"'Little ditty 'bout so much more than Jack and Diane"

I have the pleasure of teaching a class titled Pop Culture Literature, and in that class we dive into=, popular culture literature. The semester usually begins with song lyrics, and this year, and the beginning of the semester, has been rich with text to choose from, supplied by the likes of Kendrick Lamar, Phoebe Bridgers, Taylor Swift, Luke Combs, and others. This week, as we reviewed the elements of narratives and storytelling, we jumped in tot he wayback machine and pulled up a classic from when I was the age my students are now: "Jack and Diane" by John Cougar Mellencamp. Simple story from a simpler time used to review simple concepts. Or so I thought. This is what happens when you ask kids take our material and lessons and apply the critical thinking skills they supposedly are not being taught "these days."

 

The conversation began easy enough, a somewhat traditional lesson, as we identified the speaker (3rd person POV), discussed the setting (small town in the American heartland, outside the Tastee Freeze), and began to look at the conflict. After all, without a conflict, there is no story. That is where it got more interesting. The tale is one of Jack and Diane against the small town they are growing up in, doing the best they can, right? My students thought differently. "I don't like her," one student said, and when I asked "who?" she said, "Diane. She's holding him back." The conflict is between Jack and Diane. 

To paraphrase the analysis: Jack wants more. He's "gonna be a football star." Future tense. He wants more than the small town has to offer. Diane is "debutante," the princess in this small town. She has her placem socially. She doesn't want to leave. If she "runs off to the city" she'll be nobody. She'll lose her status. But she can't let Jack see what the larger world offers because he'll see that too, so she tries to convince him "we ain't missin' a thing" there in their little Bible Belt town. 

Jack did not go unscathed either. According to some of my kids, he is telling Diane that she isn't good enough for him, that life with her is, or will one day be, boring, and he has "major FOMO." He fears losing the thrill of living and having to endure a boring life in a boring town with her. Ouch. And he's pretty self-centered. He talks about what he wants, and wanting to "do what I please" with little regard for what Diane wants. (And yes, they got that line, and many of them were more than a little flabbergasted by it.) Yes, he is expressing the age-old lament of teensagers in small towns - to run off to where there is something, anything more - but Diane is small town, and she likes it. So he wants to run away from her. 

So why are they even together? That was the next question. I can't remember if I asked it or if they did - as these conversations build, they ask as many questions of each other as I do of them, and that is how it should be. Essentially, they said, he's the star football player, and she is popular girl. They are expected to be together. They don't fit, and they have different goals and dreams, but the expectation is that they will be together. Who else would they choose? So they get together, hang out, and maybe even sneak off behind the shady trees. But they don't really fit together as people. "Neither one is wrong," my kids said. "They just want different things."  To quote the T. Swift lyric we looked at on Tune Tuesday, "We learned the right steps to different dances." No one is the villain here. They just shouldn't be together. 

That's quite the blow to the teenage Kohls who didn't really listen too closely beyond "Suckin on chili dog" and air drunmed into the bridge. But it makes sense. The conflict is never resolved. Some felt they stay and grow up in the small town. Jack doesn't argue with Diane, afterall, and maybe she did remind him that they were not missing anything. They had what they needed to be happy. Others feel Jack moved on - "And walk on" - and leaves to go be a football star, maybe going to college while Diane stays put. Or, as one student said, "They're 16? Why are talking about running off now? They have time." Good point. Does the conflict need to be resolved at that moment? If they are not careful and don't slow their roll, they may be made "women and men" before they are ready. BTW, they question that too. They bring up the "back in my day" living in the Bible Belt, and yet needing saving as 16 year olds. 

Here's where I was headed with this: We hear so often that we are not teaching our kids to think critically. But we are. We have been. It takes many forms, but it is developing those skills. This little discussion about narrative elements - one early in the semester - allowed these kids to flex their critical thinking muscles, to hone their critical eyes, and not gloss over what they have in front of them without wondering. They didn't wait for answers or for me to tell them what to think. They asked questions, they disagreed with me, and with each other. We start with seemingly simple texts, like "Jack and Diane," and build into some more difficult ones that pull in so many important issues for them and for us as a whole. Kids are thinking and they have ideas about this world, their world, and about what they want, or don't want. They question things. They wondered what it would have been like for Jack and Diane, with no cellphones, no Life 360, no posting everything to Snapchat or Instagram, and just being able to be 16 and bored, or 16 and happy. 

And no, they don't really see the world the same as we do. They bring more information into their views than we ever did. They sometimes want more. Sometimes, they want less. Essentially, they want to have a chance to grow up and tell their stories. 

And so do I. We all deserve "a little ditty."