So far in Arts Scholars we have discussed many power imbalances in research, be it the western gaze on indigenous cultures, socio-economic bias when viewing underprivileged groups, or the control of the researcher over the researched. However, it was only after listening to Jennifer Frost’s lecture on the youth voting movement in America, did I realise that another far more pervasive power imbalance was occurring under my very nose: age.
As Jennifer’s analysis of the noticeable lack of research already conducted on the movement’s grassroots history reveals, the intellectual story of youth is almost invariably told by the middle-aged. This is hardly surprising, as academia is…shall we say a profession for mature persons.[1] The fact one of the oldest guest lecturers on the Power and Inequity in Research panel, Jemaima Taitia Seath, called herself “young” within academic spheres stands as testament to this.
However, rather than following the example of other researchers who absent-mindedly assumed middle-aged politicians enfranchised youth in America, Jennifer reframed young people as having agency and drive. Moreover, her decision to work with summer scholarship students whilst conducting research and tailoring her writing style for a youth audience reflect a genuine attempt by Jennifer to tell the story of the youth voting movement through its own terms, conventions and perceptions.
Ameliorating this power imbalance is difficult for academics. However, Jennifer’s experience attests to the rich insights doing so can yield.
[1] Apart from Sam and Greg, who I happen to think are both very youth adjacent 😉
