[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] Current edition of Theory & Psychology



As long ago as 1848 Marx said "all that is solid melts into air", and I do think this is the number one problem of our day. But actually I think it misses the point to ask if "it will be even harder today to try to find bonds that 'interlock individual choices in collective projects and actions.'" The destruction of the fabric of social life by neoliberalism *is* a problem, but the point is that projects *are* that fabric.

It is not a quesiton of "political actions of human collectivities" but rather that instead of "collectivities" which are pre-formed groups of people which then decide to do actions, but on the contrary groups and the bonds which tie them are the *product of projects*. The fabric itself is projects. "Project" is the unit of analysis, not an abstraction formed by adding aims and actions to groups.

Andy

Greg Thompson wrote:
Andy (and others interested in projects/systems of activity/living artifacts/etc.),

And I think Zygmunt Bauman (in Liquid Modernity), when speaking of melting in late modernity of previously solid social forms of life, puts a particularly sharp point on my question (and yours?):

"The solids whose turn has come to be thrown into the melting pot and which are in the process of being melted at the present time, the time of fluid modernity, are the bonds which interlock individual choices in collective projects and actions - the patterns of communication and co-ordination between individually conducted life policies on the one hand and political actions of human collectivities on the other." (p. 6).

This suggests that it will be even harder today to try to find bonds that "interlock individual choices in collective projects and actions." This takes it a step farther back from the projects to: How can we re-form these bonds? Or maybe we need a new way of conceiving of the project and of "projects" altogether? Fluid and ephemeral projects that flow about, mix with, seep into, and spread out?

How to do this?
-greg

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:

    Yes, Greg, the notion of Recognition demonstrated in Hegel's
    Philosophy of Right I fully embrace, particularly because it is
    realised through a concept of mediation, rather than as an
    alternative to mediation, as it is found in some modern writing.
    And yes, I see this idea as to be realised through the idea of the
    formation of collaborative projects, rather than "groups" and
    associations.

    Andy

    Greg Thompson wrote:

        As for the centrifugal forces that hold these entities
        together (whether
        you call them "systems of activity" or "projects"), I want to
        humbly add
        the importance of the Hegelian notion of "recognition." It
        seems to me that
        one of the critical functions of these entities is to provide
        recognition
        for individuals - to consummate them (to use Bakhtin's
        language). With the
        liquidity of identity that Ivan speaks of in modernity, it is
        these
        entities that provide for the moments of recognition that hold
        together our
        own selves as identities that can act agentively. And this is
        important.

        In Philosophy of Right, Hegel introduces the idea and
        importance of
        "corporations." These serve important functions of providing
        recognition (a
        give and take between individual and group), but also
        practical matters
        like distribution of resources and the development of individual's
        abilities. Isn't this quite similar to what is behind the
        ideas being
        discussed here? Andy?

        Here is a quote from Hegel's Lectures on Philosophy of Right
        that speaks to
        the obligations of wealthy in a "corporation" (really more of
        a "trade
        union" or something like that, but def. not the "corporation"
        that we speak
        of today):


        “But in the corporation the individual has his true
        consciousness and here
        he has a genuine noble opportunity to acquire honor. In the
        corporation the
        corruption of wealth is set aside…. In the corporation wealth
        is no longer
        an end in itself. He has duties in this circle…. Here he
        becomes something
        through the way he applies his wealth for the sake of his
        cooperative
        association.”
        H has much more to say about the importance of recognition for
        the poor as
        well due to their obligations to the corporation (whether or
        not this is
        built into the collaboration between TCLC and UCSD is a
        difficult thing to
        address. I think the families at TCLC have obligations to TCLC
        but their
        obligations and gift-giving to UCSD are not clear - this
        despite Mike's
        insistence upon them to the UCSD audience! The apparent (to most)
        one-sidedness of this kind of gift-giving creates a one sided
        moment of
        recognition where UCSD always has the upper hand (see M. Mauss
        on "no free
        gifts").

