Suchergebnisse

Writing and Immanence is a book that is attentive to the unabatingly potent, sometimes agonistic, forces at play in the continuing unfoldings of crises of representation. As immanent doing, the writing in the book writes to destabilise the orthodoxies, conventions and unquestioned givens of writing in the academy and, in so doing, is troubled by the ontogenetic uncertainties of its own writing coming into being. In the always active processualism of presencing, the fragility of word and concept creation animates, what Meillassoux has described as the absolute necessity of the contingency of everything'. In working to avoid the formational and structural linearities of a series of numbered consecutive chapters, the book is constructed in and around the movements of the always actualising capaciousness of Acts. In offering engagements with education research and pedagogy and always sensitive to the dynamics of multiplicity, each Act emanates from and feeds into other en(Act)ments in the unfolding emergence of the book. Hence, in agencement, the book offers multiple points of entry and departure. Deleuze has said that a creator is someone who creates their own impossibilities, and thereby creates possibilitiesit's by banging your head on the wall that you find a way through.' Therefore, the writing of this book writes to the writing, pedagogic and qualitative research practices of those in education and the humanities who are writing to the creation of such impossibilities.

In this article, I argue that writing with intimacy through an animation of Deleuzian thought helps to destabilize the simply human practice of signifying, representing, and locating emotions within a metaphysics of being, which firmly ignores affective relationality and the emergence of posthuman practices of thinking and doing. By positing the practice of intimating, I argue that such an approach will prompt movement away from thinking about what a body is or what it might mean toward moving with and sensing encounters and engagements with what bodies can do. Continuing this line of thinking and writing with Deleuze will involve me in engaging in rupture, of taking a line of flight, of speculating about intimacy, not as a linear, molar attribute of simply human bodies, but rather as a complex, relational multiplicity of molecular lines. In this, I suggest that, in what Manning calls the "politics of touch," bodies are always in the play of affective relationality, engaging in the dance between affecting and being affected, always sensing and shifting in intensive moments of movement and change. I extend this argument by proposing that intimating, as a practice of doing, involves working, with Deleuze and Guattari, with difference as "involutionary," as emergent in and creative of fields of play in which "becoming-animal" leads us to new sensings of what bodies can do. In this "becoming-animal," therefore, I will argue with and from Deleuze that intimating can be conceptualized as a means of "worlding" in which practices of always being on the lookout can be used to animate new creative relational forces in event/ful encounters with spacetime in so(u)rceries of the always not-yet-known.

This paper is designed to problematise and enhance through this doing the effectiveness of autoethnography as a method of inquiry. Autoethnographic research generally finds a home within the postpositivist proclivities and phenomenological inquiry-based practices of the humanities and the social sciences. By attempting to engage a decentring of the human in (autoethnographic) research practice, this paper suggests the need for a turning toward affectively informed posthuman theorising as practice by engaging the nonhuman as well as and in relation to the human in such inquiry. Drawing upon Spinoza's claim that all bodies (human and nonhuman) have the capacity to affect and be affected, the paper argues that autoethnographic practices need to attend to all aspects of spatial and temporal relationality and that theorising with and through affect enhances the effectiveness of inquiry into what a body, any body, can do.

The article offers an autoethnographic inquiry into the influence of the imagery of the Western on the nascent becomings of self in immediate post–World War II United Kingdom. By sharing fragments and brief rememberings in terms of "concept, affect, and percept" the article will attempt to re-live the world of "Cowboys" and "Indians" in the fragile emergence of and continuing life of self.

In this short article, we work with the notion of Tami Spry as force. There is a tension here: We have come to recognize, both through the writing of this article and through our many years of encountering both Tami herself and Tami's work as performer and writer, how we find ourselves needing to de-personalize and de-individualize: we are drawn into the beyond, the uncontainable, the "more-than," of Tami and Tami's work. At the same time as this impulse to de-personalize and de-individualize, we recognize—and cherish—that Tami Spry's work could not happen without Tami Spry. We experience, and seek to convey here, our respect, our gratitude, our love, both for a person we are privileged to call our friend and for a body of work, whether performed, written or performed in writing, that is committed to the personal, the vulnerable, the intimate and the embodied.

In making a contribution to this collection of writings, and in writing to and with them, this paper is not conceived, designed or presented as summative, conclusive or as a synthetical representation of the other writings in this edition. This paper appears at the end of the collection simply and only because of the proclivities and necessities of the linearity and organisational requirements of journal production. It is written and presented with the hope that it will diffract from the (im)possibilities of rigid classification and of creating a category of difference with which to capture or unitise collaborative writing. Further, this paper, in resisting closure and conclusion, also wishes to write with and for becoming collaborative writing, sensing the opportunities, the potential and the creative anticipations that writing collaboratively always seems to afford. Any sense gained from reading the paper that it offers celebratory hints, suggestions of gratitude and an indication of pleasure gained in sharing the esteemed company of friends and colleagues is entirely intentional.

This paper follows the authors' collective biographical inquiry into "becoming men" (Gale and Wyatt, 2008), and pursues questions about "men-ness" in their writing relationship. Drawing primarily from Deleuze, both his philosophical concepts — lines of flight, nomadic inquiry, the rhizome, and more — and his insights into his collaborations with others, the authors work together on collaborative research ventures, mostly in an ebb and flow of writings that they exchange across the ether. They write with/to each other about writing, about their respective work, about love, about loss, about subjectivities. They are aware that in the intertextuality of this writing they perform themselves. Using rhizomatic and nomadic inquiry, in this paper they explore the experience of being two men talking, asking: how is this relationship constituted? How does writing create this relationship? What — gendered, sexualized — subjectivities do they perform to/with each other?

In their collaborations over recent years the authors have worked, through their written dialogue, in pursuit of understanding subjectivities and their 'becomings'. Until now they have not explicitly explored their subjectivities as men. Their starting point in this paper is that they do not take the assignation 'men' for granted. Using collective biography, they are interested in how the worlds that they inhabited and that inhabited them in their early lives produced, and continue to produce, 'boys' and 'men'.

In this paper, using the imagery of the ever shifting movement of the sea, two friends attempt to demonstrate how the concepts, affects and percepts of Deleuzian inquiry can fuse and connect with the embodied method of poetic, performative writing to engage in and produce a collaborative inquiry into their intuitive, creative and ethically sensitive struggles as friends, parents and teachers.

This article concerns how writing, collaborative writing in particular, acts: how it moves, how it resists, how it does, the four humans writing alongside our co-authoring 'materials' – a guitar, for instance – and other more-than-human co-authors, such as affect, friendship, time. We explore writing against systems of oppression and writing through materials of resistance. Writing through can ignite the seething potentiality of a breaking through, and a writing towards the not-yet-known of other lives. We sense this as an unleashing that can act as a challenge to the self-perpetuating autopoieses that neoliberal autonomies and competitive frameworks require. Writing through materials of resistance offers an inducement to work towards the social capaciousness and the thinking with those collective orientations. Writing through refuses the surrender of freedom and offers, through practices of speculation, fabulation and experimentation, an animation of movement that can tap into the capacious fugitive energies of emergent and new collective futures.

Collaboration in scholarship holds the peculiar position of being expected, encouraged, and, in the process, somewhat taken-for-granted as monolithic academic practice. Collaboration is important for the cultivation of a rich ecosystem of ideas, thoughts, methods, theories, and experimentation. It seems safe to assume that most scholars would agree with the need and the possibilities of collaboration. Yet, collaboration in scholarship is often understood in reductionist and pragmatic ways: While ideas and thoughts flow in certain stages of the collaboration, labor is often divided among collaborators, authorship is ranked and quantified, and subjective lived experiences are most ignored or codified in rigid fashion. In this article, we attempt to further explore how collaboration can also be an act of leaning on each other in order to make sense of thinking and narrating hope and resistance in times of neo-nationalism and authoritarianism. We each live in different parts of the planet, yet we share a common hope. Here, we come together to think, feel, commune, and write with each other in hope to find ways beyond individual positions and in search of collaborations that allow us to imagine possibilities of resistance and paths toward a kinder and more just future.