> I think that this type of misunderstanding is somehow unavoidable, but at
> least we are talking about it, instead of turning it into a taboo subject.
> I find great that we are being able to do that in this forum, although it
> is somehow stressful.
I would like to thank, yes, Eva, John, Naoke, Eugene and Luiz for
their efforts in explicating how they've constructed their meanings from
text that clearly - as does all text - have multiple meanings - meanings
that are brought to the text through the interaction of the reader and the
text.
Also, in particular, Luiz, I appreciate your bringing to relief
the multiple voices of those groups all too often marginalized by national
myth and ritual - living in the state that perpetrated the Sandcreek
Massacre as well as the Ludlow Massacre, and has failed to honor those
dead in public memorial services, unlike the officially sanctioned wars, I
was glad to again be reminded of this history.
I also agree with you that these sorts of misunderstandings are
unavoidable - and it seems to me that one possible approach is, when one
feels a sense of outrage as Naoki apparently did, is to respond with a
request for clarification, as in, "John, what do you mean by your posting
....... The posting feels offensive to me, is this your intention?"
Because, clearly, John was as much in the dark about Naoki's
response as was Naoki about John's intention.
My two bits worth, here.
And, yes, one of the strengths of xmca has been its ability to
respond to conflict openly and graciously, rather than through silence.
phillip
phillip white pwhite who-is-at carbon.cudenver.edu
/////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
A relation of surveillance, defined and regulated,
is inscribed at the heart of the practice of teaching, not
as an additional or adjacent part, but as a mechanism that
is inherent to it and which increases its efficiency.
Michel Foucault / Discipline & Punish
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\///////////////////////////////////////