Challenges to Comprehension Implied by the Logo of Laetus in Praesens
Laetus in Praesens Alternative view of segmented documents via Kairos
lst April 2004 | Uncompleted

Self-reflexive Learnings from Writing

***

-- / --

Introduction

This is a reflection on a writing process over the period 1962-2004 that has given rise to the collection of articles on this site. It covers the following aspects:

A separate paper (Configuring Metaphoric Polarities in Writing, 2004) uses insights explored in this collection of papers to respond to these questions more formally.

A first exercise of this kind was entitled In Search of Transformational Pathways: bibliography of studies conducted from 1962 to 1981 under the auspices of the UIA and Mankind 2000 (1981). This organized papers in terms of the segments of concentric circles ( diagram?). A later effort described the more formal publishing activity instigated and coordinated over the subsequent period (see Sharing a Documentary Pilgrimage: UIA -- Saur Relations 1982-2000). An attempt at visualizing in a single image all the cross-references between past documents was made in 2003.

Neither of these explore the questions of why such activity, and the more speculative explorations on this site, are undertaken. What is such wrting for? As a writer colleague put it: "Have you any idea WHY we do this?". The following endeavours to respond to the question, to explain the methods and styles chosen, and to reflect on the degree of coherence that emerges from the variety of papers written.

Purpose and illusions of writing: why and to what end?

Conventional justifications for writing include:

More "noble" purposes may include:

But another set of purposes can be described in terms of: Finally the purpose of writing may be explored as:

Audience and illusions: who is such writing for?

Illusions of writing

Learning from the writing endeavours of others

politics of writing

Special thematic concerns

See later under polarities:

Context

Responding to a challenge

Disappointment at institutions

Beholden to

UIA setting

Mentors / Beholden to

Writing-related roles

Sources and mandate

Knowledge elaboration context

Arms length relationship to particular disciplines (not a joiner / dilettante? / master of none) but focused on their relationship

Style and method: in search of an appropriate form

Challenge of:

Another heading?

Method

Discipline

Characteristic forms: scope, experimental forms, unusual topics

Range of subjects

Always writing about the same thing

Experimental forms

Originality

Improbable / unusual topics / takes / angles:

Emphasis on questions (answers being the death of)

Publication issues

Biases in writing / publishing

Media / Dissemination policy

Intellectual copyright / property

Archival issues

Self-censorship / Unpublished

Assessment

Evaluation / Honours (doctor, honorary, politeness)

Successful anticipation

Learning tool

Failures

Meta-framework issues: self-reflexive perspectives

Major learnings

Embodiment

All the stuff -- my stuff -- I cultivate its togetherness

Undigested notes:

Criticism

Intelligence agencies / exposure to

I try to see how it is for me and it eludes me. Perhaps I am thinking deep down that if I manage to say something right, then it will set me free or change the world or something. Maybe. I think it is more about what we come to understand such change may be given the nature and the quality of the response to our respective writing efforts. I am happy that I am less and less attached to a response. I like the ship in a bottle feel -- maybe a message to a future incarnation of myself?

In other words, rank mysticism and magic. I can never hope to change anyone's mind. It just seems I might at best 'join in' with a few pepole doing something similar. But then we want to argue or something. Good points. I too can fantasize about the joining process -- but seemingly it does not happen -- at least as far as I can detect. Our intentionalities are too disparate.

Shouldn't there be a better way of doing whatever it is we suppose we are doing? Good question. But better for whom? It becomes more interesting to fantasize about what better might mean

Maybe the question is much more interesting than the answer.

I have noproblem with any cutting an republishing -- whatsoever. My only concern is getting into a frustrating dialogue with an editor who wants something to fit a particular pattern which politeness or other factors forces me to intuit -- to the dissatisfaction of both and to repeated rounds of trials.

Again my approach has been cut what is appropriate and use it however. That is just fine -- preferably with a link back to the original. Nadia is doing this on another piece where she is listed anyway as co-author, and another where she may end up being a co- author. In the latter case it is more an issue of whether there is a source of ihncome to cover her time -- across the boundary from where friendly support is being abused!

Cathedral / Spain

References

Evoking Authenticity: through polyhedral global configuration of local paradoxes. 2003 [text]

Organization and Lifestyle Design: Characteristics of a nonverbal structural language. 1978 [text]

In Search of Transformational Pathways: bibliography of studies conducted from 1962 to 1981 under the auspices of the UIA and Mankind 2000 In: Transnational Associations, 33, 1981, pp. 251-259. [text]

Sharing a Documentary Pilgrimage: UIA -- Saur Relations 1982-2000. Transnational Associations, 2001 [text]

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License .

For further updates on this site, subscribe here