You wrote:
>>"Affect as a sign og mimesis at work" ... I am wondering would you consider
>>negative affect as also sign of mimesis at work, such as to the effect of
>>affecting non participants among the "girls" on XMCA.
Yes, I think transference is a mimetic function, but then, to be honest, I
don't know what I'm talking about. (I talk about it because I want to think
about it but I need time that I don't have to do that)
You also wrote:
>I
>>thought that I started this conversation to discuss about affect and
identity on
>>XMCA, but it seems that we've strayed ...
I strayed. Did Bill Penuel recommend any readings in backchannel to you?
Bill, can you post any references you might have for Victoria on the list?
-- thank you.
Judith
>Firstly, let me introduce myself (to you, Judy, again). We met at the
recent AERA
>in Montreal, where I attended your presentation and also requested for a
copy of
>your paper. I've also recently received your paper via "snail-mail". Thanks
>heaps! I'ld would like to discuss it further with you later, if it's okay with
>you?.
>
>I've been working on the topic of A CHAT Perspective of Identity Construction
>(IC) (especially within the contexts of beyond schooling environments)
since late
>1996. Back then (in '96/97), I was still toying with the idea of a CHAT
>perspective to SRL (self-regulated learning) and motivation and even wrote
>something about it, though at the time, none of my colleagues at my faculty
have
>articulated this notion or shown any interest (XMCA was unknown to me at
the time
>too!). But reading about Lave and Wenger, and subsequently, Mike's book (on
>Cultural Psychology), and others as well, I've shifted my interest to identity,
>especially within religious COP. Nevertheless, I'm certain that the relations
>between SRL and IC is mediated/motivation by interest (or the lack of it? -
>somewhat mentioned in Wenger's book, "COP: Learning, meaning and identities.).
>
>Judy Diamondstone wrote:
>
>> Victoria, Since this question still preoccupies me, it was interesting to
>> see Bill's response to you that quoted me -- and to see my own rehashing of
>> Ann Freadman's text about -- well, about rehashing texts, in some sense...
>
>Perhaps, the "data-rich" description of Ann's text, as mentioned by Bill, and
>you, serves to further illuminate Bakhtin's novel articulation about the
problem
>of speech genres. In some sense, even our "conversation" highlights the
problems.
>Rehearsing texts in written forms, versus verbal utterances, and subsequently
>appropriating speech, are almost like living in two/more different planets.
If I
>may suggest, one may expect scholarly discussions on XMCA to have a somewhat
>informal personality. This is so only to the extent when conversing on
relatively
>un-academically inclined topics (such as fishing and blah). But the moment
>academia is introduced into the conversation/multilogues, it transforms the
>interactions into a dense exchanged of jargons, thereby similarly transforming
>the genre(s) of speech, as is evident even at this instant. Nonetheless, there
>are both very explicit and as well as "un-written" rules on XMCA (eg using AT
>perspective). For example, the topic of fishing is not considered XMCA
interest,
>not unless if it were something like "A Study of Self Regulation in Fishing
>Techniques among Novice Fishermans". Any response???
>
>
>> Does identification necessitate or presuppose affect? Why is it that in the
>> x-list practices the pattern of participation remains stubbornly resistant
>> to any redistribution of KINDS of participants? How come more girls don't
>> play more often in the multilogues?
>
>In playing out the various genres of speech, this seems to be also reflected in
>the "demography" of participants, Judy. Why not more "girls"? Perhaps, "gals"
>like to converse, more often than not, in persons and privacy than in public
>arena such as XMCA. This is also not discounting the fact that there are many
>(and I emphasise, TOO MANY) silent observers/participants ... In articulating
>this, I could stand accused of gender biasness, so, I'll claim that this is
>usually the practice among my female colleagues and peers. Even I am
"guilty" of
>this, "watching" XMCA as a peripheral participant for almost a year now. So,
>Judy, would one more "girl" participant increase your motivation to press on in
>these multilogues?
>
>> I think of affect as a sign of mimesis at work, and we tend to treat mimesis
>> as the primitive precondition for rational communication/ multilogue, rather
>> than as the intertwined and necessary twin of whatever we actually say. So
>> in Eva's elegant modelling of the discussion list, the activity system as a
>> whole got analyzed into several separate, cascading systems -- while that
>> picture is elucidating, it's also as Nate and others have pointed out
>> problematic.
>
>
>> Some thoughts before they're even half-baked: IF we can assume that mimesis
>> is at work in any communicative act -- both precondition for AND
>> simultaneous operant in whatever gets talked about (the dynamically
>> unfolding multilogue) THEN perhaps it may be the "missing part" (Luiz
>> Ernesto Merkle) of the ecosocial system that drives the dynamically
>> unfolding multi-logue. That which is missed/missing is a function of
>> mimesis, the unrecognizable twin of whatever issues-focused talk we do --
>> our search for MORE understanding than we already "have".... for the ever
>> elusive completion.
>>
>> Things get pretty murky here for the analyst :)
>> What do you think?
>
>Before responding to this further, let me just admit that it's way past midnite
>for me here (and after marking a bunch of student's papers on Attribution
>Theory), so, my thoughts are showing signs of clouding. I'm also thinking now
>that I'm missing the point that I'm responding to you (nb: Bakhtin claimed that
>comprehensible, articulated utterance elicit no response). Hence, my response.
>
>And Mike said something like ...
>"Victoria--
> You ask:
> 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?
>
>I am not sure that positive motivatin and interest bordering on fun
>and amusement have positive identity in a COP as a necessary consequence,
>but they sure do help.
>mike"
>
>So, mike, would you consider the above about affect and ID in COP as both overt
>process and consequence in 5th D?
>
>Thanks for your responses, folks.
>
>Victoria
>
>
>> Judith
>>
>> Judith Diamondstone (732) 932-7496 Ext. 352
>> Graduate School of Education
>> Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
>> 10 Seminary Place
>> New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1183Victoria wrote:
>
>> 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.... 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 (?)
>Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
> name="v.yew.vcf"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Description: Card for Victoria Yew
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
> filename="v.yew.vcf"
>
>Attachment Converted: C:\MYDOCU~1\ATTACH~1\vyew2.vcf
>
Judith Diamondstone (732) 932-7496 Ext. 352
Graduate School of Education
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
10 Seminary Place
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1183