I think it also speaks to a dual form of addressivity involved in all
identity-construction. In speaking, we are always addressing a particular
other, someone with feelings, values, and concerns that are distinct from
our own, someone with whom we are in a particular kind of relation. But we
are also always addressing a set of cultural Others, in the form of others'
representations of themselves and us, expectations of being in a particular
identity category, and so forth. So audience(s) are always an integral
part of forming an identity. What makes personal emails in a listserv such
an interesting "genre-crossing" is that there may be a mismatch between the
cultural others addressed and the particular others who hear the message
(accidental posting), and there may also be a sense in which the writer
believes it's OK that others "overhear" the message (intentional posting).
All in all, it's an interesting consequence of the tools we have available
for communication and identity construction!
At 10:54 AM 09/17/1999 +1000, you wrote:
>Dear all,
>
>I could not help noticing the emergence of somewhat "personal" mails posted
>on XMCA. While I have no intention of reading others personal mails, having
>stumbled upon them quite by chance, I must admit that I found it rather
>amusing, i.e. to be thrown headlong into other's very personal
conversations.
>
>On another note, I'm trying to understand this "practice". I assumed that
>the personal mails were sent by mistake as many have apologised. At the same
>time, it also raises a question on the notion of community "comfort zone"
>and identity.
>
>Even without considering some really personal mails (which were sent by
>mistakes), there have been in the past a number of mails bordering on
>informality and on friendly self disclosure, thus crossing into more
>personal genre of speech and conjuring an image of a friendly community and
>"comfortable zone" of interaction. It brings to mind of Bakhtin's discussion
>on "The problem of speech genres", where he claimed, "An absolutely
>understood and completed sentence, if it is a sentence and not an utterance
>comprised of one sentence, cannot evoke a responsive reaction: it is
>comprehensible, but it is still not all."
>
>In articulating this, I am suggesting that perhaps, my identity as a
>observer (passive/inactive etc) participant in XMCA in the past (up till
>now) has only been that of a somewhat disengaged member, watching the
>"actions/interactions". This has been the case, in my short experience in
>XMCA, when reading most mails that were "comprehensible, ... complete".
>
>But, in noticing mails that borders on the affect, I'm almost ready to jump
>in response, although sometimes there are really very personal mails, which
>I have no business to be involved in. The same response is conjured too in
>reading mails which raised more questions rather than those with complete
>logically discussions.
>
>Relating this to identity and community of practice. Does this mean that
>identification necessitate affect, such as positive motivation and personal
>interest bordering even fun and amusement, thus crossing into comfortable
>zone. The consequence is a postive identity within such community of
>practice? Is this similar to Lave and Wenger's notion of progress from
>peripheral to legitimate participation? Or can one even assume the notion of
>identity construction always involved such progress within communities of
>practice(s)? What do you think?
>
>In addition, I'm also needing some help here. I've been searching lately for
>some good review articles on Identity, could anyone help me on this?
>Similarly, I am looking for an Identity research review paper with a
>particlar flavour in CHAT perspective. In the past, Bill Penuel and Wertsch
>have written a joint paper on "Vygotsky and Identity formation," Bill, have
>you extended your discussion further on that? Let me know.
>
>Thanks
>Victoria
>
>
>
>Victoria Yew
>Ph.D. Candidate
>School of Educational Psychology, Literacies & Learning
>Faculty of Education
>University of Sydney
>NSW 2006
>AUSTRALIA
>Telephone : (02) 9351 6326/ International +61 2 9351 6326
>Fax : (02) 9351 2606 / International +61 2 9351 2606
>E-mail : v.yew who-is-at edfac.usyd.edu.au
>
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Penuel, Ph.D.
Research Social Scientist
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Avenue, Mailstop BS116
Menlo Park, CA 94025
tel. 650-859-5001
fax 650-869-5001
email: bpenuel who-is-at unix.sri.com
Check out our website at
www.sri.com/policy/ctl
---------------------------------------------------------------