[Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man

Thu Feb 9 21:30:20 PST 2017

Yes, certainly, but adults play too.  Still, yes, this makes a connection
with childhood.  And I wonder if everyone has that sensation before
sleeping in childhood? No real way to know.  Curious! Beth

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

> Beth, I remember those spirals before sleeping too; I had exactly the
> same! And for the meta and children, play itself is meta, as Bateson shows
> discussing 'the message this is play'.
>
> (my two cents, not much time this week)
> Alfredo
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> on behalf of Beth Ferholt <bferholt@gmail.com>
> Sent: 10 February 2017 05:13
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man
>
> I am not well enough read to respond to these recent posts but was very
> interested to talk more about  "meta".  I have, since I began teaching
> preschool, thought that the feeling of a "spiral of consciousness" -- is
> that my own term or from someone else? -- what I mean is when you are
> stopped in your tracks by a sensation that you are walking above layers of
> time in one place, or even that you are floating above your self as your
> mind races in every widening spirals ... that this sensation was familiar
> because I had felt it often in childhood.  I connected it to young
> children's love of repetition and ritual.
>
> I often felt, as a teacher, that the children in my class were walking a
> bit above the ground most of the time.  They appeared to be touching the
> floor or the asphalt but they were not, usually.  This became clear in the
> misunderstandings between adults and children that make up the life of the
> preschool (sort of like the one I mentioned above, between me and Mike, but
> so much larger) -- but I also have some earliest memories of seeing things
> repeatedly growing and shrinking in a spiral rhythm as I would try to
> sleep.
>
> That is my two cents of response : ) : That something of the nested dolls,
> or the liar paradox (Hofstadter, 1979 is where I heard that --
> Epidemenides/liar paradox), is essential to perezhivaie ... not just a
> repetition.
>
> Beth
>
>
>
> Beth
>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth <
> wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Responding to Robert's invitation,
> >
> > My book title is not going meta. Instead, it goes to the very hard of
> > mathematical praxis. What is it that allows a mathematician to see in the
> > moves of another a typical mathematical move rather than the move of
> > another. What is it in the doing that makes it mathematical rather
> > scientific, commonsense, chemical... And the book is concerned with
> showing
> > the sociogenesis of the mathematics of mathematics, the origin of
> > mathematical reasoning AS social relation (more accurately, because of
> the
> > ideality of mathematics, a societal relation---see Il'enkov, the ideal,
> the
> > general [obshee]).
> >
> > For the remainder of the paragraphs of the unsigned message, I do not
> > understand a thing. I thought I understood Heidegger a bit, have read
> many
> > of his works many times. But I do not see how anything in these
> paragraphs
> > arises out of the thinking of Heidegger, or anyone else who took up and
> > developed the philosopher's thinking, like Derrida or Nancy . . .
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > --------------------
> > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor
> > Applied Cognitive Science
> > MacLaurin Building A567
> > University of Victoria
> > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
> > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>
> >
> > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics
> > <https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-
> > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-
> > mathematics-of-mathematics/>*
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Robert Lake <boblake@georgiasouthern.edu
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > For meta question I defer to Professor Roth himself.
> > > (Included in this email).
> > > Robert
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 4:40 PM, <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Beth, Robert, and the others forming a “(we)”.
> > > >
> > > > Beth said it is the “()” within the “()” that interests her [as
> being].
> > > > Maybe Framing is ALL communication, ALL thought, ALL consciousness
> ....
> > > > Bateson?.... but Beth thinks we need to tackle framing head on [face
> > > into]
> > > > when discussing perezhivanie.
> > > >
> > > > Now I noticed that Wolff-Michael Roth included in the title of his
> book
> > > > the phrase – mathematics of mathematics -  and my mind wondered to
> > > > conjecture if this is going “meta” and if “()” is also going “meta”.
> > > >
> > > > Could Beth’s “()” as symbolic also have another aspect [or side] that
> > is
> > > > () = bracket and the doubling  “()” = bracketing the bracket.  These
> > > moves
> > > > as examples of going “meta” which also plays with saying/not saying
> or
> > > > revealing/concealing that Ed Wall recently posted when he said:
> > > > The truth of the proposition, in effect, resides in the possibility
> of
> > > > bringing its referents into the light (here is where aletheia takes a
> > > > part); I.e. uncovering. That is, on the LEVEL of ‘apophantic as’
> things
> > > are
> > > > propositionally either true or false, but on the LEVEL of the
> > > ‘hermeneutic
> > > > as’ they are neither.
> > > >
> > > > However, the ‘apophantic as’ IS (its being) grounded in
> interpretation,
> > > > I.e. the ‘hermeneutic as’ (its being). For Heidegger (and this is an
> > > > oversimplification) ‘hermeneutic truth’ IS in effect (in use)
> > DISclosure.
> > > > ..... complicated because if one surfaces [metaphor of LEVELS] to the
> > > > apophantic then, in effect (in use) there is a covering back up
> > > > (closure).... Also, and this is most important, the consequent would
> > not
> > > be
> > > > an understanding of Trump’s speech, but an understanding
> (interpreting)
> > > of
> > > > how  “(I)” understand (interpret) Trump’s speech.
