[Xmca-l] Re: (no subject)

[Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>]

Ana,
I think this is great and it resonates with an XMCA thread that I remember
reading some time ago that said that "ventriloquates" was a poor
translation of Bakhtin's words (still looking for that post).

"Ventriloquates" also seems to introduce some confusion b.c. it isn't clear
whether the speaker or someone else is the "dummy." Seems like neither.

Also, I really appreciate the notion of "taking on a voice", that seems to
resonate well with Bakhtin's larger concerns with genre and voicing.
Admittedly, this latter term has some of the same confusion of
"ventriloquate" - who is voicing and who or what is voiced? "Introducing
personas" seems to address that confusion well. The speaker accomplishes
something by voicing an other, and that voice by being enacted in an actual
moment of talk then becomes realized and perpetuated as a socially
recognizable voice - a persona.

Oh, and I didn't see an attachment, could you resend?

Many thanks,
greg




On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Ana Marjanovic-Shane
<anamshane@gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear Adam,
>
> Thank you for bringing this up! This very interesting paragraph has been
> interpreted by Deborah Tannen! She provides both some clues that the term
> "ventriloquate" was first used by Bakhtin's translators, and also a very
> dialogic interpretation of this paragraph. Here is a longer quote from her
> paper: Tannen, D. (2009). Abduction, Dialogicality and Prior Text: The
> Taking on of Voices in Conversational Discourse. Paper presented at the
> 84th annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Baltimore, MD.
>
> "Interestingly, the idea of distancing is the source of the term
> "ventriloquize." It derives from Bakhtin's use of the term "ventriloquate."
> However, Bubnova and Malcuzynski (2001) explain that "ventriloquate" is
> actually the innovation of Bakhtin's translators.3 The passage in which the
> term appears in English (Bakhtin [1975]1981:299) actually reads, in their
> more literal translation from the original Russian,
> "the language through which the author speaks is more densified,
> objectified, as if it would appear to be at a certain distance from his
> lips."
> I particularly like the phrase "at a certain distance from his lips,"
> because one of the effects in conversational discourse of what I call
> ventriloquizing -- or more generally the taking on of voices -- is
> precisely to make the words spoken appear to be at a certain distance from
> the speaker's lips, in the sense of distancing the speaker from
> responsibility for an utterance." (p. 6)
>
> For Tannen, the focus is not so much of the "animation" of the receiving
> "dummy" (other), but on the distancing of the author form the
> "responsibility of an utterance". I interpret this as an act of creating an
> imaginary character whose voice the author creates, in order to do
> something to it.
>
> In the next two paragraphs Tannen confirms this interpretation:
>
> "The taking on of voices, then, is a resource by which speakers negotiate
> relative connection and power, because it allows them to introduce a
> persona, then borrow characteristics associated with that persona, to, for
> example, downplay the relative hierarchy between themselves and
> interlocutors or create closeness with interlocutors or with those whose
> personas they reference.
> Put another way, I will propose that "the taking on voices" describes a
> discursive strategy by which meaning results from the relationship between
> current and previously experienced discourse. I'll demonstrate that by
> taking on voices, speakers create personas then borrow characteristics
> associated with those personas to negotiate the ambiguous and polysemous
> dynamics of connection and power." (pp 6-7, italics by me (Ana)).
>
> I think that Tannen's "introducing a persona" by "taking on a voice" is
> important for a deeper analyses of play because it provides a perspective
> on the relationship between the author/actor and the character/persona s/he
> plays. What is even more important and rarely taken into account in the
> research and analyses of play, is the use of this "persona" to change the
> relationships between the actual interlocutors (players). Thus, even if we
> call the whole process "ventriloquation", it has a very special meaning of
> changing the relationships between the people in a dialogue.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Ana
>
> PS -- See the attached Tannen's paper.
>
>
>
> On Oct 12, 2013, at 5:53 PM, Adam Lefstein <alefstein@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear Ana, Mike and everyone,
> > I can't help with the original Russian, but I have found one use of
> "ventriloquate" in the English translation of Discourse and the Novel (p.
> 299 of The Dialogic Imagination collection):
> >
> > Thus a prose writer can distance himself from the language of his own
> work, while at the same time distancing himself, in varying degrees, from
> the different layers and aspects of the work. He can make use of language
> without wholly giving himself up to it, he may treat it as semi-alien or
> completely alien to himself, while compelling language ultimately to serve
> all his own intentions. The author does not speak in a given language (from
> which he distances himself to a greater or lesser degree), but he speaks,
> as it were, through language, a language that has somehow more or less
> materialized, become objectivized, that he merely ventriloquates.
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> > adam
> >
> >
> > On 13 October 2013 00:45, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Perhaps you are correct, Ana. Perhaps a bunch of foreigners introduced
> the
> > notion of ventriloquation into Bakhtin and then read
> > it back out again.
> >
> > What I think we need is some help from Russians who can search the
> original
> > sources for the original term and its contexts of use. Without that, we
> are
> > flailing in the dark and might fall down a black hole!
> > mike
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Ana Marjanovic-Shane
> > <anamshane@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Mike,
> > >
> > > I believe that Bakhtin did not use the concept of ventriloquism (but
> > > someone could correct me if I am wrong) but that it was ascribed to
> him by
> > > others. In fact in the Poetics of Dostoyevsky, Bakhtin explicitly
> states
> > > that that the author does not infuse a hero with his voice!!! (which
> could
> > > be interpreted as ventriloquism), on the contrary:
> > >
> > > "Self-consciousness, as the artistic dominant in the construction of
> the
> > > hero's image, is by itself sufficient to break down the monologic unity
> > > of an artistic world—but only on condition that the hero, as
> self-consciousness,
> > > is really represented and not merely expressed, that is, does not fuse
> > > with the author, does not become the mouthpiece for his voice; only on
> > > condition, consequently, that accents of the hero's self-consciousness
> > > are really objectified and that the work itself observes a distance
> > > between the hero and the author. If the umbilical cord uniting the hero
> > > to his creator is not cut, then what we have is not a work of art but a
> > > personal document." (Bakhtin, Poetics of Dostoyevsky, p. 57)
> > >
> > > Also -- when Bakhtin talks about double-voicedness  -- where the voice
> of
> > > another penetrates one's own voice  (which maybe had given an idea to
> > > some interpreters that it is like another voice speaking through as if
> one
> > > was a dummy), this is not in the sense of being possessed by a daemon,
> > > which is Plato's/Socrate's understanding - but in the sense of two
> voices
> > > living in an inner dialogue.
> > >
> > > "And in the words of the story not only the pure *intonations of **the
> > > author *would be heard, but also the intonations of the noblewoman and
> > > the coachman; that is, words would be double-voiced, in each word an
> > > argument (a microdialogue) would ring out, and there could be heard
> > > echoes of the great dialogue." (Bakhtin, Poetics of Dostoyevsky, p.
> 73).
> > >
> > > My comment was more about the difference in the understanding of a
> > > dialogue between Socrates/Plato and Bakhtin. My knowledge is certainly
> > > limited, but this is my understanding of this difference.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Ana
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 12, 2013, at 3:28 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Ana-- Why would Bakhtin use the term ventriloquation if it contradicted
> > > his dialogic principles?
> > > mike
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Ana Marjanovic-Shane <
> > > anamshane@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Dear Mike and all,
> > >>
> > >> The term "ventriloquation" is of Latin origin, translated from Greek
> > >> meaning  "to talk in the belly"
> > >>
> > >> " 1580s, from Late Latin ventriloquus, from Latin venter (genitive
> > >> ventris) "belly" (see ventral) + loqui "speak" (see locution).
> > >>
> > >> Patterned on Greek engastrimythos, literally "speaking in the belly,"
> > >> which was not originally an entertainer's trick but rather a rumbling
> sort
> > >> of internal speech, regarded as a sign of spiritual inspiration or
> (more
> > >> usually) demonic possession. Reference to the modern activity so
> called
> > >> seems to have begun early 18c., and by 1797 it was being noted that
> this
> > >> was a curiously inappropriate word to describe throwing the voice."
> From
> > >> the online etymological dictionary.
> > >>
> > >> I think that for Bakhtin, dialogue would be quite the opposite from
> > >> ventriloquism.. Dialogue is about addressing the other ⎌and/or
> replying to
> > >> the other, rather than "throwing a voice into a dummy" or "talking in
> the
> > >> belly".
> > >>
> > >> Although I am not a Russian contributor, I think that Plato's and
> > >> Socrates ideas about dialogue were very different than Bakhtin's.
> > >>
> > >> What do you think?
> > >>
> > >> Ana
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >Neat, Doug.
> > >> >
> > >> >The idea that ventriloquation is where thought begins is really
> > >> interesting
> > >> >and the dialogue a lot of fun.
> > >> >
> > >> >I am almost positive that an examination of the etymology of the term
> > >> >ventriloquation in Bakhtin would repay investigation.
> > >> >
> > >> >Perhaps one of the Russian contributors could help us out here. I
> have
> > >> this
> > >> >hunch that the gods are somehow involved, or maybe there is just a
> one
> > >> God.
> > >> >But I could well be mistaken.
> > >> >mike
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Douglas Williams <djwdoc@yahoo.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Hi--
> > >> >>
> > >> >> One thing I think you'll have to deal with is Plato's hostility to
> > >> >> narrative, which for him was cast in the form of poetry. Eric
> > >> Havelock's
> > >> >> Preface to Plato would be a good place to start.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I have to admit that I think accessing this particular line of
> thought
> > >> >> through Plato is difficult, because he is so deeply suspicious of
> > >> people
> > >> >> becoming possessed, literally, by the attractiveness of imaginary
> > >> worlds. I
> > >> >> think he views imaginary narrative as suspect always, because even
> > >> though
> > >> >> it may be play for the narrator, narratives are dangerous for the
> > >> audience:
> > >> >> By subjecting themselves to the imagination of another, the
> audience
> > >> >> becomes trapped in a world of shadows of shadows, until, ultimate
> > >> horror of
> > >> >> horrors, otherwise proto-sentient beings sit around in Harry Potter
> > >> clubs
> > >> >> ventriloquizing J.K. Rowling.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On the other hand, from a cultural-historical psychology point of
> view,
> > >> >> access to reality begins with internalizing what Bakhtin might call
> > >> genres
> > >> >> of sociocultural activity--the moral and intellectual tools
> available
> > >> in
> > >> >> the external world that arm the proto-sentient being with the
> means to
> > >> >> comprehend society, culture, genres of thought and activity, and
> all
> > >> the
> > >> >> other things that internalizing the patterns of language and
> activity
> > >> >> around us make available to our own use. Ventriloquizing is where
> > >> thought
> > >> >> begins. As Socrates might say, in dialogue with Plato, if he were
> to
> > >> emerge
> > >> >> out of the shadows of a cave somewhere for a time, to ponder the
> world
> > >> as
> > >> >> it has turned these many years:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. I have often heard you warn about the dangers of poetry,
> which can
> > >> >> trap the minds of those who become bewitched by the muse. But
> suppose
> > >> you
> > >> >> have studiously avoided narrative, does it truly free someone to
> think
> > >> more
> > >> >> creatively?
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. Well, surely this is self-evident, is it not? For when is it
> > >> >> possible to think for oneself about the world in the dead thoughts
> of
> > >> >> another, such as we often see in those who become lost in plays and
> > >> >> stories? These narratives are like a labyrinth, which, once
> entered,
> > >> few
> > >> >> have the power to leave. It is surely a matter of great good
> fortune
> > >> that
> > >> >> this modern age has so many who are free from the evils created by
> the
> > >> >> poets.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Would you agree that this new Internet technology has nothing
> to
> > >> do
> > >> >> with stories of long ago?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. Yes, of course it does not. That is a very clear example of
> the
> > >> >> foolishness of wasting time reading stories, rather than thinking
> for
> > >> >> oneself. This wondrous techne clearly shows the advantage to be
> > >> derived by
> > >> >> devoting one's thought to the world as it is, rather than to
> imaginary
> > >> >> worlds created by poets and writers, which are always derivative."
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Yet there are several features of this Internet that reflect a
> > >> sense
> > >> >> of stories. What do you suppose "World Wide Web" means?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. Why, I should think that it refers to the strands of a
> spider's
> > >> >> web. But that is not a story; that is simple observation of the
> real
> > >> world.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Do you suppose that these strands of metal function like a
> > >> spider's
> > >> >> web, then? Do they trap those who wander into them?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. But Socrates, of course I do not.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Or do you suppose that only daughters of Arachne are capable
> of
> > >> >> weaving such webs?
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato: No--though surely you do not mean to say that one must know
> of
> > >> >> Arachne, or indeed of spiders and webs, to be able to create such
> > >> things?
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. No. But consider the matter this way: How would you describe
> the
> > >> >> relation of a word like "web" to the design?
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato: I think I might describe it as a kind of tool of thought.
> But
> > >> there
> > >> >> is no narrative there.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Very good. We are agreed that words are tools then. But
> suppose I
> > >> >> find another word that makes no sense outside of a narrative
> context?
> > >> Would
> > >> >> you agree that narratives might be tools, too?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato: Surely there can be no such word, Socrates.
> > >> >> Soc. There is a story told by certain barbarians of the North,
> which
> > >> >> certain poets wrote down, much as Homer did, to communicate to the
> > >> latest
> > >> >> posterity the thoughts and deeds of ancestors--though most
> > >> disreputably,
> > >> >> they selected not history, but arrant lies.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato: Indeed, that is very reprehensible, Socrates. I should
> describe
> > >> >> such people as wolves in human form, who prey not just on the
> minds of
> > >> the
> > >> >> living, but of the future. Most terrible!
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. And yet one of their stories has a meaning in this techne of
> > >> >> Internet, if I understand rightly.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. Surely not!
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. They say that a certain term describing one of the tools of
> craft
> > >> to
> > >> >> navigate on this web is called a "breadcrumb." I find this a very
> > >> strange
> > >> >> term.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato: So do I, Socrates. It shows that there is no narrative about
> > >> "web"
> > >> >> that traps these wise craftsmen of this modern era. But what does
> it
> > >> mean?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. I am told that this term refers to a story of these northern
> > >> >> barbarians, called "Hansel and Gretel," about two children. These
> > >> children
> > >> >> scattered crumbs from a loaf of bread as they walked through a
> forest,
> > >> so
> > >> >> that they could find their way home again by returning along the
> path
> > >> of
> > >> >> crumbs they had left behind them.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. I see. So you are telling me that the word "breadcrumb" is
> used
> > >> to
> > >> >> describe a way of returning on a web site to the place from which
> one
> > >> >> started, and moreover, that it is the very meaning of the word in
> the
> > >> >> context of this story that gives the word "breadcrumb" its
> particular
> > >> >> meaning?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. So I am given to understand. In fact, unless I am very much
> > >> mistaken,
> > >> >> it appears that the knowledge of this story was specifically the
> > >> >> inspiration for crafting this particular kind of technology. What
> do
> > >> you
> > >> >> think "breadcrumb" means in the context of this usage?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato: Why, I must concede, Socrates, that it appears to be a
> signifier
> > >> >> representing a pattern of thought that is embodied in this
> narrative
> > >> of the
> > >> >> barbarians.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Do you think that this is a form of creative thought? Or is
> it a
> > >> case
> > >> >> of modern craftspeople becoming imprisoned by narratives, and
> unable to
> > >> >> think outside of them? Is it creative to use an idea from a story
> about
> > >> >> children who never existed to craft a way of doing things? Or is
> this
> > >> >> modern era filled with victims of their foolish ancestors, who
> filled
> > >> their
> > >> >> minds with lies and delusions?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. I suppose I must regard the use of this story as a creative
> > >> form of
> > >> >> thought, because surely the people who use such tools must be able
> to
> > >> free
> > >> >> themselves from the limits of the story from which the word
> > >> "breadcrumb" is
> > >> >> drawn.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Do you suppose that it is possible someone who does not know
> such
> > >> >> stories is at a disadvantage, such as a carpenter might be if he
> had
> > >> one
> > >> >> kind of adze?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. I do not like to think that someone requires a narrative to
> > >> think
> > >> >> with, but I suppose it could be true, Socrates.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Is it possible, then, my dear Plato, that the poet is not
> always a
> > >> >> danger to society?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. I am unwilling to go so far, Socrates. Yet I must concede
> that
> > >> in
> > >> >> some ways, and in some cases, poets may have some value to society.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Perhaps I hear a muse murmuring in my ears, like the sound of
> the
> > >> >> flute in the ears of the mystic; that voice, I say, is humming in
> my
> > >> ears,
> > >> >> and prevents me from hearing any other. This muse tells me that
> poetry
> > >> is,
> > >> >> after all, a gift of the gods, just as is any other gift. And I
> know
> > >> that
> > >> >> anything more which you will say against the value of narratives
> will
> > >> be in
> > >> >> vain. Yet speak, if you have anything to say.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Plato. I have nothing to say, Socrates.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Soc. Then let me follow the intimations of the will of the god.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Regards,
> > >> >> Doug
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Wednesday, October 9, 2013 10:06 AM, CAITLIN WUBBENA <
> > >> >> cwubbena@gse.upenn.edu> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Hi! I am a graduate student at Penn working on my Master's paper in
> > >> >> foundations/philosophy of education. I am taking a course with
> Andrew
> > >> >> Babson and he recommended I post here for some feedback/advice.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Loosely, my topic is centered on Plato's notion of
> play/seriousness. I
> > >> want
> > >> >> to explore why intellectual play is vital for success in higher ed
> and
> > >> >> envision this particular project (it's a relatively short lit
> review)
> > >> as an
> > >> >> analysis of the historical context that has allowed this
> conversation
> > >> to
> > >> >> happen in academia. At this point, I plan to cite Plato,
> Kierkegaard
> > >> >> (Socratic irony), and Dewey. I've also been introduced to Vygotsky
> and
> > >> >> Kendall Walton. The main challenge is bridging the conversation to
> > >> higher
> > >> >> ed.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Any advice on where to go, books/articles to look into, etc would
> be
> > >> >> greatly appreciated!
> > >> >>
> > >> >> -Caitlin
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Adam Lefstein
>
>


-- 
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Visiting Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
Status: O