The "famous triangle" is an abstractoin, Martin. It does not, qua
abstraction,
represent different kinds of objects, social rules, commnities, etc. Most
famously,
it does not represent time. Rather, I assme that in any instance of its use,
the analyst
must carry out an historically grounded analysis of specific forms of
activity and the way
in which the constituent analytic categories are embodied and undergo change
over time.
Something about rising to concrete may be involved.
Soviet scholars could write all they want to about kinds of division of
labor and alenation so long
as they were writing about capitalism. They could not do so about their own
country which was,
as you know, on its way to becoming a worker's paradise, or perhaps already
was one, so that
any claims about alienation were slurs upon the state.
mike
On 10/8/05, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure that the collective hunt really illustrates a division of
> labor
> as Marx viewed it. It certainly is very different from the division of
> labor
> in an industrial society, in which workers paradoxically are brought
> together in a social process of production, yet experience themselves as
> isolated individuals (working on an assembly line is a typical example).
> That being so, if Leont'ev bases his concept of activity on the primeval
> collective hunt - but perhaps I'm mistaken here? - one wonders how well
> the
> concept can grasp alienated labor. For one thing, appeal to the
> consciousness of the industrial worker is tricky, since alienated labor
> requires/gives rise to false consciousness.
>
> I'd welcome some instruction on how activity theory deals with this: I
> recall a fragment of conversation in Seville where the claim was made that
> the famous triangle doesn't distinguish between labor as the honest toil
> to
> produce food and clothing, and as modern alienated wage labor. Is that
> indeed the case?
>
> bb doesn't recall Vygotsky writing about the division of labor, and
> coincidently I've been searching for this myself. There's a passing
> reference to "the class organization of production" in 'Educational
> Psychology.' But in the 1930 'The Socialist Alteration of Man' Vygotsky
> writes about the division of labor quite extensively, citing Marx
> frequently. For example:
>
> "In his classic descriptions of the early period of capitalism, Marx
> frequently dwells on the subject of the corruption of the human
> personality
> which is brought about by the growth of capitalist industrial society. On
> one extreme end of society, the division between intellectual and physical
> labour, the separation between town and country, the ruthless exploitation
> of child and female labour, poverty and the impossibility of a free and
> full
> development of full human potential, and on the other extreme, idleness
> and
> luxury; not only does all this result in the single human type becoming
> differentiated and fragmented into several separate social class types
> which
> stand in sharp contrast to one another, but also in the corruption and
> distortion of the human personality and its subjection to unsuitable,
> one-sided development within all these different variants of the human
> type."
>
> But Vygotsky argues here that even Marx saw a positive side to labor in
> large scale industry: that, removed from a capitalist economy, such labor
> can expand human capabilities. One presumes that he believed that the
> socialist Soviet state was heading in that direction.
>
> Martin
>
>
> On 10/8/05 8:37 PM, "bb" <xmca-whoever@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Ana, Steve, hopefully i understand the division of labor (dl) as yrjo
> > intended, and i think i do, because it's in the manner of the collective
> hunt,
> > and, in his change lab workshop in goteborg, I had the distinct
> impression
> > that his formulation of chat with extended triangles, historical
> analysis,
> > expansive learning, was around systems with these well formed elements.
> This
> > makes a great deal of sense considering his approaches to developmental
> work
> > research.
> >
> > Conciousness as an ingredient comes from early on in marx's relation of
> > conciousness and life, i tihnk, and later, but more productivley for me,
> > Leont'ev wrote about as conciousness and activity. There is an article
> with
> > this title, but i recall reading between the words of having read and
> reread
> > as much of Leont'ev as i could.
> >
> > If I couple the above with my recollection that nowhere have i seen
> vygotsky
> > writing about division of labor, then it doesn't make sense to talk in
> an
> > orthodox manner about the zoped of a toddler and an adult involving a
> division
> > of labor -- although your notion, Ana, DOES make a lot of sense to me
> when I
> > open up to new possibilities. I think it's just not explicitly in yrjo's
> > formulation. But so, having explicitly made that demarcation, this is
> where
> > we can be clear that you Ana, make your contributions in the evolution
> of the
> > study of human activity.
> >
> > Aside, what I recall having as one insight reading LBE is that Yjro
> describes
> > a zoped between two systems of activity -- a very different and amazing
> thing.
