I looked at the xmca archives to read the multilogues that you analyzed in
the second paper. I was disappointed to realize that only xmca archives are
available, especially since the Goals multilogues seemed like it would be a
very interesting one to look at. Is there any way these older xlist
archives can be accessed?
While perusing I found a following wonderful statement by Jan Nespor that
was made in the process of discussing the relationship of Bourdieu's
framework to learning theory, in particular his concept of "cultural
capital."
She wrote: "Although the idea of "cultural capital" is frequently invoked,
it isn't often used in an interesting way: as I understand it, the point is
not to identify who possesses or benefits from which capitals, but to
explicate the larger "economy of practices" in which value and capitals are
generated in the first place. " -- Jan Nespor 1/8/97
I have been following the recent thread on "cultural capital". Your
response to Genevieve's question about counterprocess provides an aperture
within which I can focus some of my concerns about issue of cultural capital
and multilogical activity.
After reading your post in response to Genevieve, I became unclear about
whether you see the object of the third stage to be multilogue in and of
itself or the topics around which the multilogue might develop (the tools
and materials for its construction). In the paper you seem to indicate that
it is multilogue itself but in your response to Genevieve you state:
"So what is the counterprocess of multilogue? What is the obstinately
resistant Other of discussions of CHAT? In a very serious sense it must be
the very resistance of the phenomena and the stubborn entrenchments of the
discourses we're collectively struggling to transform -- that which stands
opposite to the discussants taken as a collective subject (and which the
internal diversity of the discussing collective keeps current in the
activity)."
This confuses me because it would seem that Arne Raeithel notion of
"counterprocess" was basically a recasting of the language for discussing
the "object" in the Leont'ev activity triangle. Insofar as this model
originates in Marx's analysis of the labor process it is useful to remember
that he defined capital as alienated labor; one the product of labor begins
to circulate in the system of social needs it assumes its independent
existence. That independent existence is only indirectly related to the
material of the object but directly related to the social division of labor.