        All of this speaks to an important issue in the U.S., namely
        the Grand
        Canyon that exists between rich and poor. The critical
        question in the U.S.
        is: where will such "corporations" come from? Where can the
        rich and poor
        cooperatively come together in a land that is literally
        structured by
        income - where how much you make determines where you live?
        Communities
        here are de facto segregated by income. (yes, there are some
        exceptions to
        this rule).

        I think the TCLC partnership provides a means for this kind of
        (temporary)
        creation of community (corporation) that crosses income lines.
        Unfortunately, most of what makes up the "corporation", i.e., the
        undergrads, is rather fleeting. Twice a week for 10 weeks in
        and out. And
        folks at LCHC are clearly concerned about the value of this
        for the TCLC
        kids. It is sometimes hard not to think that the undergrads
        get more out of
        those 10 weeks than the TCLC kids do. But, even if this is the
        case, it is
        eye opening for those often privileged undergrads. And it is
        hard to
        imagine anywhere in the U.S. where the building of cross-income
        corporations is being done any better (Occupy Wall Street has
        very mixed
        results in this regard, For a critique of the middle-class
        white elitism of
        OWS, see: http://www.voxunion.com/?p=4592).

        -greg




        On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Ivan Rosero <irosero@ucsd.edu
        <mailto:irosero@ucsd.edu>> wrote:

            I can see the reason for the excitement, and as I've come
            of age at LCHC
            over the last few years, it is this issue --what to call,
            how to frame
            analytically and explore methodologically, and what
            theoretical
            characterization to give these "meso zones"-- that has
            been the most
            salient issue for me.

            If it is true that identity is liquid, and we move from
            one identity
            instantiation to another, then there must be accompanying
            socio-material
            formations within which such identities can be had while being
            simultaneously porous and loose enough to allow relatively
            unproblematic
            entry/exit.  No doubt that there are longer-lived
            structuring structures
            within which, and relative to which, these meso-scale
            formations come to
            life, but those are not the proximal site of interest
            here.  Further, those
            meso-scale formations that result from purposeful (and
            vulnerable) coming
            together without any guarantee of anything, are special
            indeed.

            I fear the abstract here, but I will say at least that
            these things, for
            me, are a kind of prolepsis engine, formations through
            which different
            possibilities of how future arrangements might be
            organized are tried out
            in vivo, with all the complexities of the real thing
            because, well, they
            are the real thing!

            The lack of clear-cut language is not surprising, because
            at the moment the
            pull inward that participants undergo around these
            collaborative
            partnerships, in my experience, surfaces as an ethical
            aesthetic which does
            not yet enjoy the clarity of a full blown political
            program of action.
             There might even be more than a little fatigue with the
            latter, and more
            of a desire to explore different ways of being together
            that do not require
            (and may die as soon as these are reached) clear
            categories and conceptual
            pronouncements.

            ivan

            On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Andy Blunden
            <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:

                Eugene Matusov has an article in Outlines on the topic
                of the
                sustainability of these projects:
                http://ojs.statsbiblioteket.**
                dk/index.php/outlines/article/**view/2662<
            http://ojs.statsbiblioteket.dk/index.php/outlines/article/view/2662>where
            he says: "The success of our after-school partnership
            between a
                community center and our university's School of
                Education does not
                necessarily require ... a common vision between
                partners or even
            compatible
                visions." I would welcome comments on this view.

                Also, what is the story with the Laboratory School at
                UCLA?
                Andy


                Andy Blunden wrote:

                    By "crisis," Ivan, I had in mind just the kind of
                    situation you describe
                    in southern San Diego.