> >
> > There are other possible parallels that I see Ana -- such as the
> separation of
> > motive and object that happens in the collective hunt, arising withthe
> > division of labor, and the suspension of immediate need that vygotsky
> > describes in social play, where there is in some sense a fluid, dynamic
> > division of labor. Perhaps I'm just conjecturing here, or I'm thinking
> of
> > what bodrova and leong have described.
> >
> > Anyway, I think the points Steve made are where I wanted to go, as Mike
> said,
> > the map's not the territory, and steve and I could be observing the very
> same
> > situations, coming up with different analyses because of the tools we
> employed
> > and our differences in intent. One of us could have a street map and the
> > other a topo.
> >
> > bb
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> Bill,
> >> a very interesting point! Showed me how different I understood the
> >> "division of labor" concept than the one developed by Yrjö. I started
> >> from Vygotsky's notion of joint activity in which the more experienced
> >> (often an adult) partner caries out more and often almost every
> >> operation of the activity, while the less experienced (child in
> >> development) carries out small parts of the activity. With development
> >> this proportion changes, so that the child is able to take over more
> and
> >> more complex aspects of an activity, until, one day, the child is able
> >> to carry out the whole activity (if possible) or at least to perform
> any
> >> part of the activity as her/his more experienced partner. It is not
> >> necessary to "know" what role you are playing, nor to have a
> "knowledge"
> >> of the fulls scope of an activity, to participate in it.
> >> If you think of language development as a joint activity, then, in the
> >> beginning, the child uses various sounds to express various dialogic
> >> tasks (ask for something, call, laugh, demand, protest etc) but they
> are
> >> not "words". The adult (or more developed participant in the dialogue)
> >> often "translates" these sounds into the possible utterances as they
> >> should have sounded in a more developed form. It is like the adult is
> >> doing all the work in the dialogue, or most of the linguistic work. And
> >> then the child starts using some "words" for some dialogic functions,
> >> taking over some of the "work" of speaking. etc.
> >> So, to bring this back to your example with the day care. There are
> many
> >> things going on in a day care, not just solitary play. On the contrary,
> >> the life of a three year old child is full of relationships and full of
> >> discoveries related to the world of people and the material world.
> There
> >> are joint activities in which everyone has their role, both in play and
> >> in other activities: lunch, nap time, story telling, going out, etc.
> >> There are rules about what is to be done at what time, in which space,
> >> with which toy, with which people. There are disputes about what
> belongs
> >> to whom, and who took what and what does it mean to share and how....
> >> Activity Systems Theory is absolutely necessary to analyze such a
> >> complex setting as every day life and development in a day care. In
> many
> >> ways, a day care center is as complex as a factory in which people use
> >> wrenches and pipes to make machines. In fact, I think that it is easier
> >> to learn to work in a plant like Steve's, than to learn to work with
> >> children in a day care. (Although that is relative to what is easier to
> >> each one of us).
> >> This is a fascinating point: division of labor (roles) in and its
> >> significance and meaning in development.
> >> Ana
> >>
> >>
> >> bb wrote:
> >>
> >>> I appreciate Steve's practical follow up and the chance to clarify. I
> too
> >>> have
> >> used an extension to put more muscle into my pipe wrench when working
> on my
> >> home
> >> steam heating system, having watched my father apply this strategy to
> the
> >> track
> >> gear on his bulldozer when I was much younger.
> >>>
> >>> But let me work with specifics; by example. I greatly appreciate
> Engestrom's
> >> activity systems theory and its application to institutional and
> >> inter-institutional transformation or resistance thereof. It's six main
> >> elements parse activity into interrelated elements where those elements
> are
> >> well
> >> formed, e.g. a division of labor, as in the collective hunt wrtitten by
> >> Leont'ev, that being one of the paradigm cases in Learning by Expanding
> >> (LBE).
> >>>
> >>> But what if one is interested in the day to day development of 3 year
> old
> >> children in nursery schools? There, one sees children in solitary play
> -- no
> >> division of labor to speak of among the children, no understanding by
> the
> >> children of their roles, if they had any, no conscious engaging in a
> >> collective
> >> object by the chlidren. Activity Systems Theory does not purchase much
> here,
> >> microgenetically. Ahh... but if one is interested in the development of
> >> nursery schools, and how that historical development shapes the context
> of
> >> the
> >> children's play -- what rules the adults obey and enforce, what toys
> exist,
> >> what
> >> the caregivers must do to be licensed? Or if one is interested in
> changing
> >> the
> >> nature of nursery schools? Then AST methods described in LBE could
> yield
> >> large
> >> gains.
> >>>
> >>> It's more like cutting diamonds (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_cut):
> >>>
> >>> The rule (following cleavage planes)
> >>> The tool (the cutting steel wedge)
> >>> The jewel (the outcome)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> bb
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I appreciate Bill's (bb's) comments on using the appropriate tool for
> >>>> the job. Bill seems to imply that Marxism is appropriate for certain
> >>>> kinds of heavy lifting, but other tools are more suited for more
> >>>> delicate and intricate work. I happen to run into the kind of
> >>>> situation that Bill uses as an analogy fairly frequently in my line
> >>>> of work. We use impact wrenches to bolt down and unbolt large steel
> >>>> plates that hold our clamping fixtures (I work in a large machine
> >>>> shop that mills the parts (spars) that become the long
> >>>> infrastructures of jetliner wings). Sometimes a bolt is on too tight
> >>>> for even an impact wrench to loosen, so we get a breaker bar, just as
> >>>> Bill suggests to use when needed, to muscle it off. In rare cases
> >>>> where that amount of force is still not sufficient, we go find a long
> >>>> pipe that fits over the breaker bar, and apply that extra
> >>>> leverage. If I follow Bill's reasoning, perhaps Bill would compare
> >>>> such mechanical extensions of the breaker bar to politically
> >>>> employing Leninist and Trotskyist extensions of Marxism ... in cases
> >>>> where the old rulers ... are particularly intransigent ... :-))
> >>>>
> >>>> ~ Steve
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> At 09:12 PM 10/5/2005 +0000, you wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Interesting comments, Julian, may it be the case that never the
> >>>>> twain shall meet?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> To indulge for a brief email, for which I may be soundly
> >>>>> criticized, my interest is in understanding learning and
> >>>>> development in particular circumstances, and activity theory,
> >>>>> dialectics, marxist critique, etc, are tools toward furthering that
> >>>>> understanding. Perhaps this is my own ontogeny brought about by
> >>>>> mostly american influences and resources. So then, on the one
> >>>>> hand, in this perspective, not being dialectical enough, or
> >>>>> marxist enough, or being faithful to the originators, doesn't
> >>>>> really seem a reasonable measure of the quality of someone's
> >>>>> research. In analogy to a mechanic, who finds he is working on a
> >>>>> car with hand tightened wheel lugs, it would make no sense for
> >>>>> someone to say the mechanic is not using the "breaker bar" enough,
> >>>>> since that tool is not appropriate in this circumstance.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On the other hand, I do really think it's important to well
> >>>>> understand the original works, and to critically mark where and when
> >>>>> departures are made from them. And it would seem departures must be
> >>>>> made for there to be a continuing (r)evolution. This might be the
> >>>>> razor that slices superficial from contributing studies, e.g. those
> >>>>> that illuminate the human condition and further activity
> >>>>> theory. Granted, I've seen papers submitted for publication that
> >>>>> have used AT superficially, apparently (I'm guessing) to leverage AT
> >>>>> for a publication (AT becoming the research buzz). I'd further
> >>>>> guess that a cultural-historical critique of higher education and
> >>>>> its promotion incentives would reveal contradictions between the
> >>>>> object of furthering activity theory and
> >>>>> professors/researchers/educators/etc. personal motives. Perhaps to
> >>>>> continue the analogy, we are sometimes seeing mechanics trying to
> >>>>> use "breaker bars" where breaker bars are not the appropriate tool.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> bb
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Date sent: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 15:19:15 -0400
> >>>>>> From: Ana Marjanovic-Shane <ana@zmajcenter.org>
> >>>>>> To: Xmca <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >>>>>> Subject: [xmca] ISCAR - Sevilla 2005 -- Theoretical
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Concepts in
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> CHAT and
> >>>>>> their connestion to physical concepts and knowledge
> >>>>>> Send reply to: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-request@weber.ucsd.edu?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-request@weber.ucsd.edu?subject=subscribe>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ana
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I will try two concepts: each seems to mark a conceptual
> >>>>>> dichotomy
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1. One concept that seems to divide the ISCAR/socio-cultural
> >>>>>> community is its relation to Marxism.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For some of the Marxists (or maybe for some eg michael Roth? -
> >>>>>> the dialectics is the crucial 'line') , the version of AT known to
> the
