( still hearing voices....)
kathie goff wrote:
>between the many committments, similar to the what kathryn alexander wrote
>about (and i want to respond to then, but . . .)
>it's difficult to organize a large text to reflect my thinking on one
>concept or theme,
>(beyond my dissertation, that is)
>but i did want to respond to rosa and to encourage all those who have
>posted recently for the first time, or the first time in a while.
>what sustains me often is a belief that silence is a form of response,
>highly ambigous,
>but at least it gives me lots of room to create my own meanings.
>so, when i post something and get little or no response,
>i can put my head down and slog ahead, anyway,
>but i would rather have some company, some kind of support,
>some kind words.
>
thanks for the acknowledgment here kathie, I also put down my head and
thought perhaps that my message did not get posted, gremlin, then I
thought - my posting must have been so lame that it was embarassing the
list.
Interesting dynamic here around uptake and reception. I think silence
is a form of response (raspberry sound I guess)..... :-)
I too find Rosa's comments very important and intriguing, I found
Mike's description last week ( heading under Confused) very informative, as
it brought in a bit of a context to the 'genesis" story of xcma - for
those of us who do not have the "ur-links" to the mail-list. I
understand now a bit better, a group of scholars who distributed into
this form for a variety of reasons:
Mike cole wrote: :
All-- LCHC is an organized research unit at UCSD. XLCHC started as
a community designed to continue interactions of people who had been
at this unit physically. It outgrew its original boundaries and as a means
of recognizing this fact and of trying to link it to XMCA, a journal
with editors in several locations, XMCA has grown up as some sort of
hybrid of earlier and later goals. In the process, many of the original
participants have dropped out and many more have joined.
Just so there is not misunderstanding, lchc is inclusive only in the
sense that it seeks to promote diversity of perspectives, positions, and
participation among members who themselves are diverse along many
demographic descriptors.
I am thinking about this next point Kathie makes along with Rosa on
diversity and participation:
>> Another topic that has been mentioned at some point is the relative lack
>> of participation from people of differing language and cultural
>> backgrounds.
>>
this is a huge topic and one i would like to discuss in greater detail...
discussion, even if emotionally-charged, about
how
we write here,
how
we exclude, silence, discourage, dismiss some
how
we praise, encourage, honor, value others
-- I am facinated by the prohibitions and inducements to "write" in
this space, obviously it is quite profoundly different for many
non-writing active reading participants than for writing participants who
seem to have more robust adressee systems - I won't even wade into the
active/passive binary here.
I am trying to grapple with what would be more descriptive words - I
see it more in terms of Bakhtin's speech genres, where we get located on
the continuum of addressee - speaking subject, centripedal / centrifugal
- oooops those binaries keep sneaking in.
As for "community" - who do I imagine myself to be talking to when I
respond to "Kathie Goff" or "rosa" on xcma who-is-at weber, who is listening in
on this virtual dialogue. Perhaps I can chime in now with this posting,
because I do imagine a "kathie / rosa" out there, because i am included
as an addressed participant -I have a discourse face
perhaps this is not such a problem for those on the list who actually may
have met and talked, shared a coffee, a story, or a panel together. As a
novice here, I must always conjure up a group of 'faces" beyond the
citational identities that I recognise here - the articles, books, etc.
One thing I notice is the rapid topic turns here - how we leave behind
discussion strands so that time to contemplate and mull through something
in a more robust manner seems to get sacrificed. So a week to talk
through an important topic like this one, well it's ancient history in
real temporal week time.
finally in response to what kathie Goff concludes :
these areas of relations between and among persons is where the most
exciting and interesting and painful and wonderful experiences occur
and are defined, re-defined, denied, reified, ignored, expressed in prose
and poetry, written about in academic texts, claimed to be taught, claimed
to be learned, died for,
and, of course, lived.
how well articulated and expressed, it is this ongoing tension between
the strenuous effort to realise dialogue theoretically - and all the
contradictions that make it so painful to practice.
i love the grocery lists of what activities shape our postings
kathryn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 17:54:06 PST