                    As I reported to Mike at the time, when I read
                    "Cultural Psychology" a
                    few years ago, I got really excited, not so much
                    because of the specific
                    teaching and learning methods that were going to
                    be used, but rather
            that -
                    like the climax of a detective novel - Mike had
                    identified the culprit,
            the
                    research problem that lay at the heart of problems
                    of poverty and
                    illiteracy in developed countries - /how is it
                    possible to sustain a
                    project/? what characterises a /sustainable
                    project/? This revelation
            was
                    crucial in my coming to the conclusion that the
                    molar unit of analysis
            for
                    CHAT had to be the /collaborative project/, athe
                    conclusion which I
            drew in
                    my book published earlier this year, "An
                    Interdisciplinary Theory of
                    Activity."

                    This did not mean of course that I had the answer
                    - Heavens! a concrete
                    answer to teh question of what sustains a
                    collaborative project is the
                    answer to all the problems of modernity. It is a
                    clear definition, in my
                    view, of the problem, the "germ cell" for an
                    understanding of modern
            social
                    life. It is what really needs to be studied.

                    "Collaborative project" is not just a special
                    topic or one choice for
                    making interventions, because (1) "Project," in my
                    view, is a much
            better
                    way of concieving of the unit of social life than
                    "system of activity."
            In
                    particular, the relation between the so-called
                    object and "system." For
            a
                    project, the aim is not something separate which
                    gets added to the
            system
                    of activity, but is /immanent in the project
                    itself/. It is emergent.
            It is
                    "realised." (2) "Collaboration" is the
                    fundamental, normative
            relationship
                    between people of modern life. So it is an
                    adequate definition of what
            we
                    need to be studying when we do research into human
                    life. We need to
                    understand collaboration. But fairly few CHAT
                    researchers (let alone
            anyone
                    else) make this explicit and upfront.
                    Collaboration is only possible if
                    there is a project to collaborate on and all
                    projects are collaborative.
                    Concepts originate as the immanent realised aims
                    of projects. So
                    collaborative projects form the units of our
                    psychic life just as they
            are
                    the units of our social life. So as a unit of
                    /analysis/, collaborative
                    projects reflect collaborative projects as the
                    *real* unit of social
            life.
                    So you can understand how excited I was to read
                    your article in /Theory
            &
                    Psychology/!
                    Andy

                    Ivan Rosero wrote:

                        Well, bankruptcies can still make more than a
                        few very rich, so the
            "we"
                        and "our" in this building of habitable
                        imaginaries presupposes a prior
                        set
                        of other imaginaries through to come together
                        anew, and perhaps
                        differently, even if we think we know each
                        other --or, in other words,
            to
                        give each other space to be other things, to
                        be strangers in creative
                        ways
                        in order to have any hope of reinventing and
                        in*forming what we do in
                        such
                        a way to make it more hospitable.

                        As it happens, one tendril that continues to
                        pass through Town and
                        Country,
                        but is now much more active elsewhere in
                        southeast San Diego, is a
            strong
                        connection to the food system change movement,
                        which another graduate
                        student at LCHC is exploring after having
                        dwelt for a while at T&C.
             Here
                        is one of its core members, Diane Moss (quoted in
                        http://www.voiceofsandiego.**org/people/q_and_a/article_**
                        cde3547e-f6b1-11e0-bfba-**001cc4c03286.html<
            http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/people/q_and_a/article_cde3547e-f6b1-11e0-bfba-001cc4c03286.html
                        )
                        who we know personally, answering a few
                        questions in a way that
                        concretizes
                        the shape of a few new imaginaries that we
                        here at LCHC have been drawn
                        into:


                        *What happened when you came back from that
                        workshop in 2008?*

                        I started seeing empty lots and seeing they
                        could be used for other
                        purposes. I saw that we probably had the
                        ability to grow our own food.

                        I bet on any block in southeastern San Diego,
                        somebody's growing
                        something
                        in their backyard: collard greens, corn. We
                        started looking at how we
                        could
                        take that talent and start having
                        conversations about collective
            growing
                        or
                        community gardens. Even though we didn't use
                        the term "food desert" at
                        that
                        time, we talked about why we didn't have the
                        same markets everyone else
                        has.

