ABSTRACT
It is 1968, one day after the assassination of Martin Luther King. In the predominantly White town of Riceville, Iowa, Jane Elliott, a teacher, decides to make the children in her elementary-school class experience discrimination and racism. She comes up with a two-day exercise, which was later captured in the award-winning documentary Eye of the Storm. The documentary shows Elliot asking the class whether there is something that makes the children different from each other. One of the children suggests the colour of their eyes. Elliot adopts the idea and divides the class into children with blue eyes and children with brown eyes. For one day, the children with blue eyes are ‘superior’ and the children with brown eyes are ‘inferior’, and the next day it is the other way round. The ‘superior’ children are defined as being smarter and more honest, they get the best seats in the classroom, get a little more playtime, and at lunchtime are allowed to go for a second helping in the cafeteria. What happens next is well summarized by Elliot when she says, ‘I watched what had been marvellous, cooperative, wonderful, thoughtful children turn into nasty, vicious, discriminating little third graders, within the space of 15 minutes.’ The relationships in the classroom became determined by the meanings attached to eye colour. Children who had been friends suddenly found themselves on separate sides, or, as one student said: ‘It seemed like Ms Elliott was taking our best friends away from us.’ Children also made suggestions about enforcing the rules. One ‘superior’ child suggested that Elliot should inform the canteen staff about the rule that the ‘inferior’ children may not be given extra portions, and another child suggested that the teacher should keep her pointer on hand in case the ‘inferior’ children would be getting out of hand. During playtime, quarrels occurred when the ‘superior’ children started picking on others by calling them ‘blue-eyed’ (or ‘brown-eyed’). During class, the answers given by the ‘superior’ children were interpreted in terms of intelligence and an ability to learn quickly, while the behaviour of the ‘inferior’ children was attributed to clumsiness and stupidity. The ‘superior’ children experienced the ease and pleasantness of being on top. They felt respected, valued, and strong and started acting in accordance to the position that they had. The ‘inferior’ children felt left out and unfairly treated and withdrew listlessly.