> >>>>>> West through Yrjo Engestrom's account is regarded as not Marxist
> >>>>>> (or maybe not Marxist enough).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I felt myself drawn towards this critique of Yrjo's site/approach
> >>>>>> when I saw it being 'applied' in fairly routine (non-dialectical)
> way to
> >>>>>> an 'analysis' of the directors of sports-and-drug centres. There
> was
> >>>>>> no critical analysis of why sports-people use drugs, the
> >>>>>> commodification involved in the Olympic industry etc.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The theme was there also in David Bakhurst's (and others) talks in
> >>>>>> a different way: he and others suggested that many of the users of
> >>>>>> the (CH-) AT literature (Yrjo got criticised again) are not
> faithful to
> >>>>>> the originators: eg Hegel, Ilyenkov, Bakhtin, Leont'ev ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (But then I was not impressed by his example of a meaningless
> >>>>>> 'object' of activity: I believe he worried about the sense in which
> >>>>>> there was an 'object' of the Russian Revolution. I found this
> >>>>>> extraordinary for a philosopher who has read all this Marxism.)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On the other hand I was struck by the readiness of Yrjo in his own
> >>>>>> paper/symposium to abandon the familiar model of the AS
> >>>>>> (triangles) when the need arises (I hope I understood that right- I
> >>>>>> mean when he talks of wildfire activity).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2. There seems to be a division between those concerned mainly
> >>>>>> with identity (and discourse/positioning/subjectivity) and those
> >>>>>> concerned more with practice (and activity/system). Some of us
> >>>>>> are focussing on working out the dialectics/relations between the
> >>>>>> two (see also Harry Daniels' and other papers).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We (some of my colleagues here in Manchester and I) are working
> >>>>>> on the theme of discourse-and-practice (you can find our papers to
> >>>>>> sevilla at
> >>>>>> http://www.education.man.ac.uk/lta/ISCAR2005/symposium/index.h
> >>>>>> tm
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> and would like to hear from others similarly interested in this.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Julian
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also BTW some more papers from the Sept Manchester
> >>>>>> conference on the themes of community, identity and transition are
> >>>>>> at:
> >>>>>> http://orgs.man.ac.uk/projects/include/experiment/sctigcon.htm
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> >>>>>>> --------------050203030509000100050703
> >>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >>>>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ISCAR in Sevilla, September 2005:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In a conference of this scope, where one cannot hope to have
> attended=20
> >>>>>>> even one 10th of all the presentations, it is hard to give any
> >>>>>>> overall=20
> >>>>>>> evaluations or even impressions. But, XMCA members who did not
> come
> >>>>>>> to=20
> >>>>>>> Sevilla, ought to have some notion of what went on there for 5
> days
> >>>>>>> in=20
> >>>>>>> September 2005. So those of us who were there really need to put
> our=20
> >>>>>>> thoughts together and give some descriptions of what went on. That
> is=20
> >>>>>>> not easy. There are different aspects one can write about,
> different=20
> >>>>>>> themes that ran through presentations, different aspects of=20
> >>>>>>> organization. I will be working from my notes -- taken in haste
> >>>>>>> during=20
> >>>>>>> the workshops, from the abstracts we received and from some
> other=20
> >>>>>>> sources people gave us (handouts, web pages). It would be very
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> useful if=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> someone at the XMCA headquarters could put the abstracts in pdf
> >>>>>>> format=20
> >>>>>>> on the server so that everyone could have an access to them.
> (Mike,
> >>>>>>> is=20
> >>>>>>> it possible to organize it?).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The conference was held in 3 buildings of the Department of
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> Psychology,=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sociology and Philosophy, at the University of Sevilla. Those are
> new=20
> >>>>>>> buildings (not part of the University main venue in the old
> Tobacco=20
> >>>>>>> Factory), built with inner balconies and great visibility, so
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> they were=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> easy to navigate. The workshops were held in auditoriums, most
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> of which=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> had a classic layout: a podium with a blackboard and projection
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> screen,=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> and then rows of seats and desks. Everything fixed -- unmovable.