                        *Why didn't you like "food desert"?*

                        I thought desert meant nothing — that you had
                        nothing to build on. I
                        said,
                        well, we've got people who grow things. We're
                        not starting from
            scratch.
                        But I embraced it when I became familiar with
                        another definition: that
                        there are more fast food outlets than fresh
                        food outlets.

                        *You hadn't thought about access to good food
                        in this community as a
                        problem before 2008?*

                        Southeastern San Diego always gets tagged as a
                        community with lots of
                        problems. So here was another negative tag
                        people put on this
            community.
                        I
                        saw that we didn't have the resources we
                        needed, but I didn't think of
            it
                        in terms of a food desert.

                        *What have been the biggest challenges to
                        getting people involved?*

                        People say yes, we should have gardens. But
                        it's difficult for people
            to
                        change their habits.

                        *How do you change habits?*

                        It takes time. Neighbors talking to neighbors.
                        People taking a chance
            to
                        do
                        something different.

                        -------
                        LCHC has been fortunate beyond any expectation
                        to have entered into
            this
                        new collaboration and the mesh of actors it
                        pulls together.

                        Ivan



                        On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Larry Purss
                        <lpscholar2@gmail.com
                        <mailto:lpscholar2@gmail.com>>
                        wrote:



                            My response to this thread is an extension
                            of the notion of
                            "ambivalence"
                            at the heart and soul of all social
                            imaginaries.
                            It was mentioned that the motivating force
                            to "keep going" without
                            clarity
                            of intention or goals is the "felt sense"
                            of social BANKRUPTCY
            [economic
                            metaphor] in the current social imaginary.
                             Zygmunt Bauman uses the
            very
                            extreme metaphor of "waste" in his 2004
                            book to stir the ambivalence
            at
                            the
                            center of our current social imaginary.
                             Ingold's article I recently
                            posted
                            captured the 12 century social imaginary
                            where walking, texts,
                            architecture, discourse, and contemplation
                            were all manifestations of
            a
                            single ontology. All these objects
                            expressed a social imaginary that
            did
                            not have some of the object "representing"
                            the "underlying" social
                            imaginary but rather were ALL immanebt
                            manifestations of the SAME
            social
                            imaginary.

                            Modernity [the tension between
                            enlightenment and romanitic
            hermeneutical
                            ideas/ideals] also may have an
                            encompassing social imaginary that has
            a
                            fundamental rupture [ambivalence] in the
                            notion of "representation" as
                            expressing some "underlying" reality
                            [realization] when in actuality the modern
                            walks, texts, architecture,
                            discourses and contemplations are
                            expressions of a monolithic social
                            imaginary.
                            Bauman's analysis of modernity [he is an
                            "exile" from the holocaust]
            has
                            situated ambivalence at the heart of ALL
                            social imaginaries when
                            realized
                            express "order" or "structure" which
                            requires LIMITING  formations.
                            This is
                            the core idea of sociology.  Baumans
                            emancipatory vision for
                            sociological
                            imagination [in which he generates
                            multiple metaphors] is to explicate
                            the
                            ambivalence at the heart of modernity
                            leading to social bankruptcy. It
                            is
                            the reality of this ambivalence in our
                            current modern social imaginary
                            where Bauman locates hope and the
                            possibility for emancipation from
            the
                            "waste lands".
                            Bauman purposely is exploring the power of
                            the metaphor of "waste" to
                            grasp
                            the desolation of our current
                            arrangements. For Bauman the metaphor of
                            "waste" as the by-product of our
                            "productions" in our "garden
            contexts"
                            [another metaphor which the Nazi's used to
                            create a social imaginary
                            where
                            Jews were "weeds" in the garden]  is
                            grasping the fundamental
                            ambivalence
                            at the heart of our social bankruptcy.
                            For Bauman and many others who are
                            searching for a new orientation in
                            our
                            globalized planetary social imaginary the
                            metaphor of "the suffering
                            stranger" travelling in the waste lands is
                            the moral calling
            requiring a
                            response as a growing "response-ability"
                            as a "skill" developing
            within
                            a
                            "new commons".
                            We need new "practises" and new "texts"
                            and also new discourses and
            new
                            forms of contemplation.  However, I'm
                            wondering how central to
                            transcending
                            our current social imaginary, which is now
                            a wasteland, are new forms
            of
                            architecture which express the yearning to
                            respond to the suffering
                            stranger.

