Podcast appearances and mentions of Erin Manning

Brian Massumi joined Cooper and Taylor for a discussion on his forthcoming book: The Personality of Power: A Theory of Fascism for Anti-Fascist Life. Massumi was instrumental in introducing the work of French philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari to the English-speaking world through his translation of their key collaborative work A Thousand Plateaus (1987) and his book A User's Guide to Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Deviations from Deleuze and Guattari (1992).[2] His 1995 essay "The Autonomy of Affect",[3] later integrated into his most well-known work, Parables for the Virtual: Movement, Affect, Sensation (2002), is credited with playing a central role in the development of the interdisciplinary field of affect studies.[4] Massumi received his B.A. in Comparative Literature at Brown University (1979) and his Ph.D in French Literature from Yale University (1987). After a Mellon postdoctoral fellowship in the Stanford University Department of French and Italian (1987-1988), he settled in Montréal, Canada, where he taught first at McGill University (Comparative Literature Program) and later at the Université de Montréal (Communication Department), retiring in 2018. Massumi has lectured widely around the world, and his writings have been translated into more than fifteen languages. Since 2004, he has collaborated with the SenseLab,[5] founded by Erin Manning[6] as an experimental "laboratory for thought in motion" operating at the intersection of philosophy, art, and activism. Links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Massumi https://recherche.umontreal.ca/english/our-researchers/professors-directory/researcher/is/in14429/ Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/muhh Twitter: @unconscioushh Instagram: @unconscioushh

Step into the world of the Boundless Body Podcast with Dr. B as he embarks on an enthralling conversation with the esteemed scholar, Dr. Erin Manning. In this inaugural episode, they embark on a captivating journey through the realms of sensation, movement, and perception, shattering conventional notions surrounding neurotypical body structures and language barriers. Discover the intricate interplay between human language, intelligence, and perception within the neurotypical sphere, as they unravel the complexities of psychological phenomena like psychosis and its surprising link to heightened cognitive processes. Dr. Erin Manning fearlessly shares her own encounters with institutionalized racism and challenges the rigid categorization of neurotypicality, exposing the deep-seated biases ingrained in society's fabric. As the discussion unfolds, prepare to be swept away by insights into the profound impact of shared emotions, laughter, and the transformative power of human experiences. Explore the liberating role of joy, grief, and humor in shaping our collective journey. The episode concludes with a reflection on Erin's groundbreaking teaching methodologies, emphasizing the importance of fostering individual expression and fostering meaningful dialogue. Join us on this meticulously curated odyssey for those who dare to challenge the status quo, seek enlightenment, and embrace the spirit of reinvention. Enter a realm where bodies roam boundlessly, and exploration knows no bounds. Dr. Erin Manning: https://www.concordia.ca/faculty/erin-manning.html Dr. Erin Manning's Books: http://erinmovement.com/books Contact Dr. Brian Tierney: https://somaticdoctor.com/ Social Links: https://www.instagram.com/boundlessbodypodcast/ https://www.facebook.com/TheSomaticDoctor https://twitter.com/Boundless_Body Articles: https://medium.com/@boundlessbodypod --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/boundless-body-podcast/message

Dans son livre intitulé « Le geste mineur », la philosophe et artiste Erin Manning raconte le moment où elle a pris conscience de l'existence de gestes mineurs : des gestes faits de presque rien, quasiment imperceptibles, sans sujet, comme anonymes, par lesquels des changements se produisent comme sans en avoir l'air. La metteure en scène Maria da Silva et l'artiste et paysagiste Nicolas Dutour ont voulu partir à leur tour en quête de gestes mineurs. Rejoints par Ali Lamaadli et Louise Bentkowski, ils et elles ont réalisé plusieurs temps de résidence au Pavillon de la Danse – ADC à Genève ainsi qu'au far° à Nyon, où iels ont pu expérimenter des gestes mineurs. Mais comment créer sans intentionnalité ? Comment faire apparaître des gestes artistiques qui ne soient pas spectaculaires ? Et quel protocole faut-il mettre en place pour pouvoir manipuler ce concept si fuyant et poétique qu'est le geste mineur ? Equipe Maria Da Silva, metteure en scène  Nicolas Dutour, architecte paysagiste HES Ali Lamaadli, comédien Louise Bentkowski, metteure en scène Ce podcast est réalisé par Alice Boccara-Lefèvre et publié en partenariat avec le quotidien Le Courrier Le projet Geste Mineur a été soutenu par la HES·SO, en partenariat avec le far° - fabrique des arts vivants, Nyon et le Pavillon ADC, Genève

Blending theory, practice, and fascinating cultural vision, this week's conversation with Erin Manning calls into question the systems and practices that keep us stuck.   Erin's imagination and openness seem endless as she describes how we may work to create movements for other ways of being. Crucially, Erin describes her understanding of modalities of being, explaining that neurotypicality is a system that undergirds our ways of knowing and our ways of being a body. There is no singular “neurotypical person” just as there is no singular “neurodiverse” person. Rather, we are trained into a choreography that encourages us to “practice neurotypicality well” and punishes us if we do not.Understanding the ways these systems work is vital as we untangle the hegemony and oppression that have dictated what counts as knowledge, what is valuable in a body, and even what bodies are “worth” being alive. The episode shares the resounding call that “we owe everything to each other.” How can we give into that call?  