Inferring and Explaining

138 InferrIng and exPlaInIng be advocating and arguing that his viewof Brown is superior to the received view. It is worth pausing to consider the elabo- rate narrative structure that Bell uses to con- struct the stories in And We Are Not Saved . His two main characters are an unnamed narrator (who bears an uncanny resemblance to Derrick Bell himself ) and a somewhat magical colleague named Geneva Crenshaw. Each story begins with a “chronicle.” Sometimes the chronicle is dependent on Geneva’s magical powers, as in “Te Chronicle of the Constitutional Contradic- tion,” where she travels back in time to address the Constitutional Convention and warn them of dire consequences, and moral disgrace, of enshrining the institution of slavery in the Con- stitution. Other chronicles, like “Te Sacrifced Black Schoolchildren,” are naked allegories that Bell refers to as “fairy tales.” Following each chronicle, there is an extended discussion of the chronicle between the narrator and Geneva. Te stories, thus, blend fantasy and the time- honored philosophical trope of fictional dialogue. Te narrative of the disappearing (or sac- rifced) black school children and the ensuing dialogue are used to critique the accepted read- ing of Brown as a historical and constitutional triumph. Geneva argues that the Court’s rejec- tion of legal segregation had more to do with whites’ interests, as a result of the ColdWar and our nation’s international reputation, than it did in achieving moral and constitutional jus- tice for black schoolchildren. She also argues that the sad history of public education since Brown demonstrates a failure to achieve any- thing remotely close to equal public education. She advocates for a very diferent decision and gives voice towhat she believes the Court should have ruled: 1. Even though we encourage voluntary desegrega- tion, we will not order racially integrated assign- ments of students or staf for ten years. 2. Even though “separate but equal” no longer meets the constitutional equal-protection standard, we will require immediate equalization of all facili- ties and resources. 3. Blacks must be represented on school boards and other policy-making bodies in proportions equal to those of the black students in each school district. 16 Geneva’s evidence has a familiar structure: e 1 . “The Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education should be seen as furthering the nation’s foreign and domestic interests. . . .” 17 e 2 . The history of desegregation in St. Louis (and many other districts) where Brown was frst resisted and the fact that when fnally ordered to desegregate, these dis- tricts used the newly increased funding to improve largely white schools e 3 . The harm to black students who were bussed to largely white schools e 4 . The many excellent black schools that were destroyed by Brown e 5 . The blatant inequality and de facto segre- gation that still exists in many school districts t 0 . The Court should have ruled as Geneva suggests. Tis argument looks much more like the one prosecuted by Mary Ann and Wanda than the