                            In summary, the larger contexts being
                            explored may be
            cultural-semiotic
                            imaginaries that must become realized
                            within a new commons which must
            be
                            in*formed to "hold" the suffering stranger
                            in our midst [difference
            and
                            alterity and weeds and waste as the
                            ambivalence at the heart of the
                            modern
                            vision of the garden]

                            Accountability, measurement, statistics,
                            as our current social
                            imaginary of
                            cultural and social "order" at its heart
                            has the cavity of the
            suffering
                            stranger that is now calling for a
                            response and a new cultural and
                            social
                            order in a new commons which must be
                            in*formed as our response-ability
                            to
                            the call of the other.

                            Bauman's notion of "waste" and "waste
                            lands" as by-products of our
                            globalized social imaginary calls for an
                            alternative social imaginary
                            that
                            exists in the ambivalence at the heart of
                            our current  world order.

                            Larry
                            On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ivan
                            Rosero <irosero@ucsd.edu
                            <mailto:irosero@ucsd.edu>>
            wrote:

                                Arturo, two things coincide for me in
                                reading your email:  1) I've
            been
                                working for the last 4 years in the
                                same collaboration that
                                Lecusay,Downing-Wilson,Cole have
                                written about, and 2) I too share
            the
                                following concern:

                                ----
                                CHAT keeps operating with a process
                                and methodological
                                ontology whereby the individual and
                                the social are inseparable but
                                does not provide a clear cut language
                                of description of how the
            social
                                structure shapes activity or, to put
                                it in Seeger's terms, how power
                                shapes discourse (and consciousness
                                and identy).
                                ----

                                As the authors have described, the
                                community setting in which this
                                latest
                                of LCHC's projects has unfolded does
                                not permit even the relatively
                                loose
                                structures that were the hallmarks of
                                previous 5D projects --this is


                            where


                                the ad-hoc stumbling upon interesting
                                things to do together is such
            an
                                important component of the dual sense
                                of "appropriation".  In the
                                social
                                space that has been created between
                                LCHC and Town and Country there


                            exists


                                (as I have experienced it over the
                                last four years) an enduring


                            liminality


                                that refuses to come to closure
                                --neither LCHC participants,
            including
                            grad


                                students, staff, and undergraduate
                                students, nor T&C participants
            have
                                arrived at any definite position vis a
                                vis what we are doing
            together.
                             The


                                kids get older, new ones arrive, some
                                teens have left, club and group
                                structures change, entire families
                                move out.  UCSD's side of the
            story
                                is
                                more predictable in the institutional
                                sense of allowing year-on-year
                                planning of classes and recruitment of
                                students, as well as, of
            course,
                            the


                                staying power of UCSD as a much longer
                                running process than the
                                collaboration itself.  But this can
                                only explain the brute sense of
            our
                                continued presence, one which would be
                                impossible to impose in any
                                case,


                            so


                                that we still have to try and explain
                                the delicate sense of our
                                continued
                                presence --what is happening in the
                                space of this
                                cross-cultural/cross-**institutional
                                intersection that keeps pulling


                            together


                                (in a delicate way) such a
                                heterogenous amalgam of participants --a
                                constant churn of undergraduate
                                buddies, a more stable set of grad
                                students, a constant, but slowly
                                changing, stream of kids, Ms. V.,
            and
                            the


                                few community parents that regularly
                                lend a hand?