> > > >
> > > > I am travelling back and forth exploring saying as () generating
> > effects
> > > > IN USE, and then doubling back and exploring the () generating
> effects
> > IN
> > > > USE through “()” interpretation of the uses.  To go hear would have
> to
> > > > bring in Umberto Eco who pleads for us to make a distinction between
> > > ‘use’
> > > > and ‘interpretation’ AS aspects of semiosis and semiotic but this is
> > for
> > > > another turn.
> > > >
> > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> > > >
> > > > From: Beth Ferholt
> > > > Sent: February 5, 2017 6:38 PM
> > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the calling out to Monica and me, Mike and Andy -- I had
> to
> > > stop
> > > > checking XMCA for a couple of weeks so I did not see the discussion
> or
> > > your
> > > > notes to me in the chain, until today.  One of the the strengths of
> > XMCA
> > > is
> > > > that it creates a conversation that can include people who can not
> > > always”
> > > > respond that very day, or even week, due to various forms of
> > > interruption!
> > > > Often these "interruptions" are children or political events, which
> > canY
> > > > help us to understand perezhivanie.
> > > >
> > > > As well as spending time at JFK, recently, many of us here in New
> York
> > > have
> > > > been attending local protests to keep our neighborhoods feeling safe
> > for
> > > > everyone.  I live in a neighborhood in Brooklyn that includes several
> > > > Muslim communities and several Jewish communities (as well as a few
> > > Russian
> > > > and Polish communities), and at the local protests these past few
> weeks
> > > > some people have had photographs of their family members who were
> > killed
> > > by
> > > > the Nazis attached to the back of their "never again" signs. Also we
> > all,
> > > > Muslim, Jewish, etc. families, have been often bringing  our children
> > to
> > > > the protests.
> > > >
> > > > So I have been thinking a lot about children and hope, during the
> past
> > > few
> > > > weeks.  It is within this frame that I saw this film.  I think the
> film
> > > was
> > > > expecting us to see the child as only benefitting from the main
> > > character's
> > > > lying, saying that he was the child's father, and of course the child
> > did
> > > > benefit, but I think that perezhivanie is about truth, somehow,
> > although
> > > I
> > > > am not sure how.
> > > >
> > > > My second thought is that Manchester by the Sea must have been
> > > referencing
> > > > this film, with its return-to-the-space-where-the-house-was scene,
> and
> > > > also
> > > > with the choice to replace the lost self (as father) / family or
> no.  I
> > > > think it might help this conversation if we all saw both films,
> > actually.
> > > > Two thoughts on this methods suggestion for our conversation, before
> I
> > > > return to the topic itself.
> > > >
> > > > 1) It is odd how closely the two films are related, as I did not know
> > > that
> > > > the two films were related when I told Chris to see Manchester by the
> > Sea
> > > > in relation to thinking about perezhivanie.  I told Chris when I saw
> > him
> > > in
> > > > person, and I think that discussions about perezhivanie are often
> > > different
> > > > in person.  We learned at LCHC in the 2004/5 playworld projects that
> > > these
> > > > in person discussions about perezhivanie have a pronounced proleptic
> > > > structure, mirroring the topic of study, such that the conclusion of
> > the
> > > > discussion appears at the start: It feels like magic is happening.
> (I
> > > > think this has something to do with how good teachers see the things
> in
> > > > their classroom that are useful or no before they happen or "behind
> > their
> > > > heads" ... when you are very present you have this "sixth sense,"
> which
> > > is
> > > > really an experience of time moving in two directions at once ...
> being
> > > > very present can often require a lot of in person time and being with
> > > > children speeds up the process.)
> > > >
> > > > 2) It is a strength that the XMCA conversations can continue through
> > all
> > > of
> > > > our different schedules.  It is a negative that they are not in
> person,
> > > and
> > > > seeing films together can really help.  This is where we went on the
> > > > perezhivanie facebook page when it was briefly in English and in
> > Russian
> > > --
> > > > with a film, and it was very helpful.  (Of course I am thinking of
> this
> > > > while considering the changing role and form of LCHC and Mike's
> > > > participation in LCHC and XMCA.  I am thinking of the mistakes that
> are
> > > > communication.  A story about this that I thought of recently, which
> > > shows
> > > > this point well, and seems worth retelling BECAUSE when studying
> > > > perezhivanie the form is often (always??) the study of the content:
> As
> > a
> > > > newish graduate student Mike once said "thank you" to me when I made
> a
> > > > comment in the afternoon about an AM conversation that day.  Mike's
> > > "thank
> > > > you" encouraged me to pay extra attention to this comment/thought of
> > > mine,
> > > > which later became important in our analysis of a
> difficult-to-decipher
> > > > playworld event.  I was thinking of this event as I walked and talked
> > > with
> > > > a doctoral student of my own -- I seem to have a heavily spacial
> memory
> > > > process and my student and I were walking through a doorway -- and I
> > > > suddenly realized that Mike could have been thanking me for holding
> the
> > > > door for him at this time in the past when his feedback was so
> > important
> > > to
> > > > me ... maybe he did not hear my comment, but just thanked me for
> > holding
> > > > the door ... in fact it now appears to me that this was probably the
> > > case!)
> > > >
> > > > The interesting thing to me about the above 2 points is the framing.
