A Personal History of Violence

Canada, Geoffrey. Fist Stick Knife Gun:  A Personal History of Violence in America. Boston: Beacon Press, 1995.

(Download this review as a PDF)

OVERVIEW

Geoffrey Canada is the Executive Director and President of the Harlem Children’s Zone in New York.  He is a native of the South Bronx, and a graduate of Bowdoin College and Harvard University.  He took over the Rheedlen Foundation in 1983.  This book describes how his personal history with violence informed his work with youth and the programs that he has started to support youth.  Canada actually learned the code of the streets because he grew up in the streets and had to fight to protect himself and his friends. 

He remembers his brothers being sent out of their apartment by his mother to retrieve a stolen jacket: “You let somebody take your brother’s jacket and you did nothing?” she explodes at the older brother. “You go out there and get your brother’s jacket or when you get back I’m going to give you a beating that will be ten times as bad as what that little thief could do to you.”

I waited a long ten minutes and then, to my surprise, John and Dan triumphantly strolled into the apartment. Dan had John’s jacket in hand. My mother gathered us all together and told us we had to stick together. That we couldn’t let people think we were afraid.  (pp. 4-5)

Geoffrey Canada describes the evolution of violence over the course of his lifetime.  As a child, he and his peers used fists to solve conflicts and command respect in the streets.  On occasion a weapon such as a knife or car antenna would be used, but in the eighties, the drug trade and influx of guns changed the face of violence forever.  The Rockefeller drug laws increased mandatory sentencing for drug-selling, and led to the growth of young people selling drugs because of the lighter sentences in the juvenile justice system.  When territory and property were at risk, possession of a gun was the solution for poor inner-city kids.  It guaranteed some semblance of security, and provided power without the natural checks of violence of size and skill that were previously in place.

Canada describes how relationships with adults, poverty, and safety (or lack thereof) lead kids to use violence to solve problems.  In schools, adults who set safety principles do not always understand the justice laws of the street, and cannot support them while protecting students.  Often adults create, unknowingly, larger opportunities for conflict than what naturally occur between youth. 

Trust is a major concern for young people.  This is why young people do not bring problems to adults but try to solve them the best way they know how.  There is a fine line between asking for help and being labeled a snitch.  Access to the things they need cause kids to rob or fight for shoes, jackets, and toys.  When they do not have something and they see someone else has it, their solution could be to fight and take it.  Sometimes, kids have to fight a few times to avoid being bullied or “punked” repeatedly.  In other situations, kids fall into a pecking order in the neighborhood, and must create alliances for safety within their neighborhood and throughout the areas in cities where they must travel.  Canada uses multiple stories to illustrate his points about the understanding of the streets and wins and losses in his work.  He draws conclusions about the impact of the justice system, police, education, and economy on violence.

Canada concludes with suggestions for government initiatives to reduce violence in the streets.  They include:

1. Creating a peace officer corps

2. Reducing the demand for drugs

3. Reduce the prevalence of domestic violence and child abuse and neglect

4. Reduce the amount of violence on television and in the movies

5. Reduce and regulate the possession of handguns

QUOTATIONS

“America has long had a love affair with violence and guns. It’s our history, we teach it to all of our young.” (x)

“But the truth is, the finger keeps the urgency of the work my colleagues and I do with children at the forefront of my mind.  The slight deformity is such a small price to have paid for growing up in the South Bronx.” (69)

“We will never convince them [children] to give up their weapons with fancy television jingles or with marches alone.  What these children need is a sense of safety, a certainty of surviving as they go to school or to the store.” (75)

“Before Robert left we went over the drill for what you should do when someone might be trying to kill you.  The drill was a collection of do’s and don’ts learned over the years by the mistakes others had made, often costing them their lives:…I’ve gone over this drill too many times with too many kids.” (94)

“Kids with guns often see no limits on their power.” (100)

“Here I was dealing with children dying every day and trying to solve the problem on the streets, and other Americans were sitting in offices designing new and more effective ways to entice children to use handguns.” (124)

“I couldn’t help think that this is what we are trying to do at our Beacon school – believe in our children, support them, be patient with them, knowing that eventually they will succeed.  And then cheering with all our heart when they do.” (146)

“This incident confirmed what I had long suspected:  when it came to violence teachers and principals just didn’t understand – we were on our own to survive the best way we knew how.” (157)

“I try to remember what I once knew, that children are the real experts in violence prevention, that they are the first ones to ask if you really want to know what works and what doesn’t.”  (157)

“Any child living under siege knows that he boy down the block will kill him or her instantly – no trial, no defense attorney, no copping a plea, just one second alive, the next second dead.  The government can never compete with that reality.”  (160)

QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION

1. Are you willing to take the types of personal and physical risks necessary to ensure safety of kids that the workers in these programs did?

2. What alternatives to loitering, gang involvement, and violence response does your program/ministry provide?

3. Are you trained in conflict resolution?

4. What changes need to be made in the laws relating to youth and violence?

5. How can you balance the tension between making yourself available to young people for counsel and the impression/consequence of being a snitch?  What can adults do to change this isolation and communication gap?

6. How do you reward youth who do not resort to violence?

IMPLICATIONS

Canada implies that the violence committed by and against children is the solution that children have devised to problems that adults created or do not prevent.  The government, social, and economic factors involved in youth violence must be considered as we try to reduce violence with single campaigns and narrowly focused programming.  We need comprehensive programming that addresses not only needs of children but also needs of parents and families.  If we do not approach the problem with input of families and children, we will be unsuccessful at meeting the needs of children and supporting them so that they can be successful.  

Tamecia Jones   c. CYS