                                You and Andy have said that there must
                                be some kind of crisis, and
            this
                            may


                                be so, but if this is what is allowing
                                the participants to come
                                together
                                anew, it is not the kind of crisis
                                that can be compared to, say,
            Occupy
                                Wall Street, or Greece, or the Arab
                                Spring.  It might be that I lack
                                the
                                requisite social imagination, but the
                                way I see it, what is special
                                about
                                this collaboration is that it holds
                                together without disclosing to
            its
                                participants directly how this is
                                happening.  We have been at it for
                                four
                                years, and it isn't obvious to me why,
                                as a T&C elder says, we "keep
            on
                                keeping on".  This is especially true
                                in light of severe, and
                                recurrent,
                                frustrations on every side.  For
                                example, in the absence of UCSD


                            students,


                                homework does not get done nearly as
                                regularly as when they are there
                                --this creates a huge problem for Ms.
                                V, who must still try to
            satisfy
                            this


                                community need in our absence.
                                 Sometimes we at LCHC find ourselves
            at
                            odds


                                with local customs and decisions, to
                                which we nevertheless submit in


                            order


                                to keep on keeping on.  But where are
                                we keeping on to?  (Especially
                                without access to clear-cut language
                                with which to explain any of
                                this!)

                                So, these kinds of open-ended
                                interactional spaces elicit from their
                                participants a degree of patience that
                                is rarely seen anywhere --more
                                or
                                less equally distributed!  Southeast
                                San Diego, where T&C is located,
                                is
                                not unique in all the ways that its
                                inhabitants are systematically
                                marginalized, and it is a fact that
                                local community organizers (I've
                                been
                                at some of their meetings) look on
                                UCSD and charitable institutions
                                with
                                very suspicious eyes.  In the face of
                                these realities, mutual


                            appropriation


                                is one factor, but not a wholly
                                explanatory one for the loose
                                holding-together that is going on here.

                                Whatever the answers are, it is
                                impossible for me to conceive of a
                                satisfying explanation that does not
                                include affective-imaginative
                                dimensions.  The way I see it, the
                                mystery here is not how


                            power/structure


                                shapes discourse/activity, it is why
                                this collaboration holds in the
                                face
                                of what would normally be
                                insurmountable difficulties.  Good
                                will and
                                patience all around?  Maybe, but this
                                only pushes the question deeper


                            into


                                the affective-imaginative life of this
                                collaboration.

                                Ivan


                                On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Andy
                                Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
                                <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
                                wrote:



                                    Continuing my sharing of the
                                    current edition of Theory & Psyhology,
                                    attached are scans of Deborah
                                    Downing-Wilson, Robert Lecusay and
            Mike
                                    Cole's paper (which I have been so
                                    excited about) and the first 16


                                pages
                                of


                                    Yrjo Engestrom's paper (I have
                                    omitted the case study) which is a


                                concise
                                synopsis of his current views on
                                activity and concepts.
                                    Andy


                                    Andy Blunden wrote:



                                        That's a very interesting
                                        series of points, Arturo!
                                        Could I just ask you to
                                        elaborate a little on what you
                                        meant by
            "the
                                        unconscious in sign-making"
                                        and "the problem of fetishism
                                        of the


                                    sign."
                                I guess that you are right that in
                                almost any social context (the US
                                        included I suspect), the kind
                                        of project that Mike writes
                                        about can


                                    only be
                                    implemented by surruptitiously
                                    moving the goal posts set by the
                                    recognised
                                    authorities, by a kind of
                                    subversion, making use of openings
                                    created
                                    by
                                manifest social crisis.
                                        As I'm sure you know, I am in
                                        agreement with your critique
                                        of the


                                    failure
                                    to satisfactorily "marry"
                                    psychological concepts with
                                    sociological
                                        concepts, in CHAT or anywhere
                                        else for that matter. But
                                        doesn't the


                                    kind of
                                    project Mike is talking about,
                                    where goals are immanent in the
            project
                                        itself, and the project is
                                        thoroughly and explicitly
                                        collaborative,
                                        go


