>>Re-forming institutions won't help because
>>of the way the materials are re-instated - and so limited -
>>
>>in the notion of "forming" something again (reshape... can't turn a
>>porcelain vase into a stainless steel bucket)
>
>Diane, Diane: watch your metaphors. They're fun and drastic... and could be
>played with (like using the vase for a potty...) but how well do they fit
>the re-forming potentials AND constraints and inertias of human societal
>institutions? You break a vase and get a heap of shards that will probably
>never again serve to contain a fluid.
"fun and drastic" - good! Actually, in a way, your interpretation works
to describe the inherent fallacy of institutional authority: as a breakable
artifact,
a fragile vessel designed for the elite,
and used by the elite as a "vase[potty] for all people", so to speak.
Perhaps it is
the very fragility/vulnerability of the ideology organizing institutional
authority which makes it so oppressive? (Careful!! dammit! you'll
BREAK the VASE!!!)...
>They made some mosaics in the
>pavement of Brunnsparken from the broken china salvaged from the
>east-indiaman Gotheborg -- nice to look at but not very walkable :-/ ...
>You break an institution and you still got a lot of living people you
>cannot very well make pavement mosaics of.
ah but couldn't we invite them to use the shards creatively
for building something altogether different? (e.g., not a vessel
but a path); not a fragile artifact but an inventive abuse/use of the shattered
pieces...
anarchy isn't only about tearing things down, but about what you
do with the rubble.
and
>>value of knowledge-for-knowledge's-sake (which I admit I used to support
>>but lately am thinking it's just another ruse...)
>
>How about knowledge for life's sake: I'm all for weeding as opposed to
>bonfires.
I am thinking here of two extremes - in the prairies, burning the grass is
an essential part of maintaining the fertility of the soil.
On the other hand, setting fire to the out-laying forests
and suffocating the citizens of the adjoining locales operates against
any effort ot idealize the effectiveness of destruction (or should I say
"destruktion"?)
>And something entirely(?) different:
>>(oiy: "my" project, she sez, like she owns it..., see? ownership. it's
>>everywhere)
>
>Perhaps it is yours because YOU belong to IT? or because you participate,
>are a constitutive part of it... or... it of you? I dont remember where I
>read it, but I know I cannot take sole credit for this doubt that the
>"possessive" pronomina are all about ownership. They can and do also mean
>other close relations.
*this* is valuable. I have struggled for years with the
curious claim from authority, "My students"; or the inverse, "my teacher" -
thanks for tossing in a kernel of something less mutable.
diane
"Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right."
Ani Difranco
*********************************
diane celia hodges
faculty of education
university of british columbia
vancouver, bc canada
tel: (604)-253-4807
email: dchodges who-is-at interchange.ubc.ca