student success, despite

Ethan Watters and Michael Moss express two separate pieces of literary works that display different scenarios, but express the same message. Watters sets forth a phenomenon in which an entire culture is modified for the better of industry in Japan. With this circumstance, Watters argues that the ‘total environment’ in which a demographic is set can be altered by the influence of outside sources. Moss relates a similar example, where a certain group is marketed to, and as a result, this group’s relationship with the product drastically increases. There are many differences in the two works, but both researches contain many similarities; marketing techniques, ethical views, etcetera. The main thing that is most common in both texts is type

[Fridman contrasts the ideals of the nerd and of American culture by seeing how they stand up at one of the most prestigious academic institutions: Harvard.] Fridman proclaims that even at Harvard “there is a minority of undergraduates for whom pursuing knowledge is the top priority” (lines 15-17). Many Americans see Harvard as the college attended by the best of the brightest and would expect it to have a nerdy atmosphere, however this is not the case. It is a shocking revelation for Americans to learn how the anti-intellectual culture has seeped into every part of an American’s life: from kindergarten to college. Therefore, Fridman manipulates these perplexed and shocked emotions to prompt Americans to agree with him through his statement “enough is enough,” (line 29). Furthermore, he does this to demonstrate how Americans do not want to learn for the sake of learning and only desire to attend college so they can get a better job and make more money than valuing the education they are receiving.

Among these is the continuation of the cycle of debt in American commercial society, the hierarchy of differing higher education institutions and cost, and the resulting socioeconomic and racial inequities in college demographics. Both an examination of the current trends and figures and a closer look at a real life example show the troublesome state of higher education and its effect on our commercial society.

Students when given the opportunity to expand in something that interests them gain a confidence in learning that focuses more on internal aspects rather than on an education that will set a standard on what kind of individual they should be. For instance, Davidson in examination of Inez Davidson’s classroom found that "kids want to learn...as long as there is a payoff, not in what is won or achieved in statistical terms, but what is won and achieved inside, in the sense of self-confidence and competence" (Davidson 67). Students are not as shallow as education deems them to be. When given the opportunity to prove one’s worth it is more than high grades that are gained, it is having a place in the world through the betterment of “the Self” which betters the planet. Despite this, students are still being handed specific knowledge, and predetermined paths that are said to lead students to “success.” In truth, being handed opportunities only lead to a lack of motivation, since individuals will not want have the drive to earn for one’s self and to improve on all their overlooked skills and assets. Karen Ho refers to this as she quotes the undergraduate, Devon Peterson, on how “banking firms provide [undergraduates] with a way to maintain [their] elite status in society by providing avenues to wealth and power that other professions do not” (Ho 179). The recruitment process reflects how institutions, especially ones

We are all factory workers in some sense – each and every one of us. As individuals, we each have our unique ambitions, quirks, and moral compasses; however, we coexist together in institutions to create the same products of prejudice, despite our characteristic differences. In one instance, Wall Street and Ivy League universities in Karen Ho’s “The Biographies of Hegemony” employ countless undergraduates of various backgrounds to sustain an unhealthy environment of elitism. Similar ethical malpractice also extends to the voracious pharmaceutical companies in Ethan Watters’ “The Mega-Marketing of Depression in Japan” with various types of researchers and marketing scholars under their umbrella. The hegemony perpetuated by these systems are not just limited to humans, as in Charles Siebert’s “An Elephant Crackup?” the elephant society is severely oppressed by government agencies who acted as a direct consequence to the behaviors of hunters and poachers. In such institutions, there can exist two distinct groups of individuals: those who enter a larger system with the malicious intent to subjugate others, and those who enter with a fervent desire to advance society. Tragically, because institutions are intrinsically materialistic and parochial in nature, both groups of individuals would regardless contribute to a product of inequality and ethical misconduct under these systems of hegemony.