                                    some
                                    way to addressing this problem?
                                        Andy

                                        Arturo Escandon wrote:



                                            Just wanted to point out
                                            that there are places
                                            where you cannot
            even
                                            think of implementing a
                                            simple plain standard
                                            design experiment,
            let
                                            alone an ad-hoc
                                            intervention because
                                            educational settings and
                                            institutions are thought
                                            to be mere knowledge
                                            reproduction-distribution
                                            centers. Research is the
                                            job of the


                                        Ministry
                                of Education. "Joint activity"? What
                                on Earth is that in Japan except
                                            the illusion of freedom
                                            framed under top-down
                                            cosmological
                                            structure.
                                            I am afraid that most of
                                            the cases depicted in the
                                            journal are a
                                            reproduction of the
                                            cultural conditions
                                            existing in few settings,
            in
                                            few communities, in a
                                            handful of countries. Am I
                                            able to implement
                                            an
                                            intervention or mutual
                                            appropriation in the
                                            Japanese educational
                                            context? No. Am I able to
                                            do it in "local
                                            communities", yes, but


                                        under
                                considerable restrictions. However, I
                                am guessing that the most
                                            effective interventions in
                                            local communities spring
                                            from social
                                            crisis, not from planned
                                            activity, that is, some
                                            sort of
            punctuated
                                            equilibrium in which the
                                            community changes or perish.

                                            I am very curious about
                                            (1) how the structural
                                            constraints and
                                            affordances of
                                            organisations themselves
                                            shape those mutual
                                            appropriations and how we
                                            can account for them; (2)
                                            how the
                                            mediating
                                            means themselves are
                                            unequally distributed
                                            (knowledge
            differential):
                                            in order to bridge the
                                            differences established by
                                            the lack of a


                                        common
                                repertoire of meanings you have to
                                engage in meaning making, creating
                                            in fact a new
                                            differential; (3) the
                                            unconscious in sign-making or
                                            using activity.
                                            Educational activity
                                            brings consciousness at the
                                            expense of bringing
                                            unconsciousness as well. I
                                            have not read a
                                            single
                                            decisive work addressing
                                            the problem of fetishism
                                            of the sign, on
                                            which a theory of the
                                            uncosciousness could be
                                            integrated into
            CHAT,
                                            except for works that deal
                                            with the problem of "the
                                            ideal".

                                            Seeger asks the right
                                            questions but I believe
                                            there is much more
            out
                                            there about ways of
                                            marriaging psychology and
                                            sociology to give a
                                            better account of agency.
                                            At the end, the issues
                                            raised by Sawyer
                                            are
                                            still relevant: CHAT keeps
                                            operating with a process and


                                        methodological
                                ontology whereby the individual and
                                the social are inseparable but
                                            does not provide a clear
                                            cut language of
                                            description of how the


                                        social
                                structure shapes activity or, to put
                                it in Seeger's terms, how power
                                            shapes discourse (and
                                            consciousness and identy).

                                            Best

                                            Arturo


                                            On 10 November 2011 23:41,
                                            Andy Blunden
                                            <ablunden@mira.net
                                            <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
            wrote:


                                                The current edition of
                                                Theory & Psychology
                                                looks very special. I


                                            admit I
                                    have at this stage only actually
                                    read the article by Mike Cole,
                                            Robert
                                Lecusay and Deborah Downing-Wilson,
                                but it is a special issue on
                                            CHAT
                                and
                                                interventionist
                                                methodology, with
                                                articles by a number
                                                of people


                                            from
                                Yrjo
                                                Engestrom's CRADLE and
                                                also Falk Seeger, who
                                                is guest editing the
                                                Special
                                                Issue of MCA on Emotions.