> > It
> > > IS
> > > > the "()" within the "()" that interests me. Maybe Framing is all
> > > > communication or all thought or consciousness ... Bateson? ... but I
> > > think
> > > > we need to tackle framing head on when discussing perezhivanie.  The
> > two
> > > > films are very different in regards to framing, I think this is why
> > they
> > > > are most interesting to think about together, but first I have two
> > > > citations for thinking about time that I use frequently in my writing
> > on
> > > > perezhivanie.
> > > >
> > > > These seem worth repeating here, as this thinking about time in
> > > space/time
> > > > seems to me to be thinking about framing ... the "()" makes us double
> > > back
> > > > in time as we read -- :
> > > >
> > > > (As to Performance, Alfredo copied the Schechner quote above.)
> > > >
> > > > Dewey's relation of the notion of object to prolepsis (on XMCA):
> > > > Mike (2007) used the term “temporally double sided” to describe this
> > > > phenomenon of growing back and towards the future and the past
> > > > simultaneously.
> > > >
> > > > What I am (still) thinking about, now, most often:
> > > > It is the juxtaposition of temporal double sidedness with stages that
> > > > creates perezhivanie. What Schechner argues is that this
> juxtaposition
> > > > provides the rhythm that allows us to raise ourselves up and hover,
> > > > suspended momentarily in a state of being simultaneously ourselves
> and
> > > not
> > > > ourselves: our past and future selves (someone else).
> > > >
> > > > So my first point is about framing and my second is about children.
> > The
> > > > Fate Of Man is all about the frames / "()". The stories are nested
> > within
> > > > eachother, repeating themselves, maybe even sort of like a fractal,
> or
> > > > anyhow a spiral?  I have some congenital prosopagnosia, getting worse
> > as
> > > I
> > > > age and definitely bad with a film like this.  I kept thinking we
> were
> > > back
> > > > at the ferry as the form of the conversation and context images
> > repeated
> > > > themselves, as I could not recognize the face of the character who
> was
> > > the
> > > > audience for our hero's story!  Manchester by the Sea, on the other
> > hand,
> > > > had no frames.  We just jumped right in and rode it through. I only
> saw
> > > > Manchester once but do others think this is true? relevant?
> > > >
> > > > I think that the question of children's position in relation to adult
> > > > perezhivanie is central in both of these films. The children in both
> of
> > > > these films appear to want the main characters to try again at being
> > > > fathers.  This is a critique of films about children -- I can not
> think
> > > of
> > > > the name of the person who made this critique, but I can find it for
> > > anyone
> > > > if needed -- : We adults often make films not about children but
> about
> > > our
> > > > own childhoods.  We make films about children who are no longer with
> > us.
> > > > But is this really best for the films, as films are usually best when
> > > they
> > > > are somehow in dialogue with their topic, this is a characteristic of
> > the
> > > > medium, no?
> > > >
> > > > If you do not have some pretense, some playing again, you can not
> have
> > > > perezhivanie.  But I think that Fate of Man is not about
> perezhivanie,
> > > > although in a different way than Manchester by the Sea is not about
> > > > perezhivanie.  In Manchester by the Sea there is no other with whom
> to
> > > > perezhivanie because the main character and his former wife still
> love
> > > each
> > > > other, or at lease he still loves her and she returns enough of the
> > love
> > > to
> > > > keep him loving her, and neither of them can pull the other up
> because
> > > they
> > > > both hit bottom together and in the same story.  In Fate of Man there
> > is
> > > is
> > > > no chance for perezhivanie because the other needs to be involved in
> > some
> > > > honest way, or there is no dialogue.
> > > >
> > > > In Fate of Man the hero seems to me to be playing out his memory in
> the
> > > > real world.  A child is not an other with whom one can ever
> > perezhivanie.
> > > > This is not perezhivanie as there is no real world as a player, and
> > this
> > > is
> > > > why our hero's heart will fail him.  He did not reach bottom and then
> > > start
> > > > to pull himself up by connecting with another with great bravery.
> > > Instead,
> > > > as he says himself, he just snapped -- he is now living in a dream.
> > > >
> > > > As Larry put it, above in this chain: "In other words, navigating
> > through
> > > > the suffering and existential emptiness is not a hero’s journey." And
> > > this
> > > > point is relevant, again, to our method for studying perezhivanie.  I
> > > don't
> > > > think we can manage this one on our own (XMCA), even as a group that
> > > allows
> > > > for conversations over extended time periods.
> > > >
> > > > If form and content are related in this process, I'd say that we
> won't
> > > > understand this process until we see children as full people.  And
> > > > simultaneously as children.  Children have something to tell us about
> > > this
> > > > process that no one else can tell us, and they are not going to tell
> us
> > > > this in a way that those of us who are researchers/scholars can
> listen,
> > > > without the bridge of the teacher voices.  How to include these
> voices
> > in
> > > > our research is key.  And the answer has something to do with art, as
> > > well
> > > > as with time and space.
> > > >
> > > > I am going to send this as it is long enough already, and then catch
> up
> > > > with the related chains after I do ... And I won't say more now, but
> I
> > > > agree with all the people who thought this was a great pick to start
> > the
> > > > discussion.  Many levels to discuss and I also found many aspects of
> > the
> > > > film related to perezhivanie in many ways! Beth
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:51 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > How about a documentary movie about the first Trump voter who dies
> > as a
> > > > > result of repeal of Obama Care? That would be a perezhivanie
> within a
> > > > > perezhivanie!