Belonging to a certain group is a natural experience in the lives of individuals. Groups are categorizable by a variety of options but often expel a trait that epitomizes each individual within the group such as rank, societal merit, or simply just appearance. Behaviorism gratifies purpose within cohort mentality among those in an association due to the psychological commonalities that bring these groups together. When it comes to an individual's development within a certain group, joint mentality helps create a safe environment but often times supports ideologies of self empowerment. Anthropologist Karen Ho composes the analysis of students whom graduate Ivy League universities and enter into financial professions, in her essay “Biographies

Karen Ho writes very a informing passage about Wall Street and the recruitment process in “The Biographies of Hegemony”. She speaks about the type of “families” Wall Streeters tend to form by only selecting specific types of people to work for them. An atomic family is composed of parents and their children and with aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc. as the extended family. The “constructed family” created by Wall Street is similar to an atomic family to the extent that Wall Street itself poses as the parent of its children Harvard and Princeton and has the other Ivy League schools acting as their “extended family”. Just as an atomic family has trust, loyalty, and inclusion, Wall Street’s “family” has the same in order to succeed as a

Along with the presence that Wall Street as a whole has on universities, the investment bankers themselves influence undergraduates as well. To Ho, being “consumption-oriented” means that to be the best, you have to look and act the best. Wall Streeters are in fact labeled as “‘the best,’ ‘the greatest,’ and ‘the brightest’” (Ho 167). With all their wealth as individuals and as a company, Alice Easton and Ian Shapira claim that “the ‘vigorous college recruiting

“Misconception No.1: A liberal arts education is a luxury that most families can no longer afford. ‘Career-education’ is what we must now focus on.” (Ungar, 2010, pp.191) As Ungar has claimed, there is a recent misconception that a liberal arts education is no longer a necessity but luxury because it doesn’t provide an instant career launching education. With so many people having to a need to spend as little money as possible, they are determined to only spend money on preparation for their future career. For this reason they go to college only to take courses that are necessary for their future. “She is in college to take vocational training. She wants to write computer code. Start a business. Get a job in television. She uses college to take vocational courses that pertain to her career interest.” (Murray, 2008, pp.228) Murray explained the story of a girl who is in college solely for preparation for her career. Because of this, she isn’t interested in a liberal arts education. If the course doesn’t directly pertain to her desired career, she prefers not to take it.

“Kids who are the first in their families to brave the world of higher education come on campus with little academic know-how and are much more likely than their peers to drop out before graduation” (1). Many people believe that school isn’t for everyone, and whoever goes is privileged for doing so. Countless people in the world today do not attend college, and this is mainly due to an influence of those in their family. Perhaps they are unsupportive of higher education, their parents and family members may view their entry into college as a break in the family system rather than a continuation of their schooling and higher learning. Most of the first-generation students decide to apply to colleges, because they aspire to jobs which require degrees. However, unlike some students whose parents have earned a degree, they often seek out college to bring honor to their families, and to ensure they make a decent amount of money for their future.

Today colleges are growing more and more necessary for attaining a solid path towards a successful career, yet the rapidly increasing cost of tuition is driving students away from their dream of attending college, due to the preposterous amount of money that is now being demanded by colleges across the nation and world as a whole. It is sad to see students being turned away from a successful future due to the money-hungry nature of the universities that dot the globe. More and more impossible it is becoming to have a “rags-to-riches” scenario that used to highlight the American Dream, as if a student doesn’t have the riches to afford a higher education and the tuition that is drug upon its coattails, then our society is doomed to be clothed in rags forever, unless major changes are brought about to restructure and end the indefatigable growth of tuition rates across the board.

When speaking of college, the prior benefit of obtaining a college degree that people might consider the most is personal financial gain. Alex Tabarrok states this claim in his article, “Tuning In to Dropping Out”, “…[majors like] Arts, psychology, and journalism, but graduates in these fields have lower wages and are less likely to find work in their fields than graduates in science and math”(250). On the other hand, he mentions that another reason majoring in liberal art fields could not get offers from high wage jobs is because these majors are less likely to drive the economic growth. As a result, how to choose a worthy right major has become a serious problem when students are applying colleges. “What is your child’s major?” This must be one of the most common and debated questions that Asian parents would like to discuss at dinner. During these years, I have heard this kind of conversation innumerably since Asian families are well known as structuring children’s lives for academic success. Therefore, the majority of Asian students would choose a field among science, technology, engineering, or math (STEM) as their majors in college because these subjects offer more career choices than others. The value of a major should be weighted on the importance of making and having a life after graduating from