Pedagogy of the Oppressed Preface

Pedagogy of the Oppressed—Paulo Freire

© 1970 

Translation by Myra Bergman Ramos

Preface

Preface:

In the preface to Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire offers definitions of terms he utilizes in presenting the details of his thoughts about oppression.  He feels this groundwork needs to be presented in order to engage in the discussion of the topic of oppression.  These definitions also establish his stance on the topic.

The translator helps define the term conscientização as it refers to the perception of “social, political, and economic contradictions” (p. 19) and for the oppressed to take action against the reality of oppression.  Freire does use this term as a summation of his point. He also describes the oppressed’s fear of freedom as a fear in a change of the status quo.  There is, for lack of a better term, comfort in knowing what to expect in certain situations.

The terms Subject (those oppressed persons who know and act) and object (those that are known and acted upon by the oppressors) are crucial to points made by Freire as well as radicals (the oppressed and their supporters who will act to change the situation).  According to Freire, a radical is “not afraid to confront, to listen, to see the world unveiled…He does not consider himself the proprietor of history or men, or the liberator of the oppressed; but he does commit himself, within history, to fight at their side” (p. 24). Sectarianism is defined as sects of people who are like-minded and Freire uses the term usually to refer to those who are oppressive or who lack the motivation to become Subjects.  Radicalization is a definition of those who are critical of the status quo and use creativity to make changes for the masses of the oppressed.  

Freire hopes to begin a dialogue with others and that the dialogue will become a model for the oppressed to take their pro-action for change.  He does acknowledge his own possible limitations, be they aspects he may not have perceived or discussions about matters to which he has no concrete experience.  Yet Freire feels confident that his observations enhance his ability to reflect upon this theme.

Reaction to Preface:

            The positions put forth in the preface were helpful in beginning to establish Freire’s thoughts.  I found myself appreciative of having his definitions of the terms I would encounter as I continue to read and process this information. 

            I also found myself begin to reflect on my own knowledge of the terms defined.  I can also see how the terms themselves may create controversy based on traditional views of what these terms indicate. For instance, the term radicalization.  In the past, I have heard and seen it as a negative reference to something which upsets the course of progress of a set agenda.  I now understand that a radical is someone to challenge the entity that set the agenda and the motive for the agenda in the first place.  In my opinion, the challenge does not predict that the outcome is for negative results.  On the contrary, the challenge is usually for the improvement of an agenda for those most impacted.  I see how creating a controversy even over terms used can be a catalyst for discussion—what Freire’s intention was from the beginning.

            I also appreciate that Freire can recognize his own restrictions on the topic of oppression. However, I am encouraged by the belief that Freire can engage in a very important conversation on behalf of all parties involved.

            I am trying to process one thing that seems to be a paradox.  If sectarianism is viewed as an obstacle to freeing the oppressed, then if the oppressed work together and develop a forum in which to change their situation, how do they not form a sect and thus engage in sectarianism?  Perhaps my understanding of the concept is faulty or will be explained with further reading of Freire.