Erin Manning grounds in the interstices of philosophy, aesthetics and politics. Pedagogical experiments are central to her work, some of which occur at Concordia University in Montreal where she is a research chair in Speculative Pragmatism, Art and Pedagogy in the Faculty of Fine Arts. She is concerned, always, about alter-pedagogical and alter-economic practices. She has written The Minor Gesture, For a Pragmatics of the Useless, Out of the Clear, and The Being of Relation (forthcoming). Her artwork is textile-based, relationally-oriented, and often participatory. Her current research is focused on 3e —an exploration of the transversality of the three ecologies, the social, the environmental and the conceptual. Music by Johanna Knutsson courtesy of Patience Records. Visit our website at forthewild.world for the full episode description, references, and action points.Support the show

SPEAKERSAlecia Jackson, Liza Mazzei, Jessica Van Cleave Jessica Van CleaveHello and welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast hosted by the qualitative research SIG of AERA, the American Educational Research Association. I'm Jessica Van Cleave, Chair of the Qualitative Research SIG and Associate Professor of Curriculum and Instruction at Gardner Webb University. The Qualitative Conversations podcast doesn't have a regular host. Instead, each episode is organized by our podcast committee. Today I have the pleasure of hosting this episode, in which I interviewed Dr. Lisa Mazzei and Dr. Alecia Jackson about their recently published second edition of Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research. Lisa Mazzei is Professor of Education Studies and Alumni Faculty Professor of Education at the University of Oregon, where she is also affiliated faculty in the department of philosophy. She is a methodological innovator in post human inquiry, and her work is widely read and cited across disciplines such as education, psychology, sociology, political science, anthropology, business and medicine. She is the author of Inhabited Silence in Qualitative Research from 2007. Alecia Jackson is Professor of Educational Research at Appalachian State University in Boone, North Carolina, where she is also affiliated faculty in the Gender, Women's and Sexuality Studies program. Dr. Jackson's research interests bring feminist post structural and post human theories of power, knowledge, language, materiality and subjectivity to bear on a range of overlapping topics deconstructions of voice and method conceptual analyses of resistance freedom and agency in girls and women's lives and qualitative analysis and the posts. Her work seeks to animate philosophical frameworks in the production of the new and her current projects are focused on the ontological turn qualitative inquiry and thought. Together they are co-authors of Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research, first and second editions, and coeditors of Voice in Qualitative Inquiry from 2009. Their forthcoming edited book, Postfoundational Approaches to Qualitative Inquiry, will be published in 2023. Lisa and Alecia, thank you so much for joining us on this episode of Qualitative Conversations. Liza MazzeiDelighted to be here. Thanks for inviting us. Alecia JacksonThank you for the invitation. Jessica Van CleaveAbsolutely. So some of our listeners may not be familiar with your work, or maybe new to your work. So would you be willing to tell us a little bit about yourselves, how you came to write together, and how you came to write Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research? Liza MazzeiWell, Alecia and I say that we share an academic genealogy. We first met at AERA in 2005, I think I was presenting a paper on some of my voice work. Alecia came to attend the session. And she came and introduced herself at the end of the session. And I had just finished reading an article that she had written about subjectivity with new teachers. And so I was so excited to meet her and I had just been reading her work. And so we sat out in the hallway for about an hour. And we're talking about projects. And we said that we should propose a session for AERA the following year on voice because we were both looking at voice and challenging conventional understandings. And so that was right before I was moving to England, I moved to England in 2006, was attending the British Education Research Association Conference, started chatting with a book editor. And like a good editor, he always says, What's your current project? And so I told him about this idea that Alecia and I had for a session and he said, that sounds fabulous. Can you get a book proposal to me in a month? So I'm at this conference, emailing this woman that I've met in person once saying, can we put a book together, a book proposal, and that was the proposal we wrote for voice and qualitative inquiry. And the reviews were very positive for the book. But people who read the proposal didn't think that we could secure some of the authors that we had said we would put that would contribute. And they didn't know that I had studied with Patti Lather at Ohio State University, Alecia had studied with Bettie St. Pierre at the University of Georgia, and through these feminist networks, we had connections with some scholars who were doing some very interesting work. So that was the that was the beginning of our long and fruitful partnership. Alecia JacksonYeah, when we were working on the voice book, I traveled to Manchester. And so we had some writing time together. So one thing I do want to say is that Lisa and I have, ever since the collaboration began, we've never we've never lived in the same time zone. Is that right? Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Yeah. So I think that's something that, you know, is really unique to the way that we've made things work. But we went to Manchester, we worked on the voice book, and then you came here, and we were working on Thinking with Theory. So we've had a couple of times that we've worked together, but in you know, Lisa has explained kind of the origin story. And then how Thinking with Theory came about is that after the voice book, we got really interested in we both were doing separately, we both were working on philosophically informed inquiry. And it didn't have that name at the time. Nobody was calling it that. Nobody was you know, calling it thinking with theory. It didn't have a name. And but it's what we were doing. And we started because we're reading each other's work and through the voice book, we realized is that, you know, what, what would it be like to, you know, to write something together, that was an alternative to, quote, data analysis. We were both talking about how to teach this way of doing this kind of analytic work and conceptual work. And there were lots of journal articles that people doing this kind of analytic thinking. But there wasn't anything that was out there cohesive, that we could use me, really to us in our teaching, that was kind of the impetus. So we were at the Congress. And we were out to dinner with Philip Mudd, who was our editor for the voice book. And we pitched this idea of taking, you know, one data set, and we will talk about how we don't really use that language anymore in a moment. But we talked to him about how to maybe conceptualize a book where we had one set of data that we looked at, that we analyzed across different theories. And he really loved it. And at that dinner, you know, he said, Yeah, let's put this together and see, see what it's like. Jessica Van CleaveThank you so much. It's really fantastic to sort of trace that process, obviously, briefly from that first meeting, until the beginnings of thinking with theory. So as you began the process of writing, thinking with theory and moving through to publication, what were your hopes for the book at the time? Liza MazzeiI think I don't know, I don't know what our hopes were, I think our hopes were that it would be I mean, we've talked, we talked about our work when we started envisioning a new project as what kind of intervention do we want to make? And I remember extending what Alecia was saying, I remember being at the Congress, and we started talking about wanting something for our teaching and going to the book exhibit and looking at what was what was presented as analysis. And it was all about coding. And so our I think, you know, our initial hope was, well, this, this isn't what this is not representative of the kind of work that we do. This isn't how we teach our students. And so as Alecia said, We wanted something for our own teaching. And maybe I guess the hope was that it would be picked up by others and be useful to them. So Alecia Jacksonyes, I think it was a matter of, of what Lisa said, the intervention, I think, is a really good word. We, as I mentioned, what we did there wasn't a name for what we were doing. And we said, we wanted that we you know, Bettie St. Pierre always says write something that people can cite. And so that was something that, you know, she's always said to, and you've probably heard it too, Jessica, write something that people can cite. And, and, and put something out in the world that people can, you know, can use, and I really have a big part of part of the impetus for both of us, I think was to give this alternative to the field and name it in some way and have it so that, you know, it was it would become something that was recognizable that people could use, and really to take the field into that direction. I think that we, you know, back in the early 2010 to 12 qualitative research was shifting. It was shifting away from, you know, interpretive work and even critical work. And it was just time, it was time to bring it all together and give it a name and give it a place. And there was just so much enthusiasm right away because I think people were really didn't feel like coding was really analysis. So, you know, we had already done some work on that talking, writing about pieces, we're writing about how coding is not analysis and, and I thought this was just a way to give it a place in in the in the in the field Jessica Van CleaveWell, I mean, it's fascinating because as you said, Yes and that advice from Bettie it's definitely something that that I think all of us who have ever worked with her have heard, and it's so true. since y'all have published the first edition of Thinking with Theory, there's been an explosion of all of the you know, the methodologies without methodology, and concept as method and anti-methodology. You know, this sort of thing that you said there was a hunger for at the time. I mean, I think there's no better evidence than how much has proliferated since then. So in the years since its initial publication, Thinking with Theory has become a staple in qualitative inquiry. People are citing it not only in dissertations, but in articles across the field, across publications. Instructors are using your text in their masters and doctoral level courses, Thinking with Theory has really become part of the canon of what qualitative analysis can be and can mean. And one thing also from Bettie, that comes up for me a lot when I think about what work does, especially aside from what your hopes might have initially been, is Alcoff's, quote, to paraphrase, you never know where your work goes and what it does there. So what do you think about where your work has gone? And what it's done there? How it's been taken up and received, since you published? Liza MazzeiDo you want to start Alecia or? No? Um, you know, I think, what do I think? This isn't about I remember the first time I was at AERA decades ago, and I had a piece that had come out in ED Researcher, and I was walking, like, from building to building and there was someone sitting on a bench. And I happened to glance and they were reading my article. And I thought, oh, my gosh, what, what? What a, what a validation, I guess, of one's work to know that someone would take the time to actually pick it up and read it. And so I think that the fact that