Shriya Srinivas

Christen Enos
ENGW 1111
18 September 2015
The Danger of Lifeless Communication
An Analysis of The Violence of Forgetting - Interview of Henry A. Giroux
People often read for the sake of gaining knowledge. At the same time, if the piece of
writing at hand is dull and boring, a reader will not find themselves intrigued and engaged, even
if the topic is something of utmost interest to them. The article, The Violence of Forgetting,
published on June 20, 2016 in The New York Times, is the transcript of an interview of Henry
A. Giroux and is a perfect example of documentation that contains valuable information
presented in a lackluster and lifeless way. Girouxs interview is part of a series of dialogues
with philosophers and critical theorists on violence (Evans). Henry A. Giroux is a professor in
the department of English and Cultural Studies at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario
(Evans). He is also the author of many books, America at War with Itself being his latest
publication. The interview is moderated by Brad Evans, who also serves as the one who
indirectly conveys the main idea of each section to the audience. Although his credentials are not
described in the article, it is assumed by his interactions with Giroux that Evans is qualified to
conduct this interview.
In this interview, Giroux talks about the dangers of ignoring the past and how "ignorance
appears to be one of the defining features of American political and cultural life" (Giroux). He
then goes on to talk about how ignorance is indirectly causing the many of the recent violent acts

and how education is the key to making people more aware in order to squash the violence of
organized forgetting (Giroux). This interview is one that has interesting and enlightening
content, but fails to hold the interest of the audience due to the lack of break-up in the design,
leading to a very bored but informed audience.
Girouxs interview has a primary audience and a secondary one as well. The interview is
mainly directed at an educated audience who does not happen to know about the education
problems in the world and how they are leading to ignorance. Giroux explains that the
environments where students and people of the next generation learn are not holistic and do not
aid in crushing ignorance. It is his strong belief that education should give students lessons about
life and how to be a well-informed and culturally-aware citizen, but also should empower them
to challenge the ignorance of the world and repair the issues that exist today. He says that
Education does more than create critically minded, socially responsible citizens. It enables
young people and others to challenge authority by connecting individual troubles to wider
systemic concerns (Giroux) and further explains the importance of education in preventing
tragedies and political mistakes in the future. He discusses safe spaces in universities and how
they are not as safe as they are made out to be. They are, he believes, places that create distance
between each group and increase the ignorance that people have instead of diluting it. Giroux
states how Creating safe spaces runs counter to the notion that learning should be unsettling,
that students should challenge common sense assumptions and be willing to confront disturbing
realities despite discomfort (Giroux) and how they are not promoting a diverse learning
environment. To a certain extent this is a use of logos because a reader can relate to this idea in a
logical way. The education section of this interview is directed to students because some may not

be aware that they are closeting themselves from the culturally and racially diverse world.
Giroux wants people to know that there is more out in the world than just what the plain eye
sees.
Along with attempting to inform an educated audience, he also strives to connect with the
people who are generally not aware of what damage they are causing by their ignorance as his
secondary audience, whether educated or not. His interview is also for the people who blindly go
about life without analyzing the past to try and learn and improve the future. He wants to inform
the people who actively, although most of the time unknowingly, participate in the act of
ignorance is causing our history and thought itself [to be] under attack (Giroux). One example
he gives is that those who support Donald Trump are aiding in the cruel act of diminishing all the
values and good policies that have been painstakingly developed throughout history. He believes
that by supporting people Trump the world is cleansing the memory of social and political
progress achieved in the name of equality and basic human decency (Giroux). This anecdote
also hits home for many readers personally because quite a few of them have a strong dislike for
the current Republican nominee and believe that the world as it is today is endangered because of
the ignorance and support of goons like Trump. He also takes about how contemporary politics
are those in which emotion triumphs over reason, and spectacle over truth, thereby erasing
history by producing an endless flow of fragmented and disingenuous knowledge (Giroux).
Through this example he attempts to inform the audience and ultimately the people of America
that ignorance needs to end, otherwise more violence is bound to occur. Giroux makes a strong
point about how when ignorance is at the forefront, violence is inevitable. He brings up the
example of the recent Orlando shootings, which is an example of pathos. He uses words suck as

massacre and hate and unapologetic which are powerful words that resonate with peoples
feelings (Giroux). He assumes that the audience has prior knowledge of the shootings and uses
that pathos a basis for his argument about violence and its relationship with lack of awareness.
Audiences are almost always drawn in when pathos is used because it connects them to the
writing emotionally. When an audience relates to or has a connection to a piece of writing, they
are usually more inclined to continue reading. Through this use of pathos and other means,
Giroux attempts to achieve his purpose of convincing people to be more aware of the on-goings
of the world. His purpose also relates to the idea of increasing the awareness of the higher
education problems in society today.
This interview was published in the New York Times, one of the most popular reading
forums of today. This was a smart choice because Girouxs message and ideas can be read and
understood by many types of audiences, thus bringing about change. The topic of this article is
one that many do not dwell upon on a daily basis so reading this interview will give people
insight into how they can change their ways to improve the social and political situation of the
world. However, even if the article contains vital information, it is one that might just put a
reader to sleep because of the lackluster design.
The information and ideas that Giroux presents in this article are highly interesting and
important, however the actual read is slightly boring and dry. The design of this article is very
monotone. It is question and long answer followed by question and long answer. The many
words and sentences on the page give the feeling that one is reading a thesis. It is understandable
as this is the transcript of an interview and humans tend to speak less concise compared to when
they write. However, the transcript could have used some sort of break-up or whitespace in

between to keep the reader attentive. There is an image at the beginning of the article that is
titled Burning Books by Adrian Ghenie, shown below:
This image looks very whimsical and dream-like. When ignorance is described, it is usually
described as a quality that relates to a person who is unrealistic in their knowledge of the world
and one who has their head in the clouds. Those qualities are, in a sense, illustrated in this image.
There are many colors and there is no representation of reality in the image. This image is very
well paired with the interview because it ties into the main idea of this interview; how one should
not have their head in the clouds all the time and should be aware of reality.
All the information presented in this interview is impertinent, however the persona is
where the interview lacks. An interview is a type of document where the audience can
experience the persona of the author without even looking for it. Since the interview is a
transcript of how exactly Giroux speaks, the audience understands that he is a man of his words
and believes in putting his point across no matter what, even if it sounds harsh. Giroux used
many phrases that had a simple underlying meaning but were presented in a very complex way.
For example, he says Such violence legitimates a kind of inflammatory rhetoric and ideological
fundamentalism that views violence as the only solution to addressing social issues (Giroux).
While this interview is directed primarily at an educated audience, phrases like ideological
fundamentalism can cause a reader to be turned off because it sounds as if Giroux is trying to
show-off. This persona also makes the actual read more intensive and ultimately leads to a more
boring and lifeless read.
This interview categorically does not fall into the list of great reads, but contains a fair bit
of intellectual insight and information. Girouxs point about how the problems with the

education system are leading to violence and political disaster in the world was enlightening for
the audience. His analysis of ignorance was thorough and brought to light a topic that most do
not discuss every day. Although the read was boring, it nevertheless had an impact on the reader
that will help foster change by the next generation for the future.

Works Cited
Evans, Brad, and Henry Giroux A. "The Violence of Forgetting." The New York Times. The
New York Times, 19 June 2016. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.