> >>>>>>> There=20
> >>>>>>> were just a few rooms without fixed benches -- with panels and
> >>>>>>> chairs.=20
> >>>>>>> They were used for Poster sessions. My first fear was that the
> first=20
> >>>>>>> part of our session was assigned a room with fixed benches. We
> would=20
> >>>>>>> have to move it -- since it was an interactive drama workshop
> where=20
> >>>>>>> people have to have space to move, group and regroups and
> play!!=20
> >>>>>>> Fortunately, it was not: we were given one of the poster rooms!!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We usually don't consciously think of the space and its qualities
> >>>>>>> when=20
> >>>>>>> we participate in activities with intellectual content. But it
> is=20
> >>>>>>> important. If our beliefs about the mediated quality of
> intellectual=20
> >>>>>>> growth and functioning are true, then we have to think about the
> >>>>>>> space=20
> >>>>>>> as mediated and mediating. European universities (at least
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> three of them=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> I know, and now Sevilla) are still mediated by another paradigm
> about=20
> >>>>>>> intellectual processing and education. A paradigm that Vygotsky
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> started=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> to question 100 years ago. It takes much more to have this
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> understanding=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> of ourselves trickle down to those who plan and build schools
> and=20
> >>>>>>> universities.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Participants came from many parts of the world. But not from
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> everywhere.=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> I was happy to see people from Africa -- some of them from
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> Rwanda! There=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> were not many Africans in the previous ISCRAT
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> conferences. Participants=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> came from all continents. There were many people known to us on
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> the XMCA=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> discussion list in the conference: N. Ares, D. Bakhurst, S.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> Chaiklin, M.=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Cole, M. de Haan, J. Derry, Y. Engestr=F6m, S. Gaskin, A. Goncu,
> P.=20
> >>>>>>> Hakkarainen, L. Holzman, V. John-Stainer, E. Lampert-Shepel, C.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> Lee, E.=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Matusov, D. Robbins, W-M. Roth, A. Stetsenko, A. Surmava, J.
> >>>>>>> Valsiner,=20
> >>>>>>> B. van Oers, N. Veresov, G. Wells, J. Wertsch..., There were
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> many more=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> we have to learn about.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The conference program listed two main themes with lots of sub
> themes:
> >>>>>>> THEME A.- Theoretical and Methodological Issues
> >>>>>>> THEME B.- Acting in changing worlds
> >>>>>>> Each workshop was classified within one of the two themes and
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> within one=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> of its subtopics. What was hard on the conference organizers
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> and on the=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> conference attendees was to separate workshops that tackled
> similar=20
> >>>>>>> problems in time: there were many workshops I wanted to go to,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> but they=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> were held at the same time. I always had to choose between, at
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> least two=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> competing workshops and more often between three or four. That
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> was very=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> hard to juggle. I ended up running from one to another, missing
> >>>>>>> chunks=20
> >>>>>>> from each workshop that I wanted to hear, or just worrying that I
> was=20
> >>>>>>> missing something else.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Before the conference, I made my own selection of workshops which
> >>>>>>> have=20
> >>>>>>> something to do with play and imagination. That was my personal
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> program=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> guide, I am attaching here. However, I ended up changing it to=20
> >>>>>>> accommodate other talks which were also important to me. [Other=20
> >>>>>>> participants in Sevilla: Please send your own selection of the=20
> >>>>>>> workshops!"]. In my next postings, I will discuss some of the=20
> >>>>>>> presentations I attended. I invite you who went to Sevilla to
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> discuss at=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> least one of the presentations: one paper, one concept you
> heard=20
> >>>>>>> discussed, one thought you found important in Sevilla. Each one of
> us=20
> >>>>>>> has a special "pet" interest, and sometimes, special ways to
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> understand=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> or to "objectify" this interest through different selection of
> topics=20
> >>>>>>> and different people. Maybe you want to connect the questions we
> >>>>>>> asked=20
> >>>>>>> before the Conference with your experience in the conference? Or
> >>>>>>> maybe=20
> >>>>>>> you would want to mention just something unexpected, something
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>> that made=20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> you think?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Until later.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ana
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> xmca mailing list
> >>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> xmca mailing list
> >>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> xmca mailing list
> >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Ana Marjanovic-Shane
> >>
> >> 151 W. Tulpehocken St.
> >>
> >> Philadelphia, PA 19144
> >>
> >> Home office: (215) 843-2909
> >>
> >> Mobile: (267) 334-2905
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> xmca mailing list
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 01 2005 - 01:00:21 PST