people are talking about thinking with theory as a methodology is not something that I ever imagined would happen. I think one of the things that I'm most proud of in terms of the work that Alecia and I've done together is that people will say to us at conferences, or students will say to us how pedagogical the work is how, how much it helps them understand. And that was really a primary goal of ours was to, to extend the reach of this way of thinking, so that people would consider a new analytic, if you will. I'm not I don't feel like I'm really answering your question. I don't go ahead, Alecia. Alecia JacksonNo, I think it's, I think that Lisa and I are both very, I don't know, humble people, and we just didn't really write this book in order to, you know, do anything other than, I don't know, I think we kind of wrote it for ourselves, at first, you know, and then because we wanted to do something together. And then I think, I've been most surprised, I guess, at how it's not just in educational research, like when I've had to go through and do my, you know, annual reviews, and, you know, going up for promotion, and all that. And you pull up the, you know, the Google Scholar citations, and it's just surprising to me that all sorts of social science disciplines have picked up this work. It's not just educational research, but it's, you know, people in, in all sorts of disciplines that I never would have imagined. I think there was even some citations from a business journal. And I just thought, wow, you know, so I guess what's been most delightful is that it's crossed all kinds of boundaries, which I believe that's one of our missions in, you know, is reaching into other found, you know, do some do some deterritorialized thing through the book, in terms of qualitative research, but it moving across all these other fields, you know, anthropology, sociology, business, I mean, just, there's just a whole, a whole lot of other disciplines that have taken it up. And just the expansion of that has been really surprising. I would have never thought that the work would go there. But it's really, I think, it's exciting. It's humbling. It's very endearing for people, you know, on social media to, you know, make comments about that. They have it, they've read it. It's, you know, I had a colleague who did a Fulbright in Australia. And she got there and was working with a faculty member. And the first thing they said is, oh, you work with Alecia Jackson, look, I have the book, you know, do you know. And it's just so it's just wonderful that it's just connected us, to so many people. And it's been so useful and so helpful. So. Jessica Van CleaveSo then you get asked to write a second edition of this incredibly impactful book that has gone all of these places and done all of these things. When you were first asked to write that second edition, how do you approach that as a project, especially given how big Thinking with Theory is? Alecia JacksonIt was very difficult. And we've been working on the second edition for a while the pandemic hit us, and it slowed everything down as it did for a lot of people. We changed editors, in in the at somewhere in the middle of all this, but we, we wanted to do something because it will talk a little bit about how the book is different. But in the intervening years after this was published, we began to critique some of the things that we had done in the first edition. And we wanted to update some of the things that we had written in chapter one in particular, the way we were conceptualizing some different aspects of it. And we'll get into that, but the main thing we struggled with was, do we add more theoretical chapters? Do we keep them really, you know, they work? Why change them? Do we want to add? So it took us a while, a couple of years to really think about how we wanted it to look and what we wanted to say that would be different enough, so that people would, you know, find the second edition, you know, an actual extension of what we had done. Something different. So it, it took a while. It was a process, but once we really figured out what we were doing, it flowed pretty well, you know, we were able to really work with it. Quickly. So. Liza MazzeiI mean, yeah, I think, I think initially, when we first started talking about the project, we thought that it would not, it would not involve as much new writing as it did. And when we started even, even the chapters that we that we said, Okay, well, you know, we're pretty solid with the with Derrida, there's not a lot we need to change. But then when we started really getting into it, it's like, oh, everything has to change, because all of our thinking and languaging is different. And as both of you have talked about, you know, I think when the first edition was published, that was about the time when, when Bettie published her first piece on post qualitative inquiry, and then we had special issues on data analysis after coding and so forth. And so everything that was informing our thinking, in addition to the way we were doing our own work had shifted, and, and then what we learned from working with students and the places that, that we were able to be more that we were able to show more well, what we were doing, or what we thought we were doing, because we had been doing it, you know, in the intervening time, we've been teaching it, we've been working with students around these texts in the intervening time. So I think it was it's, it's a completely different text in many ways. Jessica Van CleaveSo that kind of leads in you, you have spoken to this, I think a little bit already with that, that your thinking and your languaging and your processes and your experiences and your inter and intra actions had all shifted since the initial publication, but how did you end up deciding then what to include, what to change ,and what not to include in that second edition? Alecia JacksonThat was a process. I think that emerged from what Lisa was saying about the teaching, you know, using the book and teaching what really kind of confused students, you know, what, what was what were some things that they just couldn't, you know, make the turn into, because it was some languaging. Also related to where the book has gone. What it's done is we have done lots of workshops, using this text at the Congress in particular, but also individually, we've gone to institutions and have done workshops together and individually. And we just started to notice there were some some languaging, that that didn't really quite represent what we really wanted to do. And part of that was if we wanted to really make a break, we really wanted to escape conventional qualitative inquiry and go on this line of flight, we would need to really, really change how we talked about it. So the second edition, we dropped data altogether, it's not even in the title anymore. We don't use that word anywhere in in the book, and we call it instead, we came up with a concept, you know, so we were very much into this work is about concept creation, and, and so we came up with performative accounts. And that's how we talk about the so called stories that are that are part of the part of the plugging in. So performative accounts helps us to say something differently about, about memory, about language about subjectivity, what words do, what stories do and rather than representing reality or experience that they're, that these are actually ontological stories and the process of plugging in is a performative and so we use that language in Butler's chapter. And we just decided to pick it up and use it in the intro to make well actually, in the preface, we, we describe that shift from data to performative accounts, and then we had to rewrite the whole, you know, all of the middle chapters because data was everywhere. And really reconceptualize not just replace the word throughout, but really rewrite what was going on in plugging in if we call this entire process performative. So that was that was one. Lisa, if you want to talk about a couple of the others. Liza MazzeiYeah, I think we do a much better job in this edition talking about the questions and the emergence of the questions. That was also a thing that I think, through workshops and teachings that students were, how do I, you know, how do I do this? And so so an example when I sit on dissertation committees and students would, you know, in their proposal say, well, this is my analytic question. Well, now we call them becoming questions, but I would, but then it's like, no, you're you're missing the point. Because you can't identify that question up front, because you don't know what's going to emerge until you are actually immersed in the texts, both the conceptual philosophical texts and the research texts. So I think we did, we spent a lot of time talking about how to explain the process and the way that we sort of came to the process, or the process came to us. I think, another thing and Alecia picked up on the, the nature, the ontological nature of this work that, particularly in the last chapter, we we talk about the ontological nature of writing, and we talk about the way in which the very act of doing is producing these new ontological formations. And so that, that that language, I think, is also present throughout and it's, it's showing how we're shifting in our, in our present work both individually and together. Alecia JacksonYes, a couple of other new changes and additions, I think, we do a better job in the second edition addressing thought and thinking. In the first edition, we were really focused on theory and I think in that first chapter, really justifying the use of theory and the importance and also in the handbook chapter four. We, we really focused on that and and in, in this second edition, we do a lot with thought and the movement of thought we rely a lot on Erin Manning's work. And in her collaboration with Massumi, and in writing about thinking and thought and in the ontology of that so that's some something that's, that's new. The Barad chapter is brand new, practically, of in the first edition, when it came out in 2000. When we were writing in 2010 and 11 new you know, Barad's book was very that's what everyone was reading. And everyone was there a lot of conference presentations on you know, using Barad, and we had to do it in the first edition, what we thought was some background work on new materialism some historical kind of description and tracing of how the emergence of this particular theory into the qualitative profession, but when we read it, when we read, we read it in terms of the revisions were like, we don't really need this background anymore ever. It's it's been around now for 10 years. People are very familiar with them. And it's new materialism and Barad and, and intra-action. And so we felt like we could do, you know, take a lot of that conversation out around some of the other feminists who were working on new materialism. So the Barad chapter is very much more focused on just Barad and intra-action, and we bring in power and we move the Barad chapter to follow Butler and Foucault that made it a little bit more sense to us, since we also added a section on post human performativity, it flows better, and we added a section on power in Barad. So both of those, the post human performativity, and the materialization of power are nice sections in Barad that flow from Foucault and Butler. So we felt like those three chapters just work together better. And then we moved Deleuze and added Guattari to the end. Liza MazzeiSo and just a note on the the flow. I'm I'm teaching a course this term and the students one of our texts is thinking with theory. And so last night, we started looking at we introduced her concepts last week. And so we actually took one of the performative accounts in class last night, and looked at the way it was talked about differently with Butler's concept of performativity. And then looking at the same account with post humanist performativity. And it really, it was a fantastic discussion, and the connection was much more clear for students. Alecia JacksonSo I think it's, we've just really worked to connect, you know, really pull through the coming questions, you know, game, we don't call them analytic questions. And we really make as obvious as we can the process of the emergence of those questions, how plugging in works, and just trying to be a lot more pedagogical, with with the process. Jessica Van CleaveSo I feel like you've already discussed this, and in your response to the last question, but I didn't know if there was anything else that you wanted to add in terms of thinking with theory as a as a concept or as a text. How, how would you say it has shifted for you both over the last decade? Liza MazzeiWell, I think maybe I think we did talk about this, but but the emphasis on thought, the emphasis on newness. One of the things we talked about, I think in the preface of the second edition is how in the first edition, and we've talked about this in other ways that we were, we were still in the mode of of writing against or, or deconstructing some of the, the interpretivist hooks, if you will. And we started from that place still with this addition. And then at one point, we both said, we don't need to do this anymore, we need to push into this different territory. And so I think that's one of the that was a very important but also very freeing moment, because it's like we can, we can let go of some of this language. And we had fabulous support with our editors, partly because I think of the success of the first edition. And so then we were able to say, this is what we're going to do and you know, dropping things like the starting with method, which we did in the first book. We don't we don't do that anymore. So that we I think we felt a lot more confident in our in the acceptance of us saying this is this is how the work is now and we're not going to pretend that it we're not going to try to fit it into another way of making itself intelligible. Jessica Van CleaveSo one of the one of the other things that has changed a lot in the last 10 years is the material discursive conditions of the world. So in what way does do those shifts mean that we should or need to, or might, think with theory differently or think with different theory or what? How do y'all think about those kinds of things? Liza MazzeiI'll start and then Alecia. I mean, one of the things that we do in this edition is we, we deal with the idea of the collective. Deleuze and Guattari, this idea of collective enunciation, we talk about memory in a very different way. I think even the way that we mobilize Barad's concepts is an attention to the the formation of subjectivity and and the way things are, the way not talking about agency as some even though we worked against humanist agency in the first book, it's not even attributing agency to individuals and things and talking about agentic capacities. And so I think it's a it's a reconceptualization, and I've had some students in recent years really do some very interesting work, I think that, you know, moving and thinking very differently. So that's a that's a beginning answer to that question. Alecia JacksonUm, I'm very excited about the way in which we talk about or write about power in in the new Barad chapter in terms of the materiality of power, I think it's a very different way of conceptualizing it. So that that's something that I think, that we've, that we paid really close attention to. I think that that's a concept that, that once you plug it into materiality, you know, because it's history is really connected to knowledge. You know, Foucault's famous couplet or doublet, the power knowledge workings, and, you know, when we get into the materialization of power in the Barad chapter, I think it just really opens up, you know, a whole conversation and I think it's got, we have a lot to say about about that, in terms of, like Lisa was mentioning the collective. And how that that is working, were much more, I think, smarter about assemblage in the second edition, I think that has some some implications for materiality, language, subjectivity, all of that. So we've got some real, I think, shifts in, in how we're bringing those, those theories in, not only in the Barad chapter, but also when in chapters one and eight. When we're talking about thinking, we talk, we, you know, we are using some of the material discursive theories around how thought is, is material, how thinking is, is material and that that's Barad, you know, we, we quote her on that, and then, and write about what that what that looks like. So I think those theories also allowed us to make the shift away from epistemology to ontology. You know, this book is not a knowledge project. It's not representation. So we, you know, we really relied on those theories to make arguments for how research is creation, it is creation. So when we're in this, this ontology, these theories that you've mentioned, Jessica, we, we can't talk about research as knowledge production. Really, we're in a, you know, an ontology where research is helping us to imagine the worlds that we want to live in. So that's what we talk about a lot in my classes is, so what's the what's the use? You know, why are we doing this? If we're not, you know, we know so much already. Like, why do we want to keep asking the same questions. I was somewhere one time, I don't remember maybe getting my hair cut, I don't know. And I was talking to someone about what I do. And I was in that that semester, in particular, I was teaching a women's studies course and feminist theory was a graduate feminist theory course. And she said, Oh, that sounds so, so cool. And so awesome. And I'll say, Well, it's kind of depressing, because for 10 years, we've been talking about the same things, you know, in this feminist theories class, and, and nothing is really different. So I've started thinking about that and talking with doctoral students in my research courses saying, Well, what if research was became something completely different, you know, its use its purpose. And I think what we're doing in this book, is we're saying that we're making worlds, when we think with theory, we're creating something new, we're creating openings for possibilities that have been unthought. So and I see students doing this in their dissertations now. So they're picking up, you know, their theories, you know, we just went to a defense last week of a student, I was chairing a dissertation for and she's, she has a son who has autism. And so she basically did a power knowledge reading of all the, the materials of autism, all the the documentation, the special ed, you know, just everything that the path to diagnosis is what she called it and, and just recreated an entirely different world. Through that work, you know, the outcome of what she did the she got to the end and, and she said, this is this is what we need to do to the DSM to make this entire framework less deficit oriented, and less damage centered. So she recreates she did her critique, you know, her thinking her thinking with, but what came from that was her own creation, you know, a creation of a different concept, you know, how do we redefine this? How do we, you know, how do we talk about it differently? Y'all know, Heather Cox Richardson, that the historian on Facebook has been doing her letters, and posting a lot. And as a historian, she said something recently that that I've been using in my class, and she said, the way that we make change is that we have to change the way that we that people think about something. And the only way we can change the way people think about something is to change the way that we talk about it. That's it from a historian's perspective, that's, that's how change happens. And so it is about language, but it's also about worlding. And I think that, with this, these new theories and the material discursive turn and attending to ontology, in qualitative work, we can begin to create the worlds through the words that we use, changing the way that we talk about it, changing the way that people think about it, and then the doing. So I think that this book, in particular makes those connections between thinking and doing creation, experimentation, and really pushes that, again, what we talked about this in the chapter eight, what we do in research is unleash becomings. And that still is so I can read chapter eight and see what we have to say about unleashing becomings. But, but that's what I I envision, I would like to see research moving in that direction. I think that that's what those these theories, these post foundational theories enable us to do. And students are doing it like, I see them taking risks in ways that are very exciting. Liza MazzeiThey recognize that the descriptive project is not is not moving us. I mean, we talked about that in class last night. Okay, we know we know what's happening. So how do we what are the mechanisms for, for creating these new worlds that Alecia is talking about? Jessica Van CleaveSo that was really exciting, because I was hoping you all would have something fabulous and, and generative and opening up to say, in relation to that, and I wildly underestimated what might happen. So I really appreciate that. That was, that was really helpful. I'm sure the, the audience is going to get a lot out of that. And I think, as I go back to the second edition of Thinking with Theory, I will now be reading it differently because of hearing the ways that you all frame it and how it's now being taken up and seeing where it goes with your students and in relation to the current projects that you have going on. So thank you for that. Um, so I'm gonna shift a little bit, if you don't mind to talk about the writing process. And you said that you have shifted and talked about writing as an ontological project as well. So what does that look like in terms of your writing partnership or your coauthorship? Either for this book, obviously, you've published a lot together and separately, so what does coauthorship look like and how has that shifted for you over the years? Liza MazzeiI'm not sure it has shifted. I think that we're I think we're very appreciative of the generative nature of our collaborations together. And we often when we have not worked together on a project before, and we're working on something separately, it's like, oh, we miss we miss this. Because it does, there is a, there is an energy. And a, I don't even know how to talk about it the way in which I think we've established a great deal of trust in one another. And so it's not. So there's not maybe a hesitation that there might have been at the beginning. But it's, I can't imagine not having projects to work on together. And we keep coming, we keep dreaming up new ones. Alecia JacksonIt feels often like it just a zigzag, you know, we're just kind of in it, we're in the middle of something. Sparks fly, and Lisa will write a word. And it'll remind me, I can you know, she'll she'll write a word that will just spark an idea. And then I can develop a paragraph from that, vice versa. We're not sensitive to, we don't hang on to our we're not, you know, if I write something, I'm not hanging on to it. And I think how many times have I said in the margin? I'm not wedded to this, or this is terrible. Just rewrite it? Or, you know, I think that we just have a real? I don't know, we see it, we look at it as as equals we don't, you know, we take turns on lead. You know, who's first? Who's second, but don't really track that. I mean, I couldn't even tell you, like, who's first, who's second on however many. It's very 50 50, I think, you know, on both of our leaders, we have that written very clearly that, that it's it's 50 50. And that way, it's in these collaborations we've done in the last decade with me on the East Coast, and Lisa on the West Coast, you know, we've had, we've joked a little while I'll get up and maybe work first, you know, and then and then, you know, Lisa will sometimes say, Oh, I can't wait to go in and see, you know, like what you've done and, and then I'll come back in the afternoon to kind of see, so it always feels like a gift. You