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

[Xmca-l] Re: Life off grid - communitas?

Well, if we're discussing Latour, we should consider his point that *all* views are local!



On Oct 27, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes.
> I will also bring in Andy's point from Jane Jacobs that we do start in the local places  and have as a criteria of health shared values that we care for our children.
> To go off the grid may be one particular experimental project participating in concrete activities
> Where new ideas (mediated knowledge's) become architectures. However i propose these places have a sense of being SHARED local places with porous boundaries. Communitas.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Huw Lloyd" <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> Sent: ‎2015-‎10-‎27 10:37 AM
> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Life off grid - communitas?
> Well I would question that too, Larry.  What makes you think it is
> either/or? It is possible to be interested in description without having
> ones purview limited by it.
> Best,
> Huw
> On 27 October 2015 at 17:07, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Huw,
>> I noticed the juxtaposition of description/discourse AS [anti]idea on one
>> side with mediated knowledge generating powerful ideas WITHIN concrete
>> activities on the other side.
>> I question whether *discourse* actually straddles this either/or divide.
>> Locating concrete activity AND discourse on the same side as the location
>> for engendering the development of mediated knowledge. [including the
>> mediated understanding of types of *discourse* coursing through
>> architectures]
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Yes, but I disagree with the hook-ups with the capacity for the sublime
>>> wonder or notions of guilt and morality.  These are experienced, for
>> sure,
>>> but I think this is really something extra that is brought to the fray by
>>> those with the freedom and capacity to be sensitive and responsive
>> towards
>>> it in their own idiosyncratic ways.  There seems to a rather large matter
>>> of overlooking that the leviathon of 'humanity' is actually composed of
>>> architectures we have yet to understand.  And, moreover, it is not the
>>> object of wonder that induces wonder, but rather the capacities and
>>> inclinations of the subject.
>>> The brief still point in the article (is it an article?) is the
>> observation
>>> and reminder that a great many people are in thrall of the idea of
>>> unmediated knowledge, which is something to complement the usual
>> anti-ideas
>>> of simplicity and description.
>>> If we live in virtual sanitised worlds in which the small problems of
>>> nature are kept at bay, we lose our sensitivity to anything of any
>> greater
>>> power.  For those people who have never elected to be curious, they
>> really
>>> do not have an option other than to respond to that which is happening to
>>> them here and now.  The underlying theme here seems to be, again, the
>>> disconnect between the (anti) idea of description (and discourse) and the
>>> notion that psychological developments that equate to the the realisation
>>> of powerful ideas such as mediated knowledge are dependent upon concrete
>>> activity, which is about facing reality.
>>> Huw
>>> On 27 October 2015 at 14:55, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Mike, Huw, Greg,
>>>> I have just read Latour's wonderful and provocative exploration of the
>>>> disconnect between earth and earthlings and his sense that we have lost
>>> the
>>>> sense of the *sublime* and must search for an answer in
>>>> rearranging emerging  assemblances imagined AS  nodes, tapestries, and
>>>> weaving strands of being/becoming.
>>>> Latour wants to "bridge" the gap [the disconnect] with earthlings on
>> one
>>>> side and Gaia on the other side. Gaia's fundamental feature is that of
>>> the
>>>> "trickster".
>>>> Greg sent a link to living off the grid and asked if this expressed
>>>> *communitas*? I experienced the examples as very heroic and trusting in
>>>> being rugged individualism.
>>>> I hope we can engage with this thread. I will point out that Latour
>>>> emphasized there are no nodes, knots, weaves, and TAPESTRIES without
>> the
>>>> open spaces, and I want to call attention to this fact. My imaginal
>>> *spaces
>>>> as places* asks if we must envision SHARED LOCAL PLACES where there
>> exist
>>>> *inter (-) mediate* assembled assemblances  where the STRONG Ich
>> [capital
>>>> I] becomes the WEAK ich [small I] which opens up imaginal *third*
>> spaces
>>>> for *du* [intimate you]. Spaces of shared dialogue where Gaia as
>>>> trickster/Hermes is honoured. A place of hope and dread with always a
>>> gap.
>>>> The place of intervals and "ma".
>>>> Latour is engendering grand narratives/myths with *disconnects* [as
>>> falling
>>>> away from ...]. A neo-Platonic myth.
>>>> Larry
>>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 5:09 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>>>> It turns out that Wednesday in LCHC we are discussing Latour's
>> article
>>> on
>>>>> waiting for Gaia. I attach it for those interested. It raises Huw's
>>>>> concerns and multiplies them by a few terawatts.
>>>>> Just in time for Halloween!
>>>>> mike
>>>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Huw Lloyd <
>> huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> That looks like a compelling film, Greg.  Is 'off the grid' used
>>>>>> metaphorically, i.e. is it about living away from societal norms,
>> or
>>> is
>>>>> it
>>>>>> principally about generating their own power etc?
>>>>>> I have always thought it rather telling that the skills that
>> society
>>> at
>>>>>> large tends to value the most (finance, entertainment) are
>> invariably
>>>> the
>>>>>> most useless when it comes to living within a small community.
>>> Maybe,
>>>>>> maybe, this is because community is not something easily achieved
>>>> outside
>>>>>> of settings of co-dependence that are not mediated by money,
>>>>> qualifications
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>> Then again, one has to ask about the nature of a production
>>>> documenting a
>>>>>> more independent way of living whilst simultaneously reconnecting
>>> with
>>>>>> societal values by lugging a wide-lens camera around with
>>> homesteaders
>>>> at
>>>>>> one end of the camera and a series of official film selection
>>>> committees
>>>>> at
>>>>>> the other end of apparatus.  Is there some kind of hipster quality
>> to
>>>>> that,
>>>>>> about being radically happy in the city centre or radically happy
>> out
>>>> in
>>>>>> remote places, provided the umbilical chord isn't cut?  Or is it
>> more
>>>>>> simply communities celebrating their existence and survival --
>> "we're
>>>>> here
>>>>>> and we do things differently".
>>>>>> Either way, what seems to be interesting for me here is the change
>> in
>>>>>> meaning for basic skills and community values that seem to go hand
>> in
>>>>> hand
>>>>>> with 'disconnecting'.
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Huw
>>>>>> On 25 October 2015 at 02:30, Greg Thompson <
>>> greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Is this a new form of communitas:
>>>>>>> http://lifeoffgrid.ca/
>>>>>>> (link is to a 3 minute trailer for a movie about folks living
>> life
>>>> off
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> grid)
>>>>>>> Some of the folks seem to suggest so. Others maybe not so much.
>>>>>>> -greg
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
>>>>>>> Assistant Professor
>>>>>>> Department of Anthropology
>>>>>>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
>>>>>>> Brigham Young University
>>>>>>> Provo, UT 84602
>>>>>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>>>>> --
>>>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
>>>>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch