Stephanie West-Puckett and I have been having some fun playing with a chapter from Anna Munster's book Materializing New Media: Embodiment in Information Aesthetics along with some other works. Check out our Thinglink here: https://www.thinglink.com/scene/707993461441167360.
For transcriptions of the videos, continue to the relevant sections below.
My working thesis: Grabill’s ideas on postmodern mapping can serve as a tool to enact Munster’s ideas on constructing a ‘new biology’ of digital systems for the archival and curation of artifacts, working to promote the Digital Archive of Writing Instruction as an embodied space.
Mapping:
1. a strategy for constructing positionings of research that are reflexive
2. a tactic for making visible frames of reference in research (Sullivan & Porter, 1997)
Approaches for reflexivity and visibility work toward the challenge or problem of how to *do* theory. Therefore, mapping could be a way to approach some of the limits in Munster's text. Wunderkammers (or curiosity cabinets) represent a collection of natural and unnatural taxidermy beasts, books, paintings along with a combination of odds and ends. All use anecdote, humor, oddity, and visual amplitude, creating an affective relation to life, living, and science (Munster, 2006). This approach creates situations that fold in on themselves, reducing time and space between the viewer and the viewed and making the viewer less passive and more active within that time and space.
My challenge: While Grabill describes what postmodern mapping can do and the advantages of it, he does not produce an effective postmodern map within his book. Munster offers an exciting theoretical approach and the concrete example of Wunderkammer, but it is not a frame that I can take whole and use when thinking about the DAWI.
My conclusion (for now): There are stronger examples and texts for postmodern mapping than Grabill’s text. I plan to apply Ahmed along with Sullivan and Porter (and probably Bourdieu) in my larger project, keeping Grabill’s ideas on it present but in the background.
Questions I am still considering: How can we design a digital archive that [encourages and invites or enfolds] its viewers to fold into themselves/the content? What does that look like? How does it function? Can some aspect of postmodern mapping help imagine this?
The Walking Dead, Grail, Munster, & Me (video transcript)
This brief video explores how this scene with Carol and Daryl from TWD relates Grabill and Munster’s texts and my research in several ways.
Frequently the characters in this show are faced with horribly complex situations that may shake them to their core or seem impossible. Along the way, they encounter objects, activities, and others. Things that once seemed banal and everyday– like Cheesewiz, hot showers, and family members – now don’t seem to fit in their current context of the zombie apocalypse. In those encounters with the residuals of the past, they are reminded of what it use to mean to be living. As they have these encounters, they are affected - forced to recon with the question of what it now means to be alive while they simultaneously make their own, new pathways in this new world.
For example, as they discussed in this scene, Carol and Daryl aren’t ashes; they aren’t dead. But, in their context, not all of the dead are ashes either. These characters don’t just sit back and watch. They work to maintain kind of wonder, a balance between thought and passion. While they engage in observation, they also take meaningful action. Such action may often be difficult and complicated, but it is necessary for an embodied experience and life. They take on whatever they cross paths with and confront differential outcomes that are the results of these experiences. They are simultaneously reminded of who they were while also continuing to (re)make who they are. They are affecting what they encounter and are affected.
From a personal perspective, I am reminded of who I want to be in life and research. Being alive doesn’t mean just sitting and watching from the sidelines, procuring a faint outline of “what it means to be living”. I want to be thoughtful and intentional about my passions – teaching, writing, engaging, archiving, reflecting - in messy and complex ways. I want to engage in meaningful research that isn’t a model of the walking dead and reminds me that I ain’t ashes.
In addition to some of the connections that could be made with the ideas above, I see other connections between my texts and these characters. Munster and Grabill could offer to Carol, Daryl, and the other living people in the zombie apocalypse ways of connecting to others that can offer a kind of hope grounded in passion, thought, and relationships. I think both scholars would agree that you can’t map out everything, a a plan that goes something like this could be helpful: Be mindful of your positionality (connections to others), consider interconnections in the situation, remember that acting is affecting, and take time to reflect on actions/affects. They would also both argue that such a plan would work towards and embodied life that facilitates our connection to and moderation of each other. They won’t be ashes.
This may all be a bit of a stretch, but I figured I would go ahead and stretch it a little more by considering how I could use this metaphor (or a variation of it) in my research.
My embodied response to Munster (video transcript)
I read Munter’s chapter immediately after reading Hayles. When I finished Hayles, I literally dropped the book and said, “I made this book my bitch!” I realize that this was not a very intellectual or feminist response, but after finishing it, I felt so relieved! It felt like a victory because it was such a difficult text for me to read and understand. I did start wondering why I liked Munster so much.
One reason may be that I am a visual thinker/learner. I gravitate toward the art and visuals. I am much more comfortable creating an image than looking at stats or dealing with broad and abstract concepts. Munster offered me a kind of ‘in’ through her discussion of art that made her theories more meaningful to me. Some may argue that this is a more ‘female’ way of processing information.
When I think about reading this text, I think about motion. I read it on the way home from Carolina WPA Conference, so I was riding in the back of a state van with Janine in front of me, Wendy driving, and Tracy in the front passenger seat. Motion seems like an appropriate feeling to associate with this reading as Munster discusses the online display of information in Revealing Things as offering "a sense of movement that traverses the online viewing space, alternating between clustering and flowing snatches of information" (p. 3).
The dominant embodied response I experienced: Excitement. As soon as I read "use of new media in museum environments" on page 2, I busted out the "good highlighters" and prepared myself to connect this text to my current research (and dissertation) topics. Because I have been considering museum metaphors in the context of writing in the disciplines, including Content Curation Projects and the Digital Archive of Writing Instruction, I started to see all of the possibilities…
This embodied reaction affected my reading of the chapter. When I get excited, I tend to skip the 'critical eye reading' of a text and go straight to how the ideas and concepts could fit into or add to how I have been thinking about my project. This limitation became evident to me in our class discussion of the text. I did try to take a step back and rethink certain aspects of my reading after our conversation, but I can still feel that the excitement is outweighing the critical. It is something I am trying to be mindful of.
For transcriptions of the videos, continue to the relevant sections below.
My working thesis: Grabill’s ideas on postmodern mapping can serve as a tool to enact Munster’s ideas on constructing a ‘new biology’ of digital systems for the archival and curation of artifacts, working to promote the Digital Archive of Writing Instruction as an embodied space.
Mapping:
1. a strategy for constructing positionings of research that are reflexive
2. a tactic for making visible frames of reference in research (Sullivan & Porter, 1997)
Approaches for reflexivity and visibility work toward the challenge or problem of how to *do* theory. Therefore, mapping could be a way to approach some of the limits in Munster's text. Wunderkammers (or curiosity cabinets) represent a collection of natural and unnatural taxidermy beasts, books, paintings along with a combination of odds and ends. All use anecdote, humor, oddity, and visual amplitude, creating an affective relation to life, living, and science (Munster, 2006). This approach creates situations that fold in on themselves, reducing time and space between the viewer and the viewed and making the viewer less passive and more active within that time and space.
My challenge: While Grabill describes what postmodern mapping can do and the advantages of it, he does not produce an effective postmodern map within his book. Munster offers an exciting theoretical approach and the concrete example of Wunderkammer, but it is not a frame that I can take whole and use when thinking about the DAWI.
My conclusion (for now): There are stronger examples and texts for postmodern mapping than Grabill’s text. I plan to apply Ahmed along with Sullivan and Porter (and probably Bourdieu) in my larger project, keeping Grabill’s ideas on it present but in the background.
Questions I am still considering: How can we design a digital archive that [encourages and invites or enfolds] its viewers to fold into themselves/the content? What does that look like? How does it function? Can some aspect of postmodern mapping help imagine this?
The Walking Dead, Grail, Munster, & Me (video transcript)
This brief video explores how this scene with Carol and Daryl from TWD relates Grabill and Munster’s texts and my research in several ways.
Frequently the characters in this show are faced with horribly complex situations that may shake them to their core or seem impossible. Along the way, they encounter objects, activities, and others. Things that once seemed banal and everyday– like Cheesewiz, hot showers, and family members – now don’t seem to fit in their current context of the zombie apocalypse. In those encounters with the residuals of the past, they are reminded of what it use to mean to be living. As they have these encounters, they are affected - forced to recon with the question of what it now means to be alive while they simultaneously make their own, new pathways in this new world.
For example, as they discussed in this scene, Carol and Daryl aren’t ashes; they aren’t dead. But, in their context, not all of the dead are ashes either. These characters don’t just sit back and watch. They work to maintain kind of wonder, a balance between thought and passion. While they engage in observation, they also take meaningful action. Such action may often be difficult and complicated, but it is necessary for an embodied experience and life. They take on whatever they cross paths with and confront differential outcomes that are the results of these experiences. They are simultaneously reminded of who they were while also continuing to (re)make who they are. They are affecting what they encounter and are affected.
From a personal perspective, I am reminded of who I want to be in life and research. Being alive doesn’t mean just sitting and watching from the sidelines, procuring a faint outline of “what it means to be living”. I want to be thoughtful and intentional about my passions – teaching, writing, engaging, archiving, reflecting - in messy and complex ways. I want to engage in meaningful research that isn’t a model of the walking dead and reminds me that I ain’t ashes.
In addition to some of the connections that could be made with the ideas above, I see other connections between my texts and these characters. Munster and Grabill could offer to Carol, Daryl, and the other living people in the zombie apocalypse ways of connecting to others that can offer a kind of hope grounded in passion, thought, and relationships. I think both scholars would agree that you can’t map out everything, a a plan that goes something like this could be helpful: Be mindful of your positionality (connections to others), consider interconnections in the situation, remember that acting is affecting, and take time to reflect on actions/affects. They would also both argue that such a plan would work towards and embodied life that facilitates our connection to and moderation of each other. They won’t be ashes.
This may all be a bit of a stretch, but I figured I would go ahead and stretch it a little more by considering how I could use this metaphor (or a variation of it) in my research.
My embodied response to Munster (video transcript)
I read Munter’s chapter immediately after reading Hayles. When I finished Hayles, I literally dropped the book and said, “I made this book my bitch!” I realize that this was not a very intellectual or feminist response, but after finishing it, I felt so relieved! It felt like a victory because it was such a difficult text for me to read and understand. I did start wondering why I liked Munster so much.
One reason may be that I am a visual thinker/learner. I gravitate toward the art and visuals. I am much more comfortable creating an image than looking at stats or dealing with broad and abstract concepts. Munster offered me a kind of ‘in’ through her discussion of art that made her theories more meaningful to me. Some may argue that this is a more ‘female’ way of processing information.
When I think about reading this text, I think about motion. I read it on the way home from Carolina WPA Conference, so I was riding in the back of a state van with Janine in front of me, Wendy driving, and Tracy in the front passenger seat. Motion seems like an appropriate feeling to associate with this reading as Munster discusses the online display of information in Revealing Things as offering "a sense of movement that traverses the online viewing space, alternating between clustering and flowing snatches of information" (p. 3).
The dominant embodied response I experienced: Excitement. As soon as I read "use of new media in museum environments" on page 2, I busted out the "good highlighters" and prepared myself to connect this text to my current research (and dissertation) topics. Because I have been considering museum metaphors in the context of writing in the disciplines, including Content Curation Projects and the Digital Archive of Writing Instruction, I started to see all of the possibilities…
This embodied reaction affected my reading of the chapter. When I get excited, I tend to skip the 'critical eye reading' of a text and go straight to how the ideas and concepts could fit into or add to how I have been thinking about my project. This limitation became evident to me in our class discussion of the text. I did try to take a step back and rethink certain aspects of my reading after our conversation, but I can still feel that the excitement is outweighing the critical. It is something I am trying to be mindful of.