Search This Blog

Monday, 29 December 2008

‘The Lady’s Not for Turning…’

Photo credit: @ http://forthardknox.com/

‘The Lady’s Not for Turning’ was something Margaret Thatcher famously said referring to her decision not to enter the ERM, the European Exchange Rate Mechanism which was seen as a vital fence to climbed over if the UK was to ever seriously show its intention to become a full member of Europe.

‘To those waiting with bated breath for that favourite media catchphrase, the "U" turn, I have only one thing to say. "You turn if you want to. The lady's not for turning." I say that not only to you but to our friends overseas and also to those who are not our friends.’

Here in Thailand, Thaksin’s wife, Potjdam, has been in the news lately for all the wrong reasons because she decided that a U-turn was in fact just what she needed. Having got divorced from her husband of over 20 years, she entered Thailand (although a convicted felon from a corruption scandal). To be fair though, the divorce is widely seen as an attempt to distance herself legally from her husband in order to get access to his frozen funds. So why did she come?

This is the simple part. She came here to try to influence the election of a new government in Thailand after the previous one led by Thaksin’s brother-in-law, Somchai Wongsawat, was forced to step down through a corruption case. Just as in the old days when Thaksin himself would be seen on the TV walking round small Thai villages handing out fresh, crisp 1,000 baht notes (about 20 GBP), Potjdam’s intention was to hand out sums, much larger of course, to secure politicians’ support for her husband and ensuring that his political party would be able to stay in power. Of course we now know that this didn’t happen.

This securing of political support was important though because only then he would he have the chance to get another bite at the 2 billion dollars currently tied up in Thai banks: the product of the illegal sale of his company, Shin Corporation, to Temasek Holdings, the state owned communications company of Singapore. With his boys in power, he could easily have appointed a few favourable judges to overrule the original decision and let him have his money back. As it is, he now only has till January 4th, four days from now, to present new claims to the money and if he fails, it’s lost forever in the bottomless coffers that is the Thai state treasury.

Despite the lady’s best efforts, Thaksin looks in a desperate situation, which is why I predict a wave of bombs and general disruption in the next few days and weeks. Don’t forget the bombs that went off last New Year here in Thailand and don’t be surprised to see more.

With his closest political ally, Newin Chidchob, and all the members of his faction, having all but abandoned their relationship with Thaksin, the deadline for presenting documents to the courts to get back the 2 billion US dollars a heartbeat away, his red shirt supporters exploding (or should that be ‘imploding’) like a wet firecracker, his diplomatic passport having been removed (and a lot of talk about taking away his regular Thai one too as he’s a convicted felon now), you can see that he’s something not unlike a cornered animal (I refrained from using the word ‘rat’) though some would say that’s an appropriate symbol for the man!


Can his lady save him? Can she do a ‘mission impossible’ and somehow rescue the situation? Or should she turn and hightail it out of town? Many people believe she should, and some say that's exactly what she should do - turn and run for it like a Betty Boob character - when the trappings of wealth are gone there's not much to stay for other than to get caught up in her husband's ignominious fall from grace!

Thaksin's Day of Reckoning is getting ever closer and many people, not just Thais but also the large ex-pat community believe he is getting payback for the wrongdoings during his tenure as prime-minister. The Thais have a saying that roughly translates as 'you get what you deserve' - Som num na! Perhaps Potjdam should run and hightail it before that happens. Or perhaps like Lady Thatcher, she'll say the same thing - 'The lady's not for turning'. We'll just have to wait and see.

Thursday, 25 December 2008

Handshakes ain't what they used to be...


The news about hygiene is out now and the results are disturbing. According to an article on the BBC News site - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7667499.stm scientists from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine swabbed 409 people at bus and train stations in five major cities in England and Wales. According to the research, more than one in four commuters has bacteria from faeces on their hands, an investigation suggests. The study was part of the world's first Global Hand-washing Day, dedicated to raising awareness about the importance hand hygiene plays in public health.

'We were flabbergasted by the finding that so many people had faecal bugs on their hands' said Dr Val Curtis, director of the Hygiene Centre at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

The further north the researchers went, the more often they found commuters with faecal bacteria on their hands - men in Newcastle were the worst offenders.

'In Newcastle and Liverpool, men were more likely than women to show contamination - 53% of men compared with 30% of women in Newcastle and 36% of men compared with 31% of women in Liverpool.' I'm deinitely going to remember that next time I'm in either of those places.

Newcastle - men 53%, women 30%
Liverpool - men 36%, women 31%
Birmingham - men 21%, women 26%
Cardiff - men 15%, women 29%
Euston (London) - men 6%, women 21%

Ugh...imagine when you are shaking hands with people which after all is a perfectly normal, sociable thing to do and they have the remnants from last night's vindaloo (via their intestines!) all over their hands!! It just doesn't bear thinking about!


However, the following data suggests that the urban myth about manual workers and laborers being dirty may not be as accurate as first thought.

'Manual workers had cleaner hands than other professionals, students, retired people or the unemployed.'

Ok...I'm off...where's the soap!

Monday, 22 December 2008

The Lord of War or The Word of Law?


Image credit: © blog.synthesis.net.

Sometimes, just sometimes, no matter what you do, the law catches up with you. I remember seeing that movie with Nicholas Cage about a Russian arms dealer called Yuri Orlov who travels the world selling arms and munitions to the highest bidder. This story is true in that it is based on the real exploits of one Russian arms dealer, Viktor Bout, dubbed the "Merchant of Death" who was arrested here in Thailand in March. Many believe he supplied arms to the Taliban militia, Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda terror network and former Liberian leader Charles Taylor to name just a few of the madmen of the world to make it onto his Christmas card list.

Image credit: © bangkokpost.com/2009

Viktor Bout now says: 'I was framed'. This is like the usual though funny rebuttal of the typical petty criminals so often found in British drama of the 1980s. I can just about still here in my head Del Boy uttering the same sentiments albeit in his own inimitable way - 'It's a stitch up in'it? I was framed weren't I. The fuzz were waiting for me to leave Sudan like...and that geezer wiv the turban. How was I to know he was one of 'em like terrorist geezers! I just fought he was, you know, like Paki Ali, the market trader on Camden High Street! Nuffin' to do wiv me mate! I ask ya!'

According to the imprisoned fugitive, the Americans set him up because they don't want better relations between Thailand and Russia. As he says himself, 'They have framed me because the US does not want relations between Thailand and Russia to develop more'.

It's hard to feel a patina of grief for a man who, if the film version of his exploits is to be believed, lived the 'life of Reilly' while the carnage of war that he helped supply raged on in the background of his luxury lifestyle. It is unquestionably true that if you are going to get into the arms business, you'd better have made a Mephistophelean pact with your maker that, when it's all over, you'll go willingly to shake the hand of the Grim Reaper because for sure that's where you'll be heading when the music stops and there are no more chairs to sit down on.

Sooner or later the The Lord of War was bound to be caught out by The Word of Law, niet?

Sunday, 14 December 2008

Bush's New Shoes (size 10)


According to the BBC reporter, Humphrey Hawksley, 'It was billed as the start of a farewell visit to help define Bush's legacy to Iraq, but turned out to be full of surprises.' That's the understatement of the year! It was great to watch the look on Bush's face when he saw the Iraqi reporter take off his shoes and throw them at him in a news conference yesterday. As they say on Anderson Cooper's show 'What were they thinking?'

Click on here for a link to the story - http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/14/bush.iraq/index.html

For me though, it was the beginning of my day (early morning news) and probably the highlight of my day, too! As in Thailand where I now reside, taking off your shoes and throwing them at someone is considered the height of insult as the feet in Buddhist as well as Islamic cultural traditions are considered, not just the lowest part of body, which of course they are, but also closest to the earth and the furthest away from Buddha or Allah. Thus, Bush was treated with contempt by the reporter of the highest possible magnitude short of physically attacking him. A similar event was to happen a few days later in Thailand as if proof of the Thai practice of using shoes to express an opinion in a negative way - At a rally of About 55,000 people, 'An old woman was cheered as she struck the poster [of the new Thai primeminister] with one of her shoes - one of the rudest gestures a Thai can make'.

Bush's shoe thrower said 'This is a farewell gift from the Iraqi people you dog!' Then with the second shoe, 'This is for all the widows and orphans of those killed in Iraq.'

How did Bush respond? In a post shoe-throwing interview, he declares that it was funny, 'I found it amusing!' Yes, you may have Mr. Bush, but in your very last visit to Baghdad, when you wanted to go out in a blaze of glory like one of them cowboys you so admire, in them there Westerns, you wanted to stroll into Baghdad town on a black stallion, say how great things have been over the last 8 years of occupation in Iraq, and how you made that all happen, then ride out again without incident, you have been clearly told what the Iraqi people think of you. When a man of professional standing feels compelled to do something that is so out of character, he must be pretty upset to say the least; A man who was tortured and beaten during those eight years

In the same interview, Bush says (and for me this really is 'amusing' because of it's entertainment value), 'I don't know what his beef is!' Can you believe he had the gall to say that? As if every Iraqi shares his view of the situation Iraqis now find themselves in? At least with Saddam Hussein, the power was centralised and so people could more or less keep to themselves and avoid trouble on their own doorstep. Since Bush arrived most Iraqis are afraid to go outside for fear of suicide attacks or straying into gunfights with coalition forces. And he doesn't know what the reporter's beef is? Pullleeeeease!

On the same day, Bush gave a speech to the troops stationed in Baghdad. 'Thanks to you, Iraqi is now dramatically freer, dramatically safer, dramatically better'. This continual reference to drama is interesting for that's what many people believe - war is theatre, where drama continually unfolds on TV screens and newsreels throughout the world. How telling it is then later, when the Iraqi man interviewed on the street declares, 'It's true that Bush delivered us from Saddam Hussein, but now we are living in a tragedy.'

Monday, 8 December 2008

Culturally insensitive or crass exploitation of the world's indigenous people?

Has anyone seen this ad for burgers? The one about 'Whopper Virgins'? They invite indigenous people from various places to taste the two rival burgers - http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/organgrinder/2008/dec/04/advertising-food

'What happens when you take remote villagers from Chiang Mai in Thailand who don't even know what a burger is because they don't even have a a word for it in their language and ask them to compare the Whopper versus the Big Mac in the world's purest taste test?'

Others are the Inuit from Greenland, and another one is equally pathetic and involves Transylvania farmers who are all lumped together and called, quite rudely, 'Whopper Virgins'.

In an age when we have the highest rates of literacy ever in the world and more and more people are being educated than ever before through technology, which can reach even the remotest of places, shouldn't we expect a little more cultural awareness from the educated populace of the world?

What else can you expect from the American companies who care for nothing unless it resembles the greenback? I guess it's all part of what some have called the 'Cocacolaisation of the world' - the idea that individual cultures are being eroded and being replacd by one set of huge conglomerates which express American capitalist values and nothing more.

Wednesday, 3 December 2008

Reflective Journal Entry: Nine

I am starting to think a lot now about using a DVD as a gateway ‘into’ the world that my thesis will represent. It will be like a house like that lady at the europeana.com portal mentioned… as Viviane Reding, the European Information Minister responsible for its launch, said - '...it's like going into a culture like you go into a house - you enter the door, then go through the corridor and then you have a choice between different rooms with a different, organised way of understanding what you are looking for.' It was originally a French idea, spearheaded by them as an antidote to American dominance culturally, which is spread by Yahoo (when it's working!) and especially Google with its project to put millions of books online after digitising them. I guess that's why they called it europeana. It had to be shut down the same day because of 10 millions hits in an hour! Should be re-opened soon according to the site...

‘We launched the Europeana.eu site on 20 November and huge use - 10 million hits an hour - meant it slowed to a crawl. We are doing our best to reopen Europeana.eu in a more robust version. Meanwhile, the site you're in now is the project development site, with a video to give you a taste of what's on the real Europeana site.’(http://dev.europeana.eu/)

Anyway, I am now thinking of finishing the written forms e.g. the exegesis and artefact, then inscribing them into a DVD along with an architecture that might resemble some idea, metaphor, or symbol of the research outcome? Something in the shape of a house would be too obvious and simple and wouldn’t ‘add value’ to the project like businessmen like to say on the Lion’s Den! Rather I need something connected to the idea of art or education or something new and novel in itself? Perhaps each click on the DVD could help them navigate their way around Guantanamo or Abu Graib prisons? This needs to be developed.

Reflective Journal Entry: Eight

‘By presenting these pathways or framings on a hybrid DVD-ROM I am ensuring that no single mode of experiencing the project is privileged. The computer monitor becomes a democratic site for the rendering of the material, and the user/reader is empowered to choose the order and manner in which s/he experiences the three pathways, including alternating between them midstream. This is a critical concern for me as it facilitates the imagining and experiencing of this practice-led research as being devoid of a logocentric host.’ (‘Streamgate PhD’ stuff)

Comment on this and think about ways that I can ensure that my project is not viewed in a special way above other parts e.g. the component of a good practise led PhD – ‘ensuring that no single mode of experiencing the project is privileged.’ I will try to present my artefact in a variety of different ways. Perhaps I can use video, audio, Powerpoint presentation slides, other slides, poems, indeed a plethora of eclectic resources, which will be democratically selected. In this way a new narrative can be created - one that is free of the old school academic constraints that have so dogged the universities of the world.

I can present my story about an outsider called Yudhi who (a) defies the typical interpretation of what a terrorist is (a fanatical brutal killer), and (b) re-defines the meta narrative of the world of the terrorist. The reader/hearer/seer will be able to follow the thesis I will present in their own way using the pictures, poetics, academic explanations, hyperlinks, hypertextuality in general, documentary style presentations, and Powerpoint slides. (Add – ‘Claims of originality and contribution to knowledge may be demonstrated through creative outcomes which may include artefacts such as images, music, designs, models, digital media or other outcomes such as performances and exhibitions’ below in Differences between Practice-Based and Practice-Led Research ) No one medium will be more privileged. It is in this way that we can see that, in Lucy Lyons words, ‘they are a legitimate way for artists to reclaim their work back from the historians, philosophers and critics by gaining an authoritative, academic voice through the validation of a doctorate.' ("Walls are not my friends: issues surrounding the dissemination of practice-led research within appropriate and relevant contexts" - Lucy Lyons) (taken from - AHRC Research Review Practice-Led Research in Art, Design and Architecture -)

It is this notion of reclaiming that embodies this kind of work for it is only through reclamation that we can begin to re-create new narrative forms using different media and establish for ourselves not only as legitimate ‘practitioning’ researchers, but pioneers in a new aspect of knowledge production and praxis.

Use this:

‘Abstract During the last decade, research in art and design in Finland has begun to explore new dimensions. Artists and designers have taken an active role in contextualising and interpreting the creative process in practice, as well as the products of this process, by looking at the process itself and the works produced through it. From this new point of view, the knowledge and the skills of a practising artist or designer form a central part of the research process, and this has produced a new way of doing research. In this new type of research project, part of the research is carried out as art or design practice. The central methodological question of this emerging field of research is: how can art or design practice interact with research in such a manner that they will together produce new knowledge, create a new point of view or form new, creative ways of doing research? In this article, the making and the products of making are seen as an essential part of research: they can be conceived both as answers to particular research questions and as artistic or designerly argumentation. As an object made by an artist–researcher, the artefact can also be seen as a method for collecting and preserving information and understanding. However, the artefacts seem unable to pass on their knowledge, which is relevant for the research context. Thus, the crucial task to be carried out is to give a voice to the artefact. This means interpreting the artefact. During the process of interpretation, furthermore, the artefact has to be placed into a suitable theoretical context. In this process, the final products (the artefacts) can be seen as revealing their stories, i.e. the knowledge they embody.’ (Maarit MäkeläEmail: makela.maarit@gmail.com)

This again suggests new modes of learning that have to be understood. Making the artefact ‘speak’ is like a ventriliquist trying to get a dummy to say ‘antidisestablishmentarianism’! But it has to be done.

And this:

‘Practice-based Research is an original investigation undertaken in order to gain new knowledge partly by means of practice and the outcomes of that practice. Claims of originality and contribution to knowledge may be demonstrated through creative outcomes, which may include artefacts such as images, music, designs, models, digital media or other outcomes such as performances and exhibitions Whilst the significance and context of the claims are described in words, a full understanding can only be obtained with direct reference to those outcomes. A practice-based PhD is distinguishable from a conventional PhD because creative outcomes from the research process may be included in the submission for examination and the claim for an original contribution to the field are held to be demonstrated through the original creative work.’ (http://www.creativityandcognition.com/content/view/124/131/)

In other words, the process is as important as the end product. Or, it’s better to travel than to arrive! And there’s not going to be a bias towards the written form as opposed to visual or aural. There is a democracy at work, which says all elements of the thesis are equal just like people in the eyes of the law of a country! So images, music, designs, models, digital media or other outcomes such as performances and exhibitions are all on a par with say, a table of graphs showing e.g. average rainfall in Southern Peru, or the cosine of Pi divided by the square root of 12 trillion to the power of 5, whilst spectacular academically, will not be considered more valuable or satisfactory to the academy as constituting ‘real’ ‘true’ or, ‘more valuable’ than a PhD about the composition of a typical pop song since 1972! More on this as I am leaning now tor\wards a digital PhD thesis where all of the above could figure somewhere in the intertextual milieu that I would like to create therein so that images, music, designs, models, digital media or other outcomes such as performances and exhibitions could shoulder to shoulder with a more academic interpretation of the artefact.

Reflective Journal Entry: Seven

Think about actors for my drama - in the great movie I saw recently, Ben Kingsley played the part of the professor, David Kepesh, who meets and falls in love with a beautiful young student played by Penelope Cruz. It got me thinking that Kingsley is the perfect actor to play the part of Yudhi's father, Halim. He has the right skin tone and colour. He has that Middle Eastern/Asian look. He could even be an arab given the right attire so his look is very flexible when it comes to the roles he plays on the screen.

So, my point in writing this down is not to say, like some egotistical idiot, that I'm going to get X Hollywood A-lister to play Y part, but that there is some value in picturing them as real people for it will allow me to write about them more sympathetically, and in a more real and natural way.

Who could I get to play the part of Yudhi? A good-looking Asian looking boy? That guy who was the lead in Hanif Kureshi’s ‘My Beautiful Launderette’? Must find someone and make a real effort to focus on their picture in my mind when I am writing scenes that involve him. I have to start to see this more in cinematographic way; a series of stills that move from their inert places on the page, to a place where the characters actually breathe unassisted by their author like Barthes’ notion of the author being dead.

I imagine the character of Hava like a blonde version of Minnie Driver although now she’s too old, but a younger girl with flaxen hair that as Updike says in Terrorist something that brims over at the top like beer ‘the cedar coloured patch of frizzy hair sticks out, in its moment of capture, above the elastic waistband like the head on an impatiently poured beer.’ (p.162) Ok, the allusion here is sexual and related to her pubic hair, but what I want is a metaphor, similar in the way it captures her ‘overflowingness’, her abundance of something that is both sensual, and full of the joi de vivre of life. She will be the perfect antidote to the life-denying, negaters of life that Achmed and his militants represent.

There would be no shortage of Bollywood actors that could play the ‘baddies’: Achmed, Feran, Imad, Hanif etc. But Malika would be different, someone with flair, an innate sense of self and fully confident albeit a spendthrift.

Reflective Journal entry: Six

My supervisor (Christine) has pointed out to me that I may be dodging the bullets a bit by not facing head on the problems of terrorists in society today. I responded by saying that it was never my intention to do that, but to focus on other aspects of terrorism e.g. some of the other causes and not the effects of terrorism e.g. economic hardship, repression, coercion, etc., etc. I am now wondering whether I was so wise to be so sure and so quick with my response.

It may be that others do not share my need to focus on the importance of the people who are forced to become terrorists instead of the effects that I mentioned. There are two reasons for this. First is that I think there are already a lot of writers writing about this subject e.g. the effects of terrorism in the world today aka John Updike. The second is that these people do not have a voice, an identity because of this e.g. that others make sure that all is done in absolute secrecy. They are almost never heard because they do their work without the knowledge of their families and wind up dead at the end of things. They only, at the most, give their reasons for those acts by recording them during videos, which we get to see in a news bulletin on CNN or the BBC. Beyond that we know nothing about their motivations for wanting to do it.

My character doesn’t have this luxury as he is never actually told of his status; rather, he is told to do individual acts of which he only half knows will lead to his own, personal involvement in the deed. And I have been looking at other theories about suicide which makes for interesting reading. More on that to come.

Reflective Journal entry: Five

I have a structure but am worried that it’s too traditional, too prescriptive, meaning that it will delimit or too narrowly define my project:

Example –

Chapter One – What is an Outsider?

(1) Some common definitions:

(1.1) The Outsider as X loner not fit to live among their peers - examples
(1.2) The Outsider as the bogeyman – fairytales (Africa – white man come to take you away)
(1.3) The Outsider as X banished/exiled e.g. Socrates – ‘What happens when a person refuses to accept the myth of the citizen, and chooses to act within the context of a different , more personal myth?’ (add more here – taken from ‘Essays from the Edge: Citizenship and the Outsider in Literature ...’)
(1.4) The Outsider as X radicalized – e.g. Dostoevsky has related how the individual is so frustrated with his own helplessness that he has become an outsider in a place where he shares his culture, religion and norms with the majority. Yet, the personal dissatisfaction, his spiritual inconsequence in his own mind creates a boundary between the self and the society isolating him from others." (taken from Papers on "Outsiders" and similar term paper topics http://www.academon.com/lib/paper/16512.html)
(1.5) The Outsider as X
(1.6) The Outsider as X

It made me realise that I needed a far more open ended starting point in which to introduce my research. I knew that if I rigidly began a story with too many predefined limits, I would soon be overwhelmed with problems related to narrowness of vision and a limited parochial overall vision of what was to come. At all costs I realized this now had to be avoided.

Reflective Journal Entry: Four

I decided this may be used somewhere in the exegesis part of the doctorate:

When I began this project, a number of issues were in my mind. The first was that I was unsure exactly what was meant by a ‘practise led’ PhD and how different it was from the traditional form of research based PhD. More importantly, I was troubled at what I saw as a crisis of legitimacy e.g. the way that this new kind of PhD was lacking in any real sense of validity e.g. coming from the traditional fellows of the academy who at the same time seemed to not accept it as a legitimate form of research and thus as really contributing anything substantive to the academy as a whole. (Add this maybe – As X says, ‘In the Australian context, the creative writing PhD is subject to ongoing political debate about research worth and cultural values for creative practice. National notions of research equivalence (the debate here often led by the sciences) intertwine with internal university problems in valuing creative projects as valid academic pursuit.’ Nigel Krauth) http://www.textjournal.com.au/april01/krauth.htm

And again:

‘We work in a discipline field that abhors conformity - and this fact relates to the continuing powerful significance of creative writing in the culture. Good creative writing continues to get noticed and have central cultural influence precisely because it doesn't give in to anything politically, socially, or theoretically institutionalised. Exciting and valuable creative writing tends to map out the unexamined, the undetermined, and the unfavoured in the culture. The process of shoe-horning creative endeavour into the academic research context is difficult enough without worrying about standardisation of assessment. I have been running a postgraduate writing program where I tell students to break literary and cultural rules and progress thereby, but then I need to get each student aside to explain that the PhD requires adherence to a swagload of academic conformities. I also have to impress upon my students that there are examiners out there who are unpredictable. 'They're worse than critics,' I say. 'They're worse than national literary award judges.' (The Creative Writing Doctorate in Australia: An Initial Survey) http://www.textjournal.com.au/april01/krauth.htm



I had concerns in other areas, too. How should I lay out the findings of my research? Should I write the artefact first and exegesis second? How would they blend together? Should the exegesis be a fully-fledged interpretation of my artefact, a novella length story about a young man forced to become a terrorist, or something else? Should it seek to guide my reader or should it be less directional, less prescriptive and more descriptive, more open-ended and, most critically, open to the reader to decide the meaning and value of the piece themselves?

I also wanted to know how I was going to present the information not having ever seen an actual completed ‘practise led’ thesis. Under normal conditions, I would have been looking at reading around the subject, perhaps 50 to 80 academic articles, as many primary sources as it took to get a feel for the research proposal: taking notes, paraphrasing, summarizing, contextualising, making links where thy were there, and drawing conclusions from what I had thus gleaned. In the ‘practise led’ project, I was starting from a completely different standpoint not really having a clear, identifiable end point in which to aim for, no clear thesis that, with a carefully thought out, pre-planned academic rigorous exercise I would be able to bring out or elucidate. Not surprisingly, for a while I struggled with this anomaly and was slowed down.

Fortunately, however, while I was pondering or researching these problems, I always had the artefact part to work on as it seemed to decide its own limits, its own parameters, its own scope given that it was not bogged down with pre-conceptions that an erstwhile PhD would have been so that comforted me and made realise that ironically the artefact was serving two functions: the first was that it reminded me that the exegesis ought to work along the same lines e.g. that it not be too concerned with traditional academic structure for example, that I didn’t need have say, a table of charts, or a 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 etc., etc. (find out the exact name here for this), a traditional Literature Review, a few pie charts, or other visual information, perhaps even an abstract if, and this is the important part, if it was primarily there to impress a committee member or reinforce outmoded research protocol.

It also served to remind me that whilst on the one hand, I was banging on about there not being too much obvious planning and obvious rigor and structure, nevertheless ipso facto it already had considerable structure and organisation of its own in the form of a 3-act story structure, characterization, plots, sub-plots, back story, action sequences etc., etc. In other words, what I was realizing was that, whatever way it was written or presented, irrespective of how it was received by my peers or the wider academy, there would be no escaping that there would be a methodology that would be at work and that is something that seems to me is often lost or simply forgotten.

Tuesday, 2 December 2008

Reflective Journal Entry: Three

I have been thinking how to formulate a decent Research Question but have so many competing ideas that I have been seemingly lost in a quagmire of doubt as to whether I can actually identify central, overarching one? I decided to try another tack and think about a possible log line for the artefact component. I reasoned that if I could write a decent log line, then that would help me to identify something resembling a dominant Research Question. Here's the one that I finally settled on after a few attempts. (They are a lot trickier to write than I had imagined!)

Posssible log-line:

What would you do if, one day, you were forced to help kill a family, or face the possibility that your own family would be harmed, or left, penniless? What would you do?


What would you do if, one day, you were faced with a decision that would change your life? If, through an awful twist of fate, you were forced to take part in an act, that would end up in the loss of human life, to help kill a family that was from another culture half way round the world, whom you’d never met, or face the possibility that your own family would be harmed, or left destitute, penniless on the streets of a city that they left years earlier for a better life, and that they now only half know or connect with? What would you do?

So my question remains - how can I find a central Research Question based on this idea?

Reflective Journal Entry: Two

Reflective Journal Entry: Two

I have been struck by these words which I have been reading this morning:

'Lee and Williams, in their compelling 1999 article ‘Forged in Fire’, make the point that the PhD process will almost certainly involve ‘distress’ – that is its nature. Most PhD candidates are forced at some point to confront the fact that they are undergoing a life-changing experience – termed by one supervisor as ‘permanent head damage’. Lee and Williams suggest that...Lee and Williams suggest that this ‘distress’ should be recognised, expected and understood as necessary and productive.
Common metaphors for candidature include becoming, baptism of fire, journey of discovery, process and metamorphosis. The process of PhD development should, presumably, be one of growth in intellectual confidence, independence and originality of thinking. It would be fair to expect it to result in empowerment and ultimate entry to an elite community. These attributes – that we presume are valued by all the participants in the process – by definition are not, and should not, be easy to achieve. Our experiences as a researcher in the field and as an experienced supervisor lead us to claim that the process may involve measures of intellectual conflict and uncertainty, doubt, indecisiveness and fear – but also the beginnings of a sophisticated understanding and the pleasure of finding the voice to speak what we have learned. Supervisors (and faculties) can and should take seriously their responsibility to provide the environment where these things can happen, in a way that will assist candidates through a process of learning to claim their own knowledge.'

I have already told my wife to expect me to be a bit of a 'train wreck' at times given that I will, according to Lee and Williams (1999), be experiencing 'permanent head damage' and the like. I of course expect to benefit from this process as they say, it is 'understood as necessary and productive'. The most interesting idea here however is the last one: 'Supervisors (and faculties) can and should take seriously their responsibility to provide the environment where these things can happen, in a way that will assist candidates through a process of learning to claim their own knowledge.'

Claiming my own knowledge? I like the sound of that. This links in what I have been thinking about regarding the breakdown of the grand meta-narratives aka Derrida et al. Also I have read other things recently that have made me realise that we are all constantly at work in narrative production and whilst the grand narratives have ceased to hold their power over us, the new modes of knowledge production aka PLDs are creating now experiences and praxis elements that open up the spaces between the known areas of academic knowledge and the novel narrative structures which will ultimately replace them.