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

Re: [xmca] Current edition of Theory & Psychology



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> 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<http://www.voxunion.com/?p=4592>
>> ).
>>
>> -greg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Ivan Rosero <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> 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<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<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>
>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 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/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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/
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ______________________________****____________
>>>>>>>> _____
>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>> 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>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ______________________________****____________
>>>>>>> _____
>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>> 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>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ______________________________****____________
>>>>>> _____
>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>> 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/
>>>> 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
>>>> 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>
>>> >
>>>    ______________________________**____________
>>> _____
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> 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/
> 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
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<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
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca