In the chapter, "Rewriting Racist Code," Banks discusses the impact of African Americans having to defend themselves first against some allegation or assumption before being able to make their own appeal. The example he uses is of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X having to defend themselves "against charges that they were communist or anti-white before having an opportunity to present their appeals for the right of African Americans to vote or work" (94). As I read this, I was drawn back to our discussion of the heated and sometimes violent Purdue CLA listserv exchange regarding Obama's candidacy. In our discussion, we noticed how many of the women participants made some type of apology first before making a claim to further the listserv discussion whereas the men who participated did not. While the process of apologizing did not play out in every example on the listserv, there was an imbalance in the gender distribution of who apologized and who did not. Ultimately, the listserv and Banks' examples point to the way that power structures are inscribed in discourse practices, which led me to think about how power structures are inscribed in classroom discussions between students and teachers.

Often, before students respond, it seems as if they need to defend what they're about to say with some type of premise that may not necessarily be related to the ultimate point they are attempting to make. While this does not occur across the board, there is a reticence that is apparent in student responses that I want them to be able to move past and build confidence in their thoughts. I realize this is an ideal that ignores the power structure of the classroom, but Banks' discussion of underground spaces presents teachers useful examples of how to build a space for students to hone their skills and develop a confidence that will push them towards moving beyond having to defend and apologize first. As I'm writing this I realize that I'm grouping all students into one category and am not making distinctions between them in terms of race/gender/class. My reasoning for doing this is that I see Banks' arguments having far reaching consequences that can positively influence a broad range of students. But, what are the implications of having students (who traditionally have power) operate in underground spaces? Would their participation fundamentally alter the nature of the underground space, thus making it less generative for the students Banks describes in his work?