> > > > >
> > > > > Andy
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > Andy Blunden
> > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy
> > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-
> > decision-making
> > > > > On 21/01/2017 12:03 PM, Helena Worthen wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I am late to this discussion, but I have been paying attention. I
> > was
> > > > >> reluctant to expose myself to the emotional challenges of the
> film.
> > I
> > > > knew
> > > > >> that between the majestic music, the stunning black and white
> > images,
> > > > the
> > > > >> beautiful human faces and bodies (and some very ugly ones), and
> the
> > > > twists
> > > > >> of the story, I was going to be deeply moved. However, I have been
> > > > reading
> > > > >> two books by Svetlana Alexievich -- Voices from Chernobyl and
> > > Secondhand
> > > > >> Time - which tell equally heartbreaking, horrifying stories of
> > > > suffering.
> > > > >> Reading her work inclines me to place the film in the context of
> the
> > > > period
> > > > >> of deStalinization after Kruschev's 1956 speech to the 20th
> Congress
> > > of
> > > > the
> > > > >> CPSU, which gave the signal that it was permissible to begin to
> talk
> > > > freely
> > > > >> about Soviet history. It was a period of trying to build a story
> > that
> > > > could
> > > > >> explain and honor, if not justify, the extreme suffering of the
> > Soviet
> > > > >> people. This film seems to me to set out to accomplish that. So
> does
> > > > >> Alexievich's book, which is a compilation of interviews done
> between
> > > > 1991
> > > > >> and 2012, with people who had something to say (good and bad)
> about
> > > the
> > > > >> Soviet regime and the experience of its dissolution. She got the
> > 2015
> > > > Nobel
> > > > >> Prize for this book.  And I sense that Andy, or someone, is
> > > anticipating
> > > > >> that the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship
> or
> > > > art,
> > > > >> or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the
> > US
> > > --
> > > > >> for example, this afternoon, under President Trump.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Helena Worthen
> > > > >> helenaworthen@gmail.com
> > > > >> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Jan 19, 2017, at 4:00 PM, Christopher Schuck wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> For some reason I couldn't see the subtitles showing up in Fate
> of a
> > > Man
> > > > >>> the first time, so I started to watch it dubbed in English
> instead.
> > > But
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>> mannered Hollywood accents definitely were not exactly helping to
> > > > convey
> > > > >>> the "real Russian soul" Robbins talks about! It felt like I was
> > being
> > > > >>> asked
> > > > >>> to imagine Cary Grant inhabiting Andrei's perezhivanie-ing body.
> > So,
> > > I
> > > > >>> started over with the subtitled version.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Here are some quick initial reflections: wonderful movie, and in
> > > Andrei
> > > > >>> one
> > > > >>> of the more memorable characters I have seen. But I also found
> > myself
> > > > >>> thinking how big a difference there is between watching a film on
> > my
> > > > >>> 12-inch laptop with headphones (my only option at the moment),
> and
> > > > >>> sitting
> > > > >>> back and immersing yourself in a darkened theater or at least on
> a
> > > > >>> widescreen TV without any other distractions, allowing ourselves
> to
> > > > "fall
> > > > >>> into this space" by virtue of our very awareness of the illusion
> > > > >>> generated
> > > > >>> by the frame, as Beth and Monica put it. This difference becomes
> > even
> > > > >>> bigger if the screen you're viewing it on also enables you to
> > quickly
> > > > >>> check
> > > > >>> email from time to time during the movie, as many people do these
> > > days.
> > > > >>> If
> > > > >>> we are to consider the film experience as a model (analogy?) for
> > > > >>> perezhivanie or even a certain kind of simulation of it, this
> > effect
> > > > that
> > > > >>> occurs when we lose ourselves in a film would be undermined by an
> > > > >>> especially small frame or poor viewing conditions. At what point
> > does
> > > > >>> "the
> > > > >>> knowledge that the movement we experience is just an illusion"
> (p.
