This time, on this mailing list, I can see at least three kinds of
"Ueno" as individual.
First "Ueno", he is on the context of ordinary discussion of
this mailing list. Here, whether or not "Ueno" is Japanese is
not visible or at least not so important. Important thing here is,
for example, what and how he discusses the issues.
In this context, anway, people do not care his nation.
Second "Ueno" is visible in the story of US Memorial Days
of War. By contrasting US Memorial Days and Ueno,
"Ueno as Japanese" becomes salient and visible.
At the same time, by this contrasting, "American" becomes
visible as well.
This is beyond the problem of individual's intention and
misunderstanding. Anyway, "Ueno as Japanese" became visible
or socially, mutually constituted by this contrasting.
Third "Ueno" is in Luiz, Eugene and others' mails.
Here, "Ueno as Japanese" is still visible. However, the conext
and the meaning of "Ueno as Japanese" are quite different from
the second.
In the third context, "Ueno" as Japanese is just one of various
different view points. Here, "Ueno as Japanese" is recognized
and not invisible. However, this visibility is quite different
from the "Ueno" in the second sense.
Further, this third "Ueno" is produced by the context of
the second "Ueno". In that sense, this "Ueno" is not independent
from the second one. However, in third "Ueno", something
different context from the second are organized.
What do this exmamples show?
Frist of all, here, it seems to me that the issue of "individuality"
becomes observable.
"Ueno as individual" is visible by organizing specific contexts.
This means that organizing specific individuals is mutually
dependent on organizing contexts, communities, or activities.
We cannot presuppose universal or invariant "individual" that
is independent from contexts, communities, or activities.
Focussing on "individual" is possible. However, that "individual"
is not given and not independent on organizing contexts or
communities of practice where we are part of it.
Further, "individual" is possible to be organized multiply.
Each "individual" is interdependent exactly as each context
is interdependent, that is related to second issue.
Second, in the above example, we can see that each context
is not independent. Three contexts are, in some sense,
mutually constituted or interdependent.
Even though the second "Ueno" context is not dominant in this
community, we cannot be free from the second context that is
mainly outside of this community where we are also part of it.
Finally, in this example, it seems to me that there is
the possibility of *the third context* based on the conflict
in the second context.
By that, I would appreciate this community so much.
I myself learned the possibility of orgainizng *the third context*
here although I cannot formulate it well so far.
The "Ueno" in contexts issue is similar to the issues of disable,
dropout, LD, minority and woman.
In other words, "Ueno" in the above contexts can be regarded as
"disable", "dropout", "LD", "minority" and "woman" as well.
How can we discuss about *the third context* for these issues?
"Let' s Try to Make it a Good Day" -Some Not So Simple Ways
(Hood, McDermott, Cole 1980, discourse processes 3, 155-168)
Naoki Ueno
NIER, Tokyo