Calvin Langman

May 26, 2016

English 101
The 21st Century Model of Intellectualism
Imagine you are driving along the highway when one of your tires go out. As you drive to
the side of the road, you have a paining realization that of all the thousands of hours you spent
memorizing presidents, finding adjacent angles, and writing theses in school, nothing prepared
you for a situation like this. Perhaps changing a tire isnt the only pitfall of your knowledge;
never were you taught how to pay taxes, paint a room, or cook a decent meal. The current setup
of the American education system is not wholly fit for preparing students for life, something
Mike Rose, author of the essay Blue-Collar Brilliance, and Gerald Graff, author of the essay
Hidden Intellectualism, can agree upon. Both Rose and Graff show how the intellectualism
taught in schools is neither practical nor being taught appropriately. In Roses essay, he examines
the intelligence of blue-collar workers, while Graff examines the hidden intellectualism within
topical societal discussions. Despite the two men agreeing upon the lack of helpfulness of school
in the real world, they actually believe in two contrasting models of intellectualism with differing
views on how intelligence is measured, how intelligence should be taught, and how being
intelligent affects ones life.
Where Graff believes intelligence is measured through analytical ability, Rose believes
intelligence is best measured through ones problem-solving prowess. To Graff, ones
intelligence is based on how well he or she can analyze a situation. He states that the rudiments
of the intellectual life are how to make an argument, weigh different kinds of evidence, move

between particulars and generalizations, summarize the views of others, and enter a conversation
about ideas and that real intellectuals turn any subject into grist for their mill through the
thoughtful questions they bring to it (Graff 267, 265). The gristmill metaphor that Graff uses
reveals that he sees the human mind as an engine for using facts (grist) to communicate positions
and standpoints. Rose would disagree with Graffs model because he views intelligence as logic
and skill based. In his essay, Rose admires the intelligence of his waitress mother Rose which
comprised of her ability to [devise] memory strategies to help her wait seven to nine tables
at a time and her ability to sequence and group tasks (Rose 274). Moreover, Rose commends
the intelligence of his uncle Joe, who was a labor worker for G.M., which comprised of Joes
ability to evaluate a flurry of demands quickly, parcel out physical and mental resources, keep a
number of ongoing events in his mind, return to whatever task had been interrupted, and
maintain a cool head under the pressure of grueling production schedules (Rose 277). The skills
of Roses mother and uncle are very objective and practical; memorizing orders and knowing the
number of meetings in a day yield no leeway for argumentation. While Rose would still see these
skills as expressions of intelligence, Graff would argue that none of the skills mentioned by Rose
beg for analysis, and therefore Roses mother and uncle are not real intellectuals.
Rose and Graff also disagree on how intelligence should be manifested in young people.
Graff argues that intelligence should be nurtured in schools by exploiting students personal
interests. Speaking from his own experience, Graff explains that his childhood interest in sports
was intellectual because it was full of challenging arguments, debates, problems for analysis,
and intricate statistics that he could care about (Graff 267). Likening his interest of sports to
other common interests, Graff suggests that children interested in cars, sports, or clothing
fashions would be more prone to take on intellectual identities if [educators] encouraged them

to do so at first on subjects that interest them (265, 270). Graff concludes insisting schools and
colleges are missing an opportunity when they do not encourage students to take their
nonacademic interests as objects of academic study (270). Graff clearly believes that
intellectualism should be taught in a classroom setting by showing students how to analyze their
interests. On the other hand, Rose argues that intellectualism is best taught through hands-on
experiences in an occupational setting. Neither Roses mother nor his uncle went to high school,
his mother dropping out in the seventh grade to help raise her brothers and sisters and his uncle
[leaving] school in the ninth grade to work for the Pennsylvania Railroad. (275, 276). Roses
uncle actually advanced to supervisor of a G.M. paint-and-body department without formal
knowledge of how the machines under his supervision worked (278, 277). Even though they did
not finish their educations, Roses mother and uncle still ended up becoming very intelligent
thanks to the skills they acquired at their jobs, contradicting Graffs point of view that formal
schooling is the best way to garner intelligence. Furthermore, neither Roses mother nor Uncle
became intelligent by analyzing their personal interests but rather they became intelligent in
order to improve their way of life and make their jobs easier. Graffs method of cultivating
intelligence in a classroom would only work, according Roses theory, if becoming intellectually
analytical would help a student with their life or work.
Rose and Graff also disagree on how ones sense of community is impacted by being
intelligent. According to Graff, being intelligent helped him make friends. As a child, Graff felt
his analysis of sports helped him satisfy [his] thirst for community by entering cultural debates
with [communities] that [were] not limited to [his] family and friends, but was national and
public (268). To Graff, his childhood discussions prepared him for the the real intellectual
world (268). The intellectual world that Graff believes in is a world full of thoughtful analysis

and topical or occupational discussions. Rose would have no choice but to disagree with Graff.
Roses mother and uncle, who he praises for being intellectual, were still a part of their
respective waitressing and G.M. communities, but they both had jobs that did not call for any
analysis. The factor that brought Roses mother and uncle close to their coworkers was through
their shared experiences and similar occupational duties. In other words, Roses mother and
uncle satisfied their innate thirst for community by being physically adept, not analytically
smart like Graffs model on intelligence requires.
Out of Roses model for intelligence arises a plethora of blue-collar intellectuals: waiters
and waitresses, factory workers, and mechanics to name a few. Not only does Roses model
account for the unbounded capabilities of the human mind, but it is also far more accessible than
Graffs model. Those who do not have the ability to be schooled like Roses mother and uncle
and who opt for blue-collar work to support themselves and their families should not be shunned
by society just because they lack the specific analytical skills taught in schools. Rose
intellectuals actually exemplify a wider range of useful and applicable skills than Graff
intellectuals and are part of a larger, more inclusive community than the privileged Graff
intellectuals. Consider again that you are driving along the highway and your tire goes out. Who
would you prefer to help you out: a Graff intellectual who can thoroughly discuss how flat your
tire is, or a Rose intellectual who can help you to replace it?

Works Cited
Graff, Gerald. Hidden Intellectualism. They Say/I Say with Readings. 3rd ed. Eds. Gerald Graff, Cathy
Birkenstein, and Russel Durst. NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 2015. Print.

Rose, Mike. Blue-Collar Brilliance. They Say/I Say with Readings. 3rd ed. Eds. Gerald Graff, Cathy
Birkenstein, and Russel Durst. NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 2015. Print.