> > 2
> > > in
> > > > >>> their article) undermine the perezhivanie-like quality of film as
> > > > opposed
> > > > >>> to forming an integral part of it? And, might the way distraction
> > > > >>> functions
> > > > >>> to undermine perezhivanie in the context of film in any way
> mirror
> > > how
> > > > we
> > > > >>> "distract" ourselves in the course of living lives from conscious
> > > > >>> engagement with the perezhivanie we are otherwise undergoing? Is
> > > > viewing
> > > > >>> a
> > > > >>> film on a 12-inch screen while checking email and calling it an
> > > > >>> "experience" in any way analogous to the self-deceptions and
> > escapes
> > > we
> > > > >>> engage in during the course of either experience-as-struggle or
> > > > >>> experience-as-contemplation? I did not check email while watching
> > > Fate
> > > > >>> of a
> > > > >>> Man, by the way. Just in case you're wondering.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> As for the film itself: I was struck by the incidental way in
> which
> > > the
> > > > >>> earlier loss of his childhood family is introduced and
> acknowledged
> > > at
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>> very outset, and how this contrasts with the dramatic ongoing
> > > > >>> perezhivanie
> > > > >>> that ensues going forward: it is as if this early loss is "taken
> > for
> > > > >>> granted" as also part of the Russian experience.  We are not
> privy
> > to
> > > > any
> > > > >>> perezhivanie he might have presumably undergone before that
> point;
> > it
> > > > is
> > > > >>> simply not "within the frame." At several points, I was reminded
> of
> > > > >>> Satyajit's World of Apu (last movie in his trilogy), where there
> > was
> > > > >>> also a
> > > > >>> set of early losses and a relationship formed with a "son." Have
> > any
> > > of
> > > > >>> you
> > > > >>> seen it? I think it would also be a good example of perezhivanie.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I would not want to overemphasize the use of literary motifs,
> since
> > > > >>> Bondarchuk was presumably not making any references to the
> concept
> > of
> > > > >>> perezhivanie as such. But there were several devices that evoked
> > Beth
> > > > and
> > > > >>> Monica's passage from To The Lighthouse ("Time stand still
> here"),
> > > and
> > > > >>> their metaphor of a life (or more specifically, a perezhivanie
> > > within a
> > > > >>> life) spiraling back over itself to bring two disparate moments
> > into
> > > > >>> juxtaposition in a way such that "your life becomes
> > three-dimensional
> > > > >>> again" (p. 2). One occurs in the various scenes when Andrei gazes
> > up
> > > at
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>> sky in reverie and all we see are clouds, or the scene where he
> > lies
> > > in
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>> grass after his first escape and the camera pans back as it
> becomes
> > > > very
> > > > >>> quiet, leaving nothing but him swallowed up in the vastness of
> > > nature.
> > > > >>> There is a certain timeless quality to these scenes, a sense that
> > he
> > > is
> > > > >>> momentarily transcending the linear temporal flow of his life as
> he
> > > > >>> either
> > > > >>> stands outside it and "stands still" in it. It could be a
> thousand
> > > > years
> > > > >>> passing by in those clouds, or just the 17 years of his second
> > phase;
> > > > it
> > > > >>> suddenly doesn't matter. Another thing I noticed was the use of
> the
> > > two
> > > > >>> musical themes: the love song the accordionist plays for him and
> > > Irina,
> > > > >>> and
> > > > >>> the festive music incongruously piped in at the concentration
> camp
> > > > during
> > > > >>> that amazing scene around Part 1, minute 45 where the prisoners
> are
> > > > being
> > > > >>> marched in and the crematorium is going full blast down the road.
> > At
> > > > some
> > > > >>> point (I couldn't relocate it) Andrei has a flashback where he
> > > revisits
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>> love song and his memories of Irina; then at minute 20 in Part 2,
> > > while
> > > > >>> processing his family's death after coming home from the war, he
> > > finds
> > > > >>> himself hearing the concentration camp song on the record player
> > and
> > > is
> > > > >>> suddenly transported back to that traumatic experience. Yet he
> does
> > > not
> > > > >>> smash the record right away; he stares at it for a minute, almost
> > as
> > > if
> > > > >>> he
> > > > >>> is resituating these two moments in relation to each other.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Perhaps I am overanalyzing, but I found both these motifs to
> speak
> > to
> > > > >>> Beth
> > > > >>> and Monica's examples in the way they bring two moments back into
> > > > contact
> > > > >>> with each other.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Finally, Mike and Andy's discussion in the Misha thread about the
> > > > >>> watching
> > > > >>> of a film functioning as perezhivanie for those viewers for whom
> it
> > > > >>> reflects and repeats their own experience, raises a question
> about
> > > the
> > > > >>> difference between extended perezhivanie and the personal
> > > re-enactment
> > > > of
> > > > >>> one's perezhivanie within a much smaller time scale (the two or
> > three
> > > > >>> hours
> > > > >>> spent watching the movie). I hope at some point we could delve
> more
> > > > into
> > > > >>> this issue of time frame and time scale in various forms of
> > > > perezhivanie.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Chris
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my intention
> in
> > > > >>>> providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You picked out what
> were
> > > for
> > > > >>>> me
> > > > >>>> also the main (but by no means the only) instances of
> > perezhivanija
> > > in
> > > > >>>> this
> > > > >>>> movie.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one perezhivanie
> > in
> > > > >>>> particular as the main theme of the movie. At the beginning of
> the
> > > > >>>> movie,
> > > > >>>> the man and boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of
> > the
> > > > >>>> movie
> > > > >>>> they walk off together again. So this is the central theme. As
> you
> > > > say,
> > > > >>>> when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his talented
> > > war-hero
> > > > >>>> son
> > > > >>>> who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life has become
> > > > >>>> meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's
> > > reflections
> > > > >>>> too.
> > > > >>>> He sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family
> and
> > > > >>>> doesn't
> > > > >>>> even know what town he comes from, but is aimlessly living on
> > pieces
> > > > of
> > > > >>>> rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same situation.
> > So
> > > > >>>> after
> > > > >>>> some time mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he
> > > lies
> > > > to
> > > > >>>> the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they
> > embrace.
> > > > But
> > > > >>>> the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the boy
> > > accepts
> > > > >>>> this.
> > > > >>>> The man is able to define a new meaning for his life; he has
> done
> > > this
> > > > >>>> autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he still needs
> > > > >>>> another,
> > > > >>>> the boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own
> > > invention.
> > > > >>>> The
> > > > >>>> boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it is true; he
> is
> > > not
> > > > >>>> sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, but as
> a
> > > > child
> > > > >>>> he
> > > > >>>> can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very
> > significant
> > > > when
> > > > >>>> Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, worried about his own
> > death.
> > > > >>>> What if
> > > > >>>> I died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son!
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the man's
> whole
> > > > >>>> struggle
> > > > >>>> during the war: in the first phase he does not differentiate
> > between
> > > > his
> > > > >>>> life as a father and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen -
> > war
> > > is
> > > > >>>> his
> > > > >>>> duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His
> > > bravery
> > > > >>>> in
> > > > >>>> driving his truck to the front line under fire reflects the fact
> > > that
> > > > he
> > > > >>>> has never imagined his own death. Then he finds himself
> prostrate
> > > > >>>> before 2
> > > > >>>> Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded shooting
> > > > anyone
> > > > >>>> who
> > > > >>>> has survived. But surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to
> > be
> > > > >>>> used as
> > > > >>>> a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality for
> the
> > > > first
> > > > >>>> time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel
> > both
> > > > >>>> thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this second phase
> > of
> > > > >>>> Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving
> > and
> > > > >>>> returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his
> > later
> > > > >>>> reflections on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers
> > the
> > > > >>>> futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced labour
> > becomes
> > > > >>>> unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic
> metres
> > > > when
> > > > >>>> 1
> > > > >>>> cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and
> > > embraced
> > > > >>>> death
> > > > >>>> after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German
> masters
> > > this
> > > > >>>> is
> > > > >>>> an unendurable act of defiance. As David points out, there are
> > flaws
> > > > in
> > > > >>>> the
> > > > >>>> scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death
> defiantly,
> > > > >>>> stares
> > > > >>>> it in the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as
> a
> > > > "brave
> > > > >>>> Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an impossible
> > moment.
> > > > Not
> > > > >>>> only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and
> > hands
> > > > the
> > > > >>>> war
> > > > >>>> plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance
> to
> > > > >>>> return to
> > > > >>>> his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent back to
> the
> > > > >>>> front.
> > > > >>>> His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his life as a
> > > father
> > > > >>>> into
> > > > >>>> the shade. He no longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take
> > > time
> > > > >>>> off
> > > > >>>> and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, the
> > > continued
> > > > >>>> survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides
> > continued
> > > > >>>> meaning
> > > > >>>> and integrates the two themes in his life. This takes work, as
> > Marc
> > > > >>>> points
> > > > >>>> out, and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving
> this
> > > > >>>> redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death of his
> > son
> > > > >>>> (and NB
> > > > >>>> the end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again without
> > > > >>>> meaning.
> > > > >>>> Fourth phase. He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a
> > > > father
> > > > >>>> again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in
> > his
> > > > >>>> life.
> > > > >>>> It is real work, and we witness this psychological turmoil as he
> > > copes
> > > > >>>> with
> > > > >>>> the idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and
> > > > >>>> eventually
> > > > >>>> he manages it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> The transition between each phase is a critical period during
> > which
> > > > >>>> Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note also, that there is a
> > > > >>>> premonition of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his
> > > family
> > > > >>>> is
> > > > >>>> wiped out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets
> > his
> > > > >>>> wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together
> create
> > a
> > > > life
> > > > >>>> and have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion intrudes. So
> from
> > > the
> > > > >>>> beginning of the movie we are introduced to the main theme.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me to
> select
> > > it
> > > > >>>> for
> > > > >>>> discussion rather than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt
> > that
> > > > in
> > > > >>>> producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government was engaged
> > with
> > > > its
> > > > >>>> people, in a process of collective perezhivanie and by
> reflecting
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > >>>> collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, before and
> > > > after,
> > > > >>>> they aim to assist the people in collectively assigning meaning
> to
> > > > this
> > > > >>>> terrible suffering and like the man and his "son" walking again
> > into
> > > > the
> > > > >>>> future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to much
> > > > criticism,
> > > > >>>> but
> > > > >>>> that is hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms
> of
> > > the
> > > > >>>> other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on
> > these.
> > > In
> > > > >>>> terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple
> and
> > > > >>>> difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open another
> > > movie
> > > > >>>> for
> > > > >>>> analysis? I think there are at least 10 subscribers to this list
> > who
> > > > >>>> have
> > > > >>>> published in learned journals on the topic of perezhivanie in
> > > > childhood.
