Re: [xmca] schools-without-computers-by-choice-and-conviction-that-they-dont-help-kids

[Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>]

On 12 November 2011 20:48, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Huw,
>
> I get the basic idea of where you are coming from with this. I'm familiar
> with Paul Willis' use of the unfortunate term "penetrations" in his book
> Learning to Labo(u)r. It is quite similar to Bourdieu's notion of being
> able to see through ideology and into the "real" relations between things
> (my scare quotes around real). I see both Willis and Bourdieu as developing
> Marxist ideas.
>

I don't recall coming across the phrase in literature, so be assured I
wasn't using it as term.


>
> Having said that, I still have some concerns (aside from the unfortunate
> term "penetrations"). My concern is that there is a posited "real" that the
> critical critic has available to them that is not available to others
> (maybe we would say that he has the intellectual "equipment" to "penetrate"
> reality). I don't have a problem with the idea that the critical critic has
> a different and useful perspective on things, I just don't agree that we
> should speak of this in terms of a better grasp of reality.
>
> Instead, I would say that the critical critic has a better perspective FOR
> some particular ends. But I'm not convinced that it is necessarily because
> their perspective is "more real" or closer to reality. It depends on what
> reality, and what for.
>
>

"Perspectives is 'more real'" reads like a typological error to me.  The
means of representing perspectives are inherently real, by virtue of their
being represented.  It is the truthfulness of the existence of the
realities they represent which is the point.   The representation of a
fantasy is very real, but the thing pointed to by this representation is
not, it is questionable, and this questioning entails the logic of
truthfulness.  Likewise the 'very real effect' of a fantasy does not refer
to the reality of the thing pointed to by the fantasy, it refers to the
real effect of a real representation.

Huw





> Elsewhere Bourdieu notes that misrecognition ("misknowing" - i.e.,
> meconnaissance) is absolutely essential to social life. Misrecognition is
> at the heart of meaning - without it we encounter a meaningless, lifeless
> world. So I'd suggest that it is better to be honest about our shortcomings
> when it comes to reality. Better to ask what a given way of "seeing" is
> good for. What does it allow us to see and do?
>
> -greg
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > On 27 October 2011 22:14, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 27 October 2011 20:56, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 27 October 2011 20:47, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Huw,
> > >>> Is reality really something to be "penetrated."
> > >>> -greg
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> If you wish to get from one side of a city to another, there are
> finite
> > >> ways of doing so using conventional transport.  If you wish to
> > articulate
> > >> that intention in terms of a particular route, you will have to
> mentally
> > >> penetrate the fog of obstacles from A to B prior to an accurate
> > >> articulation.  Does 'penetrating to reality' sound better?  Hopefully
> > the
> > >> gist is clear.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > ... but that also the intention successfully acted upon is a change and
> > > thereby a form of penetrating reality.
> > >
> > >
> > I thought this loose-end might be helpful.  Bourdieu, in 'Distinction'
> > p387, expressed this aspect:
> >
> > "What the relation to 'mass' (and, a fortiori, 'elite') cultural products
> > reproduces, reactivates and reinforces is not the monotony of the
> > production line or office but social relation which underlies
> working-class
> > experience of the world, whereby his labour and the product of his
> labour,
> > opus proprium, present themselves to the worker as opus alienum,
> > 'alienated' labour.
> >
> > i.e. the difference between a participatory, intentionally influential
> > relation and a passive one.
> >
> > Huw
> > __________________________________________
> > _____
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
> Department of Communication
> University of California, San Diego
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca