155 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2016
    1. assignment, you should also provide a detailed description of how the assignment will be graded

      Not necessary in truest sense. Look at Rhizo14 and Rhizo15 for great learning with no direction and no assignment.

  2. Jun 2016
    1. you can put the handprints of 30 children in your pocket and you can read The Untext at one sitting without having to spend six weeks in the MOOC.

      Nice visual. I wanna dip my palm in paint and press it up against the page.

    2. The Untext demonstrates that writing is a function of complex, multiscale networking as words, phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, marginalia, links, and images flow through and around one another to create new ideas. This has always been so, but precious, static print concealed this dynamic flow of ideas. Modern technology has made this flow of desire more apparent.

      This is my favorite passage in this article so far. It covers a lot of ground and a lot of thinking that is aligned to my own about learning and writing and connecting. That dynamic flow of ideas is what keeps me engaged as a writer/learner, and helps me think of my role as a teacher, too.

    3. About the Authors

      Thanks to all of you for trying to make sense for the rest of us. I'm tempted to think: Oh, so this is what we were doing?

    4. We suspect that this kind of writing has always been possible, but modern technology makes it likely and so easy.

      Yes. True. Another hint of how digital is changing/altering/shaping literacies -- in how we write and how we read and how we interact with texts and each other.

    5. There is no authority and no position in a swarm, at least no position with political, rhetorical, and power implications.

      and thus, no distinguishing anchor. In fact, this article about the writing of the Untext is prob now the anchor, and I wonder if there is tension in that fact -- that by writing and explaining about the Untext, we have lessened its power as a rhizomatic document?

    6. We believe that The Untext is an accurate expression of rhizomatic learning as we experienced it in #rhizo14, and we invite readers to look through it, in all its chaotic messiness, multimedia-ness, and important marginalia.

      We do, even if some of us still question the whole rhizomatic metaphor for learning. Learning can be messy at times. Collaboration is a tricky balance. Writing in and around and among spaces are their own difficulty.

    7. It was the process of coming together to think and work and make beauty and chaos. It is our way of engaging in exhilarating learning and research. For us, this is scholarship.

      or at least, a way to remain "in the moment" even after the moment -- that arbitrary element of "six week course" -- has ended. The Untext was a desire, for me, to keep moving forward, to remain entangled in the writing of others.

    8. We had no definitive answers. We became distracted.

      Or more like, we needed time to think, to let the experience simmer for a stretch. Reflection points give us another view of the experience itself.

    9. a number of questions

      In some ways, these questions are the inquiry itself, almost more than the writing we did as a swarm. I appreciate that others took the time to formulate questions. I dove in and wrote. Others framed the experience.

    10. do you also sense the energy and engagement and collegiality and even fun underneath it all? We hope you can, because that is what keeps us going.

      So true, and it was this spirit of the digital page that made this kind of writing experiment not only interesting, but also engaging. We did not know how it would turn out. I, for one, did not ever think it would ever become an article for HyPed, or the basis for a presentation, or anything more than thoughts streaming along the page (and the margins of the page)

    11. First, most MOOC research has not brought the connectivist experience to life for readers who have not experienced the rhizomatic swarm of open, online, connected learning.

      Here lies the difficulty of explaining the potential of open learning spaces, and why canned MOOCs at the University level exist. Getting people to wrap their heads around the experience is critical. I'm not sure the Untext did that, though, and wonder if it has made it all the more imposing. Not to take away from the writing and the experience of it. It is valuable. But will its chaotic nature be a closed door instead of an open invitation?

    12. Next time, Hybrid Pedagogy or some other radical, digital journal will perhaps be able to accept The Untext as it emerged without this bridge, this frame of an article that leaves too much out. Soon.

      maybe ...

    13. especially the marginalia

      And it would be an interesting endeavor just to read the margins and not the text. It's multiple storylines emerging from the book itself. I remember taking great interest in the margins of this text, where I felt a bit more free to explore.

  3. Feb 2016
    1. ‘built upon the not-so-controversial ideathat how we conceive the world is relevant to how we live in it.’

      cf Wittgenstein

    2. is reading with love.


    3. So you will never get to the bottom of a concept like multiplicity, you will never beable to figure out what it really means, nor, if you become the least bit Deleuzian,will you want to

      There is no such as thing as what it really means"



  4. Jan 2016
    1. Annabelle, 16

      This para is incredibly rich - and resonates with me, as I grew up on a small island. The exposure to other cultures is also still one I value now as the cMOOCs are broadening my circle of friends

    2. Once I made internet friends, making friends in real life became much easier,

      I wish that this distinction would go away. Internet life IS real life

    3. It’s how I met my closest friends when I felt isolated from people who shared my interests.


  5. Jun 2015
    1. Steven Wheeler’s presentation below reviews related ideas contextualizing the modern learning climate. The gist? Rapid technology change has produced critical new pathways for both formal and informal learning.
    2. Rhizomatic Learning Is A Metaphor For How We Learn
  6. May 2015
    1. Its insistent question is ‘how does it work?’

      methodoloy papers can act as a scaffold but a rhizo analysis shoudl follow its own flight as you map.

    2. In this paper the author provides an overview of a rhizomatic methodology using illustrations from her doctoral thesis, where she used Deleuze and Guattari’s (1987)

      This is a good guide to trying rhizomatic methods.



    1. The “dark” side of Rhizo14 related to many of the gaps in MOOC research that have been noted by other researchers and referenced in the review of literature. Rhizo14 participants for whom the experience was less than positive felt isolated. They felt unable to make meaningful connections despite in some cases being experienced “MOOCers.” One viewed the emphasis on community as an unnecessary pressure, which led to artificial effects, exclusion and limited learning. Another viewed the community as “ disjointed networks of pre-established subgroups. ” Another described the community as having a “ dark edge .” These participants felt that there was a lack of appropriate facilitation, and that there were inappropriate exhibitions of power and politics in the course. Some felt that the course was based on weak philosophical foundations and that the rhizome is an empty signifier. Some questioned the lack of content in the course and felt that it lacked depth and theoretical discussion. For these participants the rhizome is “ A pernicious, pervasive weed, rooted in a lot of dirt and “SH***””; “ . . .a ‘thug’ and can be very badly behaved”; “Part of one big family/ plant—joined at the hip”; “Clones of the “same damn plan t.” One respondent wrote “I knew before that the arborescent paradigm was a problem. The rhizome is a contrasting alternative, but I learned in the course that this alternative has a lot of connotations with ugly and weed-like characteristics which are not necessary for every complex or even chaotic network” (survey respondent)

      This is the relevant passage in this paper. Annotating it here: chrome-extension://bjfhmglciegochdpefhhlphglcehbmek/content/web/viewer.html?file=file%3A%2F%2F%2FC%3A%2FUsers%2Fsh131d%2FGoogle%2520Drive%2FMy%2520eBooks%2FRhizomes%2FMackness%2520and%2520Bell%25202015.pdf



    1. Durability after foundations

      2 types: Material & strategic.

    2. This study displays all the ingredients of actor network theory 1990. There is semiotic relationality (it’s a network whose elements defi ne and shape one another), heterogeneity (there are different kinds of actors, human and otherwise), and mate- riality (stuff is there aplenty, not just “the social”). There is an insistence on process and its precariousness (all elements need to play their part moment by moment or it all comes unstuck). There is attention to power as an effect (it is a function of network confi guration and in particular the creation of immutable mobiles), to space and to scale (how it is that networks extend themselves and translate distant actors). New for actor network theory, there is an interest in large-scale political history. And, crucially, it is a study of how the Portuguese network worked: how it held together; how it shaped its components; how it made a center and peripher- ies; in short, of how differences were generated in a semiotic relational logi

      Ingredients of ANT

    3. t can also be understood as an empirical version of Gilles Deleuze’s nomadic philosophy (Deleuze and Guattari 1988).


    4. All of which were the effects of a set of materially heterogeneous relations

      D&G make a related point about Hume (?)

    5. actor network theory can also be understood as an empirical version of poststructuralism.

      This is interesting?

    6. materially heterogeneous relations analyzed with semiotic tools; a sym- metrical indifference to the truth or otherwise of what it is looking at; concern with the productivity of practice; an interest in circulation; and the predisposition to exemplary case studies

      Signatures of ANT

    7. t is obvious to most engineers that systems are made not simply of technical bits and pieces but also include peopl

      This is obvious, so the opposite (social networks include tech) should also be.

    8. A tiny handful of these suggestions subsequently get trans- muted into the much harder statements about nature that circulate in scientifi c papers (“the fi gures in the table show . . .

      How scientific truth claims begin as vague observations.

    9. it is better to talk of “material semiotics” rather than “actor network theory.”

      Latour, apparently, prefers calling it "ant" rather than spelling it out in full

    10. A paradigm can be understood, they said, as a culture .
    11. Second, the actor network approach is not a theory. Theories usually try to explain why something happens, but actor network theory is descriptive rather than foundational in explanatory terms, which means that it is a disappointment for those seeking strong accounts

      Not a theory. Describes, does not explain.

    12. Actor network theory is a disparate family of material-semiotic tools, sensibilities, and methods of analysis that treat everything in the social and natural worlds as a continuously generated effect of the webs of relations within which they are located.

      ANT is not a single thing



    1. The new skills include: Play The capacity to experiment with the surroundings as a form of problem solving. Performance The ability to adopt alternative identities for the purpose of improvisation and discovery. Simulation The ability to interpret and construct dynamic models of real-world processes. Appropriation The ability to meaningfully sample and remix media content. Multitasking The ability to scan the environment and shift focus onto salient details. Distributed cognition The ability to interact meaningfully with tools that expand mental capacities. Collective intelligence The ability to pool knowledge and com - pare notes with others toward a common goal. Judgment The ability to evaluate the reliability and credibility of different information sources. Transmedia navigation The ability to follow the flow of stories and information across multiple modalities. Networking The ability to search for, synthesize, and dissemi - nate information. Negotiation The ability to travel across diverse communities, discerning and respecting multiple perspectives, and grasping and following alternative norms.

      skills of participatory culture

    1. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari Intersecting Lives Francois Dosse; Translated by Deborah Glassman

      Review of biography of D&G

    1. ‘tool kit’,


    2. trippy slogans

      Trippy slogans can be neat

    3. a chaotic bricolage of anthropology, fractal geometry, music theory, psychoanalysis, literature, art history, physics and military history

      And philosophy!

    4. (‘We’re tired of trees,’ they wrote. ‘They’ve made us suffer too much.’)

      Poor trees

    5. their true adversary was not so much capitalism as ‘the fascism in us all, in our heads and in our everyday behaviour, the fascism that causes us to love power, to desire the very thing that dominates and exploits us’.

      Yes, the problem is bigger than capitalism

    6. (Deleuze serenely put his hat back on, and walked out.)


    7. Were they really celebrating madness as a revolutionary force?

      There's something odd about the idea that capitalism causes schizophrenia, and we should then celebrate this because it turns us into revolutionaries.

    8. Desire, they admit, is not always good

      Like the rhizome, it has its dark side

    9. capitalism encourages a kind of generalised schizophrenia, a shatteringly intense fracturing of subjectivity.

      It's important to remember that Anti-O and ATP are together subtitled "Capitalism and Schizophrenia"

    10. more like a sprawling work of experimental fiction, a futurist epic

      Yes! Stop trying to understand it all!

    11. Freud’s big mistake, they agreed, was to see desire as something rooted in lack, as an attempt to fantasise a missing object (the mother’s breast, for example).

      Desire is not a lack. It is a desire to change a situation.

    12. adventurously interpretative monographs he called ‘portraits’ and later likened to ‘buggery’:

      It's hard to know where his exegesis ends and his interpretation begins

    13. he was adored by his students, not so much a professor as a ‘spiritual guide’.

      I think this is important. I get a sense that he was trying to show folk how to think, not teach them what to think

    14. Guattari resented ‘being strapped onto Gilles’, and felt ‘overcoded’ by the ‘perfection that he brought to the most unlikely book’. What he really wanted to do was ‘say stupid shit. Barf out the fucking-around-o-maniacal schizo flow.’

      Apparently he did resent this, Terry

    15. In recent years, Dosse notes, there has been a tendency to ‘de-Guattarise’ the collaboration and to canonise Deleuze at Guattari’s expense, but Deleuze always insisted on the centrality of his friend’s contribution.

      This is why I say D&G, rather than Deleuzian

    1. everything is in the middle and nowhere simultaneously

      A poem in the making here ....

    2. Content is a shifty word. It can mean different things to different people."

      Yep. And that's what has made these discussions so interesting ....

    3. content can be the human element that enables students to see themselves in their learning and to imagine their own possibilities

      I really like this point ....

    4. the specific content you use is less important than whether it can be useful

      Good point here, about the ideal of porous lines between disciplines (or that is how I interpret this). Learning in isolation has limited value. Making connections across content is "sticky learning."

    5. content is political.

      It comes with baggage and perspective and power ... and noticing all of those things is part of our own learning experience in the world.

    6. "The holes are vital to the whole. "

      Sarah's comment there at Wendy's blog has lingered for days with me .... Something about the gaps in between as the space where the learning really happens, and is hard to assess.

    7. We've been filling this space with content, but how it connects and how it all moves us through our learning paths and root systems, is not content but the result of the content and the curriculum moving in orchestra

      Here is that line between what something is (or might be) and how it impacts us (and whom we might become). Plus, using the orchestra metaphor really works for me, personally.

    8. for me the content emerges in the conversation itself

      Interesting, and brings to mind the power of writing and of talking through issues for understanding ...

    9. Content is how we conjure and trigger our stories, in ourselves, and each other.

      I love this statement, as it creates a powerful means of agency over content -- we make, and remix, the stories that make us who we are, and how we connect to others in the world.

    10. You have caused me to spend a good few hours thinking about all this... and it's probably done me and my students some good!

      I agree, and that is what sparks change and consideration -- a solid question along an interesting track ... and what is also interesting is how it make take time for it to sink in. Mulling it over ... that's part of the learning ...

    11. the transfer of knowledge from one to another

      Made easier by social spaces? Maybe.

    12. find those conversations and resources that keep me engaged

      and what matters here is that we have a choice ... we can leave, we can return, we can skip, we can jump .. but many students do not have that possibility in their classrooms (meaning: my classroom).

    1. Rhizoanalysis, or rhizomatic cartography, has few precedents in literacy studies (see, however, Alvermann, 2000; Hagood, 2004; Kamberelis, 2004).

      How would I map the makes in #walkmyworld?

    2. have settled on a multicolumn format that includes image–sketches based upon digital video frames (see Appendix).

      Need an agreed upon way to look at the data representation.

    3. This article has emerged from an extended amount of individual and group reviews of different data sets with a focus upon understanding embodied literacy activity in students’ classroom performances

      I can then see this as being a tool for distributed research analysis. Will work on a plan.



    1. like this sketch

      I like the graph. I have to follow the roots of this unlearning literature. Feeling a legacy of Piaget in this sense of "crisis" or "discomfort" that is required for deep learning.

      I know I throw things when writing, yet there is also a sense of elation and drive.

      I find the or strange. I wonder if It should be and. Many students put in time without effort and get no where.

      I also think you can reach understanding instantaneously (though I think Sam refers to more designed learning than natural learning). I think about Kristeva and the abject. It isn't so much unlearning but a reversion.

      My dabbling in this makes me wonder if we would need tools in the chart or the activity...wait we would be stuck with Engstrom's triangles again.

    2. know more at precisely the same moment that you understand less.

      Or is this a recognition that you have so much more to learn? Is understanding from this framework nothing more than the motivation from greater knowledge?

    3. while not yet being able to meaningfully connect it to things you already know.

      This puts deep learning in the hands of the individual I am beginning to wonder if understanding is something that belongs to the collective. It is too subjective in the individual.

    4. The inability to connect a new piece of information with the world as we already know it--this is a classic problem of the unlearning that is required for deeper learning

      It could be just not encountering enough variations across multiple case studies.

      I also see many parallels to the idea of what we are calling synthesis here.

    5. knowledge while losing understanding

      I agree with this statement but I do not by into the science of unlearning. You are not "unlearning" when your perceptions shift. It is a movement or trajectory.

      I need to explore this more but the field of research in misconceptions is much stronger in the hard sciences. I am not too comfortable with it, but ill-defined and well-defined domains do behave differently. Oops I just anthropomorphized knowledge. Mistake?

      To me the idea that of starting with the learner is wrong is wrong. Deeper learning does not have to begin from here.

  7. Apr 2015
    1. “sub- jects” and their “positions” and not offering a rich enough account of the spaces performed by individ- uals, their bodies, their material practices, and the discourses on which they draw (Gregson & Rose, 2000; Thrift & Dewsbury, 2000).

      What does it mean when these spaces become networked? Are we disembodied or new embodied? I know I pace and pull on my hair when I learn in networked spaces.

    2. Butler (1990, 1993) disrupted dominant no- tions of gender and sexuality by arguing for a nonessentialist perspective on the construction of identity. Identity is something that is acted, repeat- edly, with the body and other forms of discourse, rather than something that “is.”

      Need to track down Butler as Leander's work has been so influential in the way identiy is reterritorialized, territorialized, and deterritorialized in literacy research.

    3. that are more or less destabilizing or stabilizing. Deleuze and Guattari described the four aspects of the more abstract assemblage, including content, ex- pression, (re)territorialization , and deterritorializa- tion, as an abstract “machine” with two axes, which we have represented in our rhizomatic interpretation (Figure 2).

      If there is greater deterritorlization in the world should the map not be placed on two axes? should they be unbalanced?

    4. stability) is secondary to that of deterritorialization. In their view the overriding ten- dency of the world is toward deterritorialization (Patton, 2000).

      So progress is always deterritorilzation but at the same time the Web is leading to greater homogenization. We have machinations of stability and distability pushing on the Web. Here I think the machinations of assesmblages do take deliberate effort.

    5. The notion of deterritorialization

      If you remove the territory of both language and content you have to say then they exist on the same plane as if they transverse the same space.

    6. related to the thought of the machine or as- semblage; a machine has no “home or ground,” no organizing center or subjectivity other than what it does.

      Content is defined as the machinations of assemblages so this work around machines having no function to do what they do is interesting.

    7. he expressions or expresseds are inserted into or intervene in contents, not to represent them but to anticipate them or move them back, slow them down or speed them up, sepa- rate or combine them, delimit them in a different way

      NVM D+G do get at the idea of movement being multidirectional.

    8. described the re- lation of language and bodies (e.g., human bodies, bodies of knowledge) as one of force and interven- tion: “it is a speech act” (p. 86). Language acts to move, combine, and accelerate bodies, just as the ele- ments of language itself are in motion:

      I really like this idea that language moves bodies. Gets movement, trajectories and agency built in. Though I could see language being used to decelerate bodies. Agency given and taken with language

    9. anguage has been understood as somehow “serving” content by representing it, point- ing toward it, or corresponding with it.

      I really like this definition of language. Defines agency, but I think language can be used to decelerate bodies as well. Give and take agency.

    10. Since reality is constructed language does not represent reality but it co-constructed with it. There is nothing to be represented so therefore language can not be separated from stuff.

    11. Second, language has been (ill) conceived as entirely separate from content, from the “machinic assem- blage of bodies, of actions and passions, an intermin- gling of bodies reacting to one another” (Deleuze &

      D+G definition of content.

    12. For example, in literacy studies, we might ask how “reading,” as an assemblage, may have been organized in an entirely different way, with different configurations of social bodies, human bodies, and textual materials

      This assumes humans are not organized to maximize and seek out different affordances and tools. Maybe the assemblage that emerges is the most logical.

      I refer then of course to verbocentric definitions of reading as Leander & Rowe put reading in quotes. I do think you can read any encoded text. I draw a line there between universal sign systems and what we read in nature versus texts encoded through human activity.

    13. ndless circuits; these connections among bodies draw off pleasure. Social machines or assemblages organize “partial” investments (e.g., the infant’s pleasure at the mother’s breast) into larger assem- blages—organized institutions such as “motherhood” or “the family” (Colebrook, 2002, p. 82).

      Seeing connections to Blake here. This idea that everything is born of desire. I contrast this though with Kristeva's focus on the abject or aversion. As if meaning is antithetical to desire. Is one a more feminist interpretation of intertextuality where one class finds aversion in the desire of others? Where pain is a byproduct of someone else's desires?

    14. Deleuze and Guattari (1987) are empirically committed to considering how the bits of social life are connected and thus form assemblages.

      This would mean we should be examining for assemblages of our content in our analysis. So we could look for assemblages of identities, textual knowledge and uses etc.

    15. Lines of flight (also called “lines of deterritorialization”) are leaks, escapes, or departures from the territories drawn by dominant systems of signification.

      Key definition. There is the idea that connections and ways of being more important than the identification.

    16. Every rhizome contains (oversignifying) lines of segmentari- ty, according to which it is stratified, territorialized, organized, and signified. Lines of segmentarity (also called “customary” or “molar” lines, Deleuze & Guattari, p. 203), produce stasis, rules of organiza- tion, and center–periphery relations (Kamberelis, 2004).

      This is what the "in-crowd" feeling that some of the "introverts" to which I will now mislabel as "hesitant to enter" creates.

      By rushing into the complexity we are stratifying the chaos in ways that organize the learning space.

    17. onnection and heterogeneity (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987), which, in the case of literacy performances, offer us a means of thinking about the nature of movement and alignment within the flow of bodies, texts, ta

      Anyone using this article as a guide for rhizoanalysis, which you should never do (make up your own), should substitute their own work here and think about each of these four terms.

    18. n ap- proach to the active potentials of performances to create something new and unpredictable.

      Here I struggle as well. Things are predictable. That is a basic function of humanity. We can look at patterns of past histories and pick from predictable futures.

    19. different expres- sions of relations shaped by lines of desire, multiplic- ity, and creation

      Identity is abound here.

    20. the unexpected—the surpris- es produced in multimodal and multispatial relation- ships.

      The unexpected takes a skill level though to be truly unexpected. If you look at enough pieces long enough a pattern does emerge.

    21. spective on the immanence of social life, the world of objects, persons, and language are on the same plane—all are signs that interact and form new rela- tions.

      Key definition. I can get behind this intertextually but in terms Immanence as if reality were a projection with ever shifting centers...above the pay grade.

    22. uperimposition of points of perspectives, a tangle of points of view, a coexistence of moments which essentially distort representation.

      This does get at what I have loosely been calling socially complex texts.

    23. world of differ- ence....

      Variants are important in defining reality. So are patterns. Equally so.

    24. he associates nonrepresentation, including rhizomatic relations, with difference and becoming

      This is the key. I always struggle with the post modern idea of nonrepresentation. You end up unwishing yourself into being. Like the teenage subcultures a new conformity is born,

      but thinking of texts as becoming.. There is something to that.

    25. performance has no organizing center, frame, single meaning, or static pivot, but rather evolves and splin- ters in multiple directions

      Tis just means I am thinking about my unit of analysis wrong. Stop thinking about it as separate events attached to one identity. Look at the performance of the Learning Event in its entirety.

    26. Rhizoanalysis transforms our focus on the interaction as a stable “text” to be “read” and in- terprets it as a constantly moving configuration that is ripe with potential for divergent movements.

      I start to take slight issue with many post-modern theorists. Here. I agree with Kress on the issue that while nth interpretations of readers exist authors use the affordances of text to constrain these possibilities.

    27. What effects (and affective intensities ) are being produced through the relations of these images

      I see how this can play out in the analysis of performance. Wonder if performance can be followed a map created from the #walkmyworld data we have.

    28. hizoanalysis sees everyday life as “chiefly concerned with the on-going creation of effects”

      What does this mean in terms of texts? Do we analyze them solely in terms of the purpose? Can they be analyzed once separated from the act of creation?

    29. This mode of thought may be described as moving from identifying what is present or contained within an interaction to analyzing the interaction as a process of producing difference .

      identifying what is present means counting. Does the latter involve counting?

    30. We read Deleuze and Guattari (1987) as a cri- tique of representational logic and related approaches that dominate literacy studies.

      The concept of research and though being non-representational begs the question, "What's the point?"

    31. We draw on the work of Deleuze and Guattari (1987) as a means of mapping or “animating” (Slack, 2003; Stivale, 1998) our data.

      I am seeing some connections to what what [Laura de Reynal] (https://twitter.com/lau_nk) and Michele Thorne are doing with the #webjourney. They invented a really cool methodology. I call it reflective network design.

    32. Deleuze names four cri- teria of representation: identity, resemblance, analo- gy, and opposition

      Critiques of representations. This is essential in understanding rhizoanalysis.

    33. From within this position, we recognize the contradictions inherent to our present project because we use verbal and visual representations, and reductive ones at that, to argue for the inadequacy of representa- tion itself.

      Is this the truth with any retelling regardless of mode?

    34. esearch representa- tions only partially and inadequately capture the vi- brant life and dynamism of performances.

      This is bound to happen to matter the methodology. We are naming things by exploring variants in phenomena.

    35. rich means of understanding social inter- action as emergent, dynamic, and dialogic (Bakhtin, 1981; Goffman, 1981; Hanks, 1992; Scollon & Scollon),

      Read these. Have read some. Track down the rest.

    36. A second key interpretive problem we have been concerned with involves different prac- tices of identity.

      Identity as being central to meaning making and literacy practices. Yet these are mandated practices what does that mean?

    37. stance, in the segment above, Terrayel and his part- ners have used linguistic text but also cartoon-like images to represent their interpretations of The Jungle (e.g., feet and a finger in a jar). Terrayel and the oth- ers point to these

      Leander is still exploring embodied meaning. he and his team have a study group at the Literacy Research Association.

    38. A conventional reading of the perfor- mance might analyze how meanings are contained, in- dexed, and related by different bits of the interaction

      Discourse analysis?



    1. Gosh. Spending more of my time stopping and actively experiencing sunrises and sunsets might just be considered a subversive act. A complicated shorthand for how to live.

      Truth. Art. Simple words. Complex Meaning.

    1. Concepts A Critical Approach

      Going to move on to this next.



    1. pure philosophy, and not criticism, since he sought to create the concepts that correspond to the artistic practices of painters, filmmakers, and writers. In 1968, he met Félix Guattari, a political activist and radical psychoanalyst, with whom he wrote several works, among them the two-volume Capitalism and Schizophrenia, comprised of Anti-Oedipus (1972) and

      I find it hard to know when D is explaining Leibniz and when he is elaborating on him

    2. Leibniz

      The Fold (Le Pli) is a thought provoking read. Monads unfold in Baroque harmony http://iris.nyit.edu/~rcody/Thesis/Readings/Deleuze%20-%20The%20Fold.pdf

    3. metaphysics adequate to contemporary mathematics and science

      String theory? Quantum theory? Again, I read this through a Leibnizian lens

    4. Deleuze conceived of philosophy as the production of concepts

      He says this in his lectures on Leibniz, I think

    1. Badiou declared Deleuze an “enemy of the people” and penned several anti-Deleuze articles. Under the psuedonym “Georges Peyol”, Badiou penned “The Fascism of the Potato,” because if I know anything about resisting fascism, it usually involves declaring enemies of the people and creating a cult of personality around yourself.

      This is hilarious

    1. Deleuze was known to give compelling lectures that were seemingly improvised. But they weren’t. Deleuze would spend the majority of his time preparing for his lectures. When he would show up to class with his meticulously prepared notes, he wouldn’t even look at them because he already knew them by heart. All the while, he “chain smoked straight through class.”

      It is interesting that rhizomatic learning does not privilege the 'teacher' yet Deleuze seems to be very much a 'star performer' or 'sage on the stage'

    2. All the leftists in Paris came with completely bogus projects. Felix supported them blindly. We bought a camera for one person, a motorcycle for another…we gave money to someone who came to us saying, ‘I need five thousand francs for an abortion tomorrow.’ ‘Send the money back to us when you can, ok, here you go.’ And they never came back.

      This seems highly unethical and perhaps egocentric

    3. love was capitalistic.

      What on earth does this mean?

    1. The two of us wrote Anti-Oedipus together. Since each of us was several, there was already quite a crowd. Here we have made use of everything that

      I have this quote on my wall to remind me that I am the sum of everything I have ever read or heard.

    2. History is always written from the sedentary point of view and in the name of a unitary State apparatus, at least a possible one, even when the topic is nomads. What is lacking is a Nomadology, the opposite of a history.

      the opposite of history! thinking of Rosi Braidotti...

    3. Every stratum is a judgment of God; not only do plants and animals, orchids and wasps, sing or express them selves, but so do rocks and even riv- ers, every stratified thing on earth. The first articulation concerns content, the second expression. The distinction between the two articulations is not between forms and substances but between content and expression, expression having just as much substance as content and content just as much form as expression. The double articulation sometimes coincides with the molecular and the molar, a nd sometimes not; this is because con- tent and expression are sometimes divided along those lines and some- times along different lines. There is never correspondence or conformity

      content -> expression... fascinating passage

    4. Have we not, however, reverted to a simple dualism by contrasting maps to tracings, as good and bad sides? Is it not of the essence of the map to be traceable? Is it not of the essence of the rhizome to intersect roots and sometimes merge with them? Does not a map contain phenomena of redundancy that are already like traci ngs of its own? Does not a multipli- city have strata upon which unifications and totalizations, massifications, mimetic mechanisms, signifying power takeovers, and subjective attribu- tions take root? Do not even lines of flight, due to their eventual diver- gence, reproduce the very formations their function it was to dismantle or outflank? But the opposite is also true. It is a question of method: the trac- ing should always be put back on the map.

      is the act of tracing as reproducing of lines of flight and then returning the tracing to the map an act of intentional collaborative emancipation?

    5. We are no more familiar with scientif-icity than we are with ideology; all we know are assemblages.

      It's interesting given the proposed applicability of their theorising to everything from urban planning to popular music and Moby Dick and.... education. This is also interesting in relation to the Jackson, Alecia Y. and Mazzei, Lisa A. (2013) “Plugging One Text Into Another: Thinking With Theory in Qualitative Research” Qualitative Inquiry, 19(4) 261–271 and the passage there about assemblage

    6. No signifiance, no subjectification: writing to the «th power (all individuated e nunciation remains trapped within the dominant significations, all signifying de sire is associated with dominated subjects). An assemblage, in its mult iplicity, necessarily acts on semiotic flows, I NTRODUCTION: RHIZOME □ 23 material flows, and social flows si multaneously (independently of any recapitulation that may be made of it in a scientific or theoretical corpus). There is no longer a tripartite division between a field of reality (the world) and a field of representation (the book ) and a field of subjectivity (the author). Rather, an assemblage estab lishes connections between certain multiplicities drawn from each of these orders

      how does assemblage fit into the concept of nomadology i wonder?

    7. Even though there is a real dis tinction between them, content and expression are relative te rms ("first" and "second" articulation should also be understood in an entirely relative fashion). Even though it is capable of invariance, expression is just as much a variable as content. Content and expression are two variables of a functi on of stratification. They not only

      wow, fascinating...

    8. A rhizome has no beginning or end; it is always in the middle, between things, interbeing, intermezzo.

      This is my favourite D&G quote at the moment

    1. During the 1950s, Guattari was a strict Lacanian. Even his friends would call him “Lacan” as a joke. In 1964, Lacan chose Guattari as a lieutenant at the newly created Freudian School of Paris. Guattari was sure that Lacan anoint him as a “preferred partner”

      Psychoanalysis, I assume. Anyone?

    2. Grossly irressponsible? Maybe, but it kind of worked in treating the patient.

      Kind of worked? Seems kind of unethical to me!

    3. The work was mostly coordinated through letters the two exchanged. Guattari would send notes and scribbles to Deleuze, who would compile the thoughts into what finally became “Anti-Oedipus.”

      Imagine how much easier they would have found it now, with Google docs!

    1. (“And the meek shall inherit the earth.”)

      Nietzsche calls this "master-slave morality. Those in charge (the Church, originally) have sold us this idea of meekness in order to keep us as obedient cattle.

    2. paraphrases their points using their own vocabularies. At the same time, Deleuze never provides an interpretation of the thinkers he is discussing; he is uninterested in hermeneutics, uninterested in teasing out ambiguities and contradictions, uninterested in deconstructing prior thinkers or in determining ways in which they might be entrenched in metaphysics. All this is in accord with Deleuze’s own philosophy: his focus is on invention, on the New, on the

      I think that D would love all of the crazy collaboration and remixing we are doing.

    3. “creation of concepts.”

      In his lectures (I think) D defines the philosopher as "a creator of concepts". Blackburn (not a Deleuzian) defines the philosopher as a "conceptual engineer".

    4. do not bother trying to comprehend or understand the text.

      I cannot emphasis this enough. Trust your mind to make the connections it needs in order to become

    5. Do not be duped into thinking that you can win a battle against the powers that be – they are the powers that be because they took action, because they created something.

      I am feeling as if this is resonating in our education circles about standardized testing and the testing industry, and who is making policy that shape the lives of our students and the shape of our classrooms. Push back. Create change.

    6. Writing has nothing to do with signifying. It has to do with surveying, mapping, even realms that are yet to come. (A Thousand Plateaus 4-5)

      I admit -- this appeals to me, particularly shifting the idea of inquiry into the unknown map and the ability to understand we don't always know what is coming ahead of us. Be prepared for the unsteady ground afoot. Be open to the territory just over the horizon.

    7. A Deleuzian aesthetic is predicated, at least in part, on change, movement, transformation, repositioning, shifting, flowing, mutating, multiplying, generating, and, of course, magic.

      Action words ... what's it meant by magic?

    8. Rhizome rather than root, molecular rather than molar, dynamic rather than static

      Here we go ... the rhizome takes root

    9. Action will always prevail. Reaction will always fail.

      Yet, we begin with reaction, right? If it is strong enough, we move into action. I don't see the dichotomy here.

  8. Feb 2015
    1. reflect

      On this side, she is beautiful, alive, curious, eyes full of the moon. She is the moonless night. On that side, she is little more than a reflection. He sees that now. He sees that he does not know what he created in the margins of the page. She will be lost to him. She will not be lost to herself, though. Somewhere, someone will find her, or she will find them, and it will be as if she never disappeared into the story.

    2. illustrating complexity

      Time went. Time passed. Time went. She disappeared. It was not what she wanted. Her reader forgot about her. Her writer no longer know what to do with her. She went. She passed. She disappeared.

    3. I am attempting to illustrate a passage of time

      She pulled out her pen. Closed her eyes. Drew the passage of time as an ellipse, folding in on itself. Pinned her words to the outer edge. Jotted Simon to the inner sphere. Reached into the drawing and pulled it out, holding it all gently in her hand. Watched as her skin got old, wrinkled, and then young, smooth. Heard his voice. Tossed him time and hoped that he knew how to catch it, too.

    4. You will not be reading what I wrote

      And yet, faint echoes remained. She thought she saw Simon in here, in these words. She knew his voice, even when his voice was merely ghosts of meaning, made flat by the lack of links. What if she could find a space on the side of the page, hide amidst the annotations. What would she see when others came calling? Perhaps the moonless night of her birth would come in handy after all. She molded her will into the shadows and waited ...

    5. limits of static text

      This morning, she pushed her fingers up against the edge and felt the limits of static text. It felt like popcorn, all soft and edgy at the same time, and it crumbled in her fingers. She watched the static text drop to the floor and imagined the janitor in the morning, cleaning up the debris. What intrigued her now, though, was what remained after the static text disintegrated ...

    6. You are clearly fictional.

      She was born in the last moonless night of October, just before the change of seasons. To think of it now, he wondered if that had anything to with whom she would later become ... the reader wandering through Simon's blog. The only blog she read. The only words she could find that would bring some lights to her nights. Yes, she was fictional. But aren't we all? That was what he often wondered, as he wrote about her as if she never existed. Perhaps, she didn't.

  9. Jan 2015
    1. Sian Bayne's article entitled Smoothness and Striation in Digital Learning Spaces

      Link, brother? Where's the link?

    2. Nomad space is ‘smooth’, or open-ended. One can rise up at any point and move to any other.

      Hmmm ... beyond the cultural reference now to the Avatar television show/comic (not the James Camerson blue lagoon aliens), I like this way of describing the wandering thinker ...

    3. Look

      I will. I will look. I will look beyond. I will like for us beyond ..

    4. I am a mapping story.

      We seem to often return to the metaphor of maps, don't we? Perhaps it is the landscape of the unknown, of adventure awaiting. We don't imagine that the map might be the working of some madman's mind and only a faint echo of the real world. (more twists and knots)

    5. My point here, is that I am not here without you.

      And if you never hit "publish"? Then what, I wonder. Do I still reside in your mind as the imagined reader? Or do we know enough that I become halfway between imagined and known, even if I am not the reader there? But I am the reader here. (twisting us into knots, as I am apt to do)

    6. I am not entirely sure.

      And, Simon, you're not afraid to write anyway, which is why I love to see your words spin on my page from a half a world away. You always take me to some unknown space. Unknown, but not unwelcome.