                                                Mike's article
                                                elaborates on what the
                                                participants call a
                                                "mutual
                                                appropriation"
                                                approach to developing
                                                theory and practice.
            Instead
                                            of
                                implementing a project design and then
                                modifying it in the light of
                                            the
                                    reseacher's experience, the
                                    researchers go in to a local community
                                            with
                                    very
                                                open ended ideas about
                                                how and what they want
                                                to achieve, and
                                                engage
                                                with
                                                their community
                                                partner, learn about
                                                their (the partner's)
            project,
                                                offer
                                                assistance and
                                                resources and share
                                                knowledge and
                                                objectives and
                                                ....
                                                mutually appropriate.
                                                The article describes
                                                the results of a


                                            specific
                                project which is an exemplar of
                                "mutual appropriation" which has
                                            grown
                                out
                                                of the 5thD
                                                after-school programs
                                                which LCHC began in
                                                the 1980s.

                                                The article is
                                                actually very moving.
                                                I personally think
                                                that this


                                            kind
                                of
                                                work is tackling the
                                                main problem in front
                                                of us
                                                cultural-historical
                                                cultural psychology
                                                people today. If you
                                                don't subscribe to
            Theory
                                                &
                                                Psychology, I don't
                                                know how you can get
                                                to read the paper. Maybe
                                                someone
                                                has a solution there.
                                                But it is a must read.
                                                I will read the


                                            remaining
                                articles in the special issue, but
                                this is a real high.
                                                Andy


                                                --



            ------------------------------****----------------------------**--**------------

                                *Andy Blunden*
                                                Joint Editor MCA:
                                                http://www.tandfonline.com/****toc/hmca20/18/1
            <http://www.tandfonline.com/**toc/hmca20/18/1>
                                                <


                                            http://www.tandfonline.com/**toc/hmca20/18/1<
            http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1>
                                    Home Page:
                                    http://home.mira.net/~andy/
                                    <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
                                                Book:
                                                http://www.brill.nl/default.****aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
                                                <http://www.brill.nl/default.****aspx?partid=227&pid=34857><
            http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
            <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>>
                                                <


                                            http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
                                            <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857><
            http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
            <http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>>
                                    ______________________________****____________
                                                _____
                                                xmca mailing list
                                                xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
                                                <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                                                http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/****listinfo/xmca<
            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca>
                                                <


                                            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>



                                    --
                                    ------------------------------****----------------------------**--**
                                    ------------
                                    *Andy Blunden*
                                    Joint Editor MCA:
                                    http://www.tandfonline.com/****toc/hmca20/18/1<
            http://www.tandfonline.com/**toc/hmca20/18/1>
                                    <


                                http://www.tandfonline.com/**toc/hmca20/18/1<
            http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1>
                                    Home Page:
                                    http://home.mira.net/~andy/
                                    <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
                                    Book:
                                    http://www.brill.nl/default.****aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
                                    <http://www.brill.nl/default.****aspx?partid=227&pid=34857><
            http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
            <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>>
                                    <


                                http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
                                <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857><
            http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
            <http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>>
                                 >


                                    ______________________________**____________
                                    _____
                                    xmca mailing list
                                    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
                                    <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                                    http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>


                                ______________________________**____________
                                _____
                                xmca mailing list
                                xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
                                <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                                http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>

                            ______________________________**____________
                            _____
                            xmca mailing list
                            xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
                            <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>

                        ______________________________**____________
                        _____
                        xmca mailing list
                        xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                        http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>


                --
                ------------------------------**------------------------------**
                ------------
                *Andy Blunden*
                Joint Editor MCA:
                http://www.tandfonline.com/**toc/hmca20/18/1<
            http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1>
                Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
                <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
                Book:
                http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
                <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857><
            http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
            <http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>>
                ______________________________**____________
                _____
                xmca mailing list
                xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
               __________________________________________
            _____
            xmca mailing list
            xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca





-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    *Andy Blunden*
    Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
    Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
    Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
    <http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>

    __________________________________________
    _____
    xmca mailing list
    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto: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


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857

__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca