Robert notes and Mike responds to:
"the peculiar status
of humor as a vehicle for subversion of authority by peripheral participants,
a topic noted in other contexts as one of the few 'weapons of the weak'
(Scott, 1985)..."
In light of recent history of participation by one neophyte to xmca, I must
add:
"I resemble that remark"
(excerpt from the three stooges) ;-)
I am interested in expanding on power relations - participation as Saxe and
many constructivist/conceptual change advocates note, individuals
participation in activity is shaped by the prior (individual) knowledge that
they can bring to the situation. Some attempt to disable authority through
far more disruptive or destructive channels, as we can see happening in many
problematic classrooms. A plausible and testible explanation in analogue
form is that people apply the tools for interaction that are in their
toolkit, perhaps with the simple goal of participating actively, or of
shifting the focus of interaction to something they know. Now it may be that
someone has many tools available and can pick and choose, such as being able
to cite Vygotsky or Leont'ev. There are many who cannot participate in such
expert style.
As Mike cautions those who use irony or sarcasm, he may also disable their
ability to participate - re-establishing his authority. (This is not
criticism, Mike, just a perspective without circumlocution, which is itself
another tool of redirection or even of reserving authority, but one far more
acceptable within an intellectual community) Of course, without such
intellectual shaping the listserv discussion may well become anarchistic. It
has been noted several times here that many other listservs are seen to
display much less well mannered postings. I appreciate the judgement calls
Mike makes and sometimes wonder if this place is where he exercises positive
critical theory. ;-)
It might be temporarily helpful to reproduce publically the goals of xmca.