> > > > >>>> Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's
> > perezhivanija?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Andy
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >>>> Andy Blunden
> > > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy
> > > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-
> > > decision-making
> > > > >>>> On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clarà wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Hi, all,
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I
> > didn't
> > > > >>>>> know. I
> > > > >>>>> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our
> respective
> > > > views
> > > > >>>>> on
> > > > >>>>> perezhivanie.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie
> > in
> > > > >>>>> three
> > > > >>>>> different planes. First, we could consider the person who
> watches
> > > the
> > > > >>>>> film,
> > > > >>>>> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film
> > > > restructures
> > > > >>>>> her
> > > > >>>>> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for
> example,
> > > her
> > > > >>>>> own
> > > > >>>>> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a
> > little
> > > > bit
> > > > >>>>> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their
> > > study
> > > > of
> > > > >>>>> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most
> > > > >>>>> naturalistic
> > > > >>>>> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural
> artifact
> > > > which
> > > > >>>>> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed
> for
> > > the
> > > > >>>>> film
> > > > >>>>> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to
> her
> > > real
> > > > >>>>> life
> > > > >>>>> would be an m-perezhivanie.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real
> life,
> > > and
> > > > >>>>> we
> > > > >>>>> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by
> > the
> > > > >>>>> river
> > > > >>>>> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this
> plane,
> > > > >>>>> Sokolov's
> > > > >>>>> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback)
> > could
> > > be
> > > > >>>>> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate
> to
> > > all
> > > > >>>>> what
> > > > >>>>> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative
> > would
> > > > be
> > > > >>>>> the
> > > > >>>>> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship
> > > > between
> > > > >>>>> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these
> > > events
> > > > >>>>> are
> > > > >>>>> still very present to him, so although relating to past events,
> > > there
> > > > >>>>> is
> > > > >>>>> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which
> is
> > in
> > > > >>>>> present
> > > > >>>>> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said:
> > > “Part
> > > > of
> > > > >>>>> this might also be a question of what it means to describe and
> > > > >>>>> represent
> > > > >>>>> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to
> > others,
> > > > or
> > > > >>>>> to
> > > > >>>>> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if
> > the
> > > > >>>>> attempt
> > > > >>>>> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also
> > > central
> > > > >>>>> to
> > > > >>>>> the living of it?”
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration
> was
> > > not
> > > > a
> > > > >>>>> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events
> with
> > > > >>>>> on-time
> > > > >>>>> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which
> > the
> > > > >>>>> narrator
> > > > >>>>> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there
> are
> > > > >>>>> several
> > > > >>>>> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a
> Sokolov's
> > > > >>>>> activity
> > > > >>>>> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes
> > that
> > > > all
> > > > >>>>> his
> > > > >>>>> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this
> > > moment,
> > > > >>>>> his
> > > > >>>>> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses
> to
> > > > >>>>> relate
> > > > >>>>> to
> > > > >>>>> all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed
> in
> > > his
> > > > >>>>> conversation with his oncle: “it's got to be that this life of
> > mine
> > > > is
> > > > >>>>> nothing but a nightmare!”. In this moment, Sokolov's past in
> the
> > > > >>>>> prision
> > > > >>>>> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the
> > > > >>>>> m-perezhivanie
> > > > >>>>> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his
> family;
> > > but
> > > > at
> > > > >>>>> that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it,
> > he
> > > > >>>>> realizes
> > > > >>>>> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was
> > > linking
> > > > >>>>> him
> > > > >>>>> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become
> > > > >>>>> meaningless:
> > > > >>>>> “Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now
> it
> > > > turns
> > > > >>>>> out
> > > > >>>>> that for two years I was talking with the dead?”. In this
> > > > conversation,
> > > > >>>>> however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to
> > > relate
> > > > >>>>> to
> > > > >>>>> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting
> his
> > > > >>>>> family
> > > > >>>>> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: “you've got to go on
> > > > living.
> > > > >>>>> You
> > > > >>>>> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get
> > > > married,
> > > > >>>>> you
> > > > >>>>> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again,
> play
> > > with
> > > > >>>>> your
> > > > >>>>> grandkids”. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this
> > > > >>>>> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful
> > > again:
> > > > >>>>> “and
> > > > >>>>> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight”. But, then,
> > > Anatoly
> > > > >>>>> also
> > > > >>>>> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the
> m-perezhivanie
> > > that
> > > > >>>>> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a
> > > son;
> > > > >>>>> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful
> > > again.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how
> Sokolov's
> > > > >>>>> relation
> > > > >>>>> with his own immediate death changes along the different
> > occasions
> > > in
> > > > >>>>> which
> > > > >>>>> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of
> > > > >>>>> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not
> > > > >>>>> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility
> > > (the
> > > > >>>>> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is
> > given
> > > > >>>>> back to
> > > > >>>>> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of
> impossibility
> > > > >>>>> which is
> > > > >>>>> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each
> > > occasion
> > > > >>>>> in
> > > > >>>>> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the
> > m-perezhivanie
> > > > >>>>> that
> > > > >>>>> mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured,
> his
> > > > >>>>> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: “here's my death coming after
> > me”.
> > > > >>>>> When he
> > > > >>>>> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is
> > > > expressed
> > > > >>>>> as:
> > > > >>>>> “the end of your misery”, “to my death and my release of this
> > > > torment,
> > > > >>>>> I
> > > > >>>>> will drink”. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov;
> in
> > > the
> > > > >>>>> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at
> the
> > > end
> > > > of
> > > > >>>>> the
> > > > >>>>> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the
> m-perezhivanie
> > is
> > > > >>>>> expressed as: “I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep,
> > and
> > > > >>>>> that
> > > > >>>>> would frighten my little son”.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Marc.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck <
> > > > schuckcschuck@gmail.com
> > > > >>>>> >:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used
> > > > "pivoting"
> > > > >>>>> I
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a
> > > child
> > > > >>>>>> will
> > > > >>>>>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat
> different
> > > > >>>>>> application but related, no?
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
> > > > >>>>>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
> > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Chris, all,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article
> in
> > > the
> > > > >>>>>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie
> (quoting
> > > > >>>>>>> Sobchack)
> > > > >>>>>>> the following:
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that
> > > there
> > > > >>>>>>> is a
> > > > >>>>>>> connection between filmic time and ‘real’ time: “The images
> of
> > a
> > > > film
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> exist
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and
> situation.
> > > > >>>>>>> Indeed,
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> the
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> lived-experience
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to
> > > share
> > > > >>>>>>> it”
> > > > >>>>>>> (1992, p. 60).
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> And later
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes
> > > > >>>>>>> multidirectional is
> > > > >>>>>>> that “rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in
> > > such a
> > > > >>>>>>> way
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> as
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> to create a past” (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: “In a
> > > very
> > > > >>>>>>> real
> > > > >>>>>>> way the future – the project coming into existence through
> the
> > > > >>>>>>> process
> > > > >>>>>>> of
> > > > >>>>>>> rehearsal – determines the past: what will be kept from
> earlier
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> rehearsals
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> or from the “source ma-terials” (1985, p. 39)."
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Alfredo
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> ________________________________________
> > > > >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> > > > <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.e
> > > > >>>>>>> du>
> > > > >>>>>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck <schuckcschuck@gmail.com>
> > > > >>>>>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43
> > > > >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > > >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or
> fictional
> > > > >>>>>>> narrative
> > > > >>>>>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our
> > attention
> > > > and
> > > > >>>>>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and
> > > > >>>>>>> artificially
> > > > >>>>>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but
> > less
> > > > >>>>>>> organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in
> the
> > > > >>>>>>> course
> > > > >>>>>>> of
> > > > >>>>>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to
> get
> > > > around
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> this
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues
> > as
> > > to
> > > > >>>>>>> the
> > > > >>>>>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film
> > would
> > > be
> > > > >>>>>>> to
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> view
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of
> > > > >>>>>>> perezhivanie,
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> as
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of
> > > > >>>>>>> perezhivanie
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> as
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept
> of
> > > > >>>>>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real
> > > living
> > > > >>>>>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the
> > *pivoting*
> > > > >>>>>>> between
> > > > >>>>>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs.
> evolved,
> > as
> > > > >>>>>>> David
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> put
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> understanding
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> the concept from the film per se.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg <
> > > > dkellogg60@gmail.com
> > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread
> on
> > > > this:
> > > > >>>>>>> he's a
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows
> that
> > > one
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> reason
> > > > >>>>>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress
> to
> > > > >>>>>>> related
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones.
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> "perezhivanie",
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one;
> > it
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> doesn't
> > > > >>>>>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence required
> > for a
> > > > >>>>>>> genetic
> > > > >>>>>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished
> > > work
> > > > of
> > > > >>>>>>> art
> > > > >>>>>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the
> way
> > > > that,
> > > > >>>>>>> for
> > > > >>>>>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine
> its
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> authenticity).
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps
> > > drinking
> > > > >>>>>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically
> > > gratuitous
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> example
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad
> name.
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> David Kellogg
> > > > >>>>>>>> Macquarie University
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald <
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> carolmacdon@gmail.com
> > > > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right
> now
> > > only
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> empirical
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> psychological categories come to mind.  I will watch it
> again
> > > and
> > > > in
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >>>>>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of
> > > > >>>>>>>> /perezhivanie/
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> take
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> the discussion further.
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques
> > > would
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> perhaps
> > > > >>>>>>>> be
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a
> > Russian
> > > > >>>>>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> experience
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> of
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other
> > similar
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's
> family
> > > > dying
> > > > >>>>>>>>> in
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >>>>>>>> famine.
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Carol
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden <
> ablunden@mira.net
> > >
> > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles:
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-
> man-
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-
> man-
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Andy
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
> > ------------------------------
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Andy Blunden
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> decision-making
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example.  I think that
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> having a
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin)
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa
> > > > >>>>>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Beth Ferholt
> > > > Assistant Professor
> > > > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education
> > > > Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> > > > 2900 Bedford Avenue
> > > > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
> > > >
> > > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> > > > Phone: (718) 951-5205
> > > > Fax: (718) 951-4816
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Robert Lake  Ed.D.
> > > Associate Professor
> > > Social Foundations of Education
> > > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading
> > > Georgia Southern University
> > > P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA  30460
> > > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group
> > > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Those who
> have
> > > never despaired have neither lived nor loved. Hope is inseparable from
> > > despair. Those of us who truly hope make despair a constant companion
> > whom
> > > we outwrestle every day owing to our commitment to justice, love, and
> > > hope* (
> > > Cornel West, 2008, p. 185).
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Beth Ferholt
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education
> Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> 2900 Bedford Avenue
> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
>
> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> Phone: (718) 951-5205
> Fax: (718) 951-4816
>
>

-- 
Beth Ferholt
Assistant Professor
Department of Early Childhood and Art Education
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
2900 Bedford Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889

Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
Phone: (718) 951-5205
Fax: (718) 951-4816