1

The Implications of Hierarchy and the Illusions of the

Achievement Ideology

Jonathan Weir
ED 161
Fall 2013
October 7, 2013


2
Within MacLeods ethnographic account of Clarendon Heights, we find a peculiar
case of a habitus that ceaselessly attempts to pair ambition with an external reality where
success is dependent upon a dynamic mix of personal and social factors. By carefully
reviewing MacLeods account of the Brothers successes and failures, it becomes apparent
that the achievement ideology that shapes their perception of the world is incongruous
with their school structure, a place where success is an unattainable illusion. This
discrepancy has a detrimental effect on the boys self-esteem, as they struggle to achieve
only mediocre results in school. Their turbulent educational experience perpetuates what
Marx would define as self-estrangement and leads the Brothers to experience alienation
from members of other social classes.
The Brothers live in households where discipline and obedience are paramount,
conditioning them to react submissively towards figures of authority. In their households,
the young males are expected to respect curfews, perform academically, avoid trouble in
school, and refrain from indulging in drinking alcohol, using drugs, and smoking
cigarettes. In breaching these rules, the Brothers are disciplined by parents or other adult
male family members in the form of extended periods of isolation in their rooms, or the
rare case of physical abuse. Most of the Brothers silently accept their parents authority
by consenting to the rules of the household, which establishes a hierarchical structure
within the family.
This sense of submission within the households of the Brothers may stem from
the parents experiences in the working work. Holding low-level and uninteresting jobs,
the parents have had an abundance of experience working below authority. Through these
jobs, they have come to learn the importance of submission to authority and its value for
3
success in the workplace. This translates into the formation of the hierarchical
infrastructure of their households and shapes the perspective that the Brothers adopt
towards authority figures in their school. The translation of the parents experiences at
work into the Brothers obedience at school offers a glimpse into Bowles and Gintis
correspondence principle, which suggest a direct association between society and the
education system. As Marxists, Bowles and Gintis (1976) explain that both students and
workers experience alienation due to isolation, an effect of the hierarchical structure and
the submissive attitude of low-level workers (72).
The verbal interactions and socialized language used within the Brothers homes
further fortified this hierarchy within the family. MacLeod (2008) makes note of Shirley
Brice Heaths research, which explains how working-class African American parents use
commands when addressing their children, whereas middle-class families typically
implement interrogative questions (18). With little space for collaboration or dialogue,
the Brothers not only perceive the rules of the household as inflexible law, but also
blindly accept the achievement ideology that their parent incessantly convey. This
achievement ideology is a social perspective that encompasses the idea that education
ensures equal opportunity and that economic inequality is the result of differences in
ambition or ability.
The Brothers role within the hierarchical structure of their families is neatly
transplanted into the social structure at Lincoln High School. As a working-class school,
LHS emphasizes behavior control and regiment, encouraging the boys to keenly abide by
school rules. Having adopted the ideals of education as a means to economic success and
social mobility, the Brothers are highly motivated to work hard on their academic
4
pursuits. The school reinforces their faith in the value of education as they promote good
behavior, hard work, and academic achievement as the prerequisite to economic success.
Based upon the pairing of the achievement ideology and the illusion of equal
opportunity, the Brothers forge a work ethic that is congruent with the values of the
dominant culture, which Marx (1844) would marked as alien activity and a step
towards psychological estrangement (75). Motivated by external forces that define
success, the Brothers attempt to tailor their behavior so that their level of achievement
will match the amount of energy they expend while trying to succeed. This perspective
crafts detrimental ambitions for the Brothers that are unfit for their external reality and
the structure of the school. Despite the Brothers profound academic efforts, they are
unable to achieve above-average grades. Self-estrangement results from the
disproportionate relationship between the Brothers effort towards succeeding and the
lackluster rewards for their labor in the form of mediocre marks.
Blind to the flaws of the school system in which they work, the Brothers can only
see their failures as self-provoked as they attribute their shortcomings to deficiencies in
intelligence or effort. MacLeod (2008) explains how, the Brothers may temper their
high aspirations, believing not that the institutions of school and the job market have
failed them, but that they have failed themselves (127). As the boys attach a high value
to academic achievement, their poor academic performance perpetuates into low self-
esteem. This deep emotional investment in school constructs a strong identity amongst
the Brothers as students, which becomes not a means of connecting the Brothers to their
peers, but a source of alienation from other students.
5
Though there is no clear, singular reason as to why the Brothers fail in their
academic pursuits despite their hard work and obedience, MacLeod (2008) cites
Bourdieus theory of cultural capital as a partial explanation. This theory articulates the
cultural capital of the lower classes is devalued by the school while that of the upper
classes is revered. Cultural capital includes the norms, behavior, language, and dress of a
particular group. Middle and upper class students who enter school with the cultural
capital of the dominant group are better equipped to succeed academically (101). One
example of this returns to MacLeod (2008) citing Heaths linguistic research, which
highlights how middle-class parents use interrogatives while socializing their children at
an early age (18). By asking questions rather than giving commands, middle-class parents
are preparing their children for the classroom, which encourages collaboration and active
participation. Unequipped with this skill set, the Brothers are placed at a disadvantage
and alienated from the high achieving middle-class.
On the other end of the spectrum, the Brothers identity as a students and their
strong sense of ambition isolates them from the underachieving Hallway Hangers who
reject school and curse authority. The idle nature of the rebellious white group in
Clarendon Heights has no appeal to their black counterparts. The Brothers prefer to keep
busy with sports, school, and girls rather than drinking and doing drugs. Within the
school, disciplinary repercussions evoke a feeling of shame amongst the Brothers, a
drastic contrast to the Hallway Hangers, who celebrate violence and aggression. Again,
the Brothers perception of achievement is used to measure peers and contributes to their
alienation.
6
Though Marx defines four different types of alienation, they are intricately
intertwine within one another and exist symbiotically. The Brothers experience various
forms of alienation that stem from their experiences in the public school system. Here we
witness the effects of alien activity or acting based on the needs of an external force.
The Brothers achievement ideology comes from the authority figures in their lives:
parents and teachers, who ceaselessly emphasize that hard work begets success. By
adopting this perception, the Brothers attempt to thrive in an environment where success
is unattainable for members of their socioeconomic class. The boys hard work goes
unrecognized and blinded by meritocracy, they blame no one but themselves.
This sense of failure breeds self-estrangement as the Brothers mistakenly mark
the seemingly inverse correlation between the act of producing and the product of their
labor (their grades) as a lack of effort and ability. The alienation from themselves
transforms into alienation from their peers, who the Brothers appraise through an
academic lens. As Marx (1844) explains, each man views the other in accordance with
the standard and the position in which he finds himself as a worker (77). Self-judgment
and the judgment of others are codependent and are at the foundation of every hierarchy.
This vicious and dynamic cycle of alienation is embedded within the structure of our
society and of our schools, allowing it to perpetuate through generations.

7
Works Cited

Bowles, S. & Gintis, H. (2011[1976]). Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational
Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life. Chicago, IL: Haymarket. [Selections]

Macleod, J. (2008). Aint No Makin It: Aspirations and Attainment in a Low-Income
Neighborhood. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Marx, K. (1978[1844]). Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. In R. C. Tucker
(Ed.), The Marx-Engels Reader (p. 66-125). New York: W. W. Norton and Co. [Excerpt
from Estranged labor]