know, when I go into the document, I there's never a time where I'm not a little bit excited to see what's developed and what's what's being made. Because it isn't an act of creation. And you know, we're not, but we're just you know, we're reading the same things. You know, it's just, it's, it's a collaboration in every sense of the word, you know, from reading the writing to, you know, the publishing, it's just yeah, it's, you know, we're respectful of when there's other things going on, you know, travel or family stuff. And, you know, it's just, yeah, it's just easy. Jessica Van CleaveWould that we all could have such lovely, collaborative relationships that are just easy. That's wonderful and of course, we all get to be the beneficiaries of that easy work for you. Not that it's easy, but um, so is there anything else that you want to share with the qualitative conversations audience either about thinking with theories, specifically, or qualitative research broadly or anything else that comes to mind? Liza MazzeiThis is not my this is not my original thought. This is something that you know, Bettie St. Pierre says all the time, but that I say to students, if you if you want, I mean, two things, I guess, you get into the middle of a project and you think that you want to think with this particular concept? Well start thinking with it. But if it's not doing the work that you want it to do, then try something else. But you have to be willing to spend the time to immerse yourself in the reading and the study in order to be able to, to do the work. I mean, Alecia, and I talked about with the first edition, people say, Well, how did you choose these theories? Well, some of them were ones that we had, because we had worked with them in pre, you know, with some of our other work. But then we as we started thinking, for example, with Barad, it was okay if we're going to do this, we need to really spend some time with it to see if it if it is doing something for us. And if it's not, then we need to find something else. So that's, I mean, we we talked about that a little bit in the book, but I think it's just really emphasizing that it's, it's it's not easy work, but it's such exciting and generative work. And I think once the students start, start encountering it then it's hard for them to imagine not doing their work in this way. Alecia JacksonYeah, I think that what, what Lisa just said reminds me of how I talk about theory is that it just finds you, you know, that's something I say, in every class, we're, you know, we're, we have two theory classes that we offer in our doctoral program. We just call it theory one, theory two, and it's just, it's pretty linear. You know, it starts with positivism. And then just, by the time we get to the end of theory two, we're in post humanism. So it's, you know, just going through those frameworks, and and there were some times students just nothing really speaks to them. And so we just say, you know, just keep reading, and something, you know, that language. You know, I tell the story of how, when I first read Foucault, it was like, wow, this is language that I've always sensed, and felt that I couldn't articulate, I didn't know what I needed to say. And then here's somebody who's saying it for me. And then all I had to do is plug it into, you know, what I was encountering in the world. And, and that helped me to think differently about it and opened up to the end thought so, you know, a lot of what I like to say to students is, you know, this, this work is the pursuit of the unthought it is the pursuit of what we, you know, can't imagine yet, the not yet. We were back to the movement between the first and second edition. And, and, you know, Jessica, you read a chapter for us on Manning, because we thought we need to add a new theorist, you know, and we'd both been reading a lot of affect and gone with the affect conference. And, and we thought that that was something that was missing from the book. And so we thought, well, let's just add a Manning chapter. And it didn't, it didn't fit well. It didn't, it didn't, it didn't, it wasn't working the way that we wanted it to work. But Manning was working on us, but we couldn't figure out what was going on. So we just kept wrestling with it. And and, you know, you read it, and we got great feedback from you. And it made us really ask some questions about what what is, what are we doing? And how are we putting this to work? And what happened is, I remember we were going back and forth on it. And, and I think I texted you, Lisa, or sent you an email, and I said, I think we're using Manning, Manning methodologically like as a technique. And so we're like, whoa, that's exactly what's going on. It's not that we need to plug Manning into the performative accounts, we need to plug it into writing and thinking and doing. And so chapter eight is where Manning shows up and affect because we do a lot with pre individual sensing, and how that is part of of a thought. That thought is not just cognitive, but it's this pre individual syncing of something coming into being of the coming that's emerging. So we just stayed with Manning, but it it shifted and helped us to say something about writing and thinking and ontology that we could never have planned for. So the last thing, yeah, I'll just say is that you just don't know where you'll end up. And all of this is emergent, contingent, relational, all of those things. So just stay, as Donna Haraway says, just stay with the trouble and you know, something will will come, Donna Haraway says something, something always happens, and it always will. So I think that that's part of what the message is in in the the second edition. Jessica Van CleaveWell, I want to thank you both so much for your time today. This has been a delightful conversation for me, and I know our QR SIG listeners are really going to appreciate your, your descriptions of the text, as well as the connections that that you are making and thinking about, both in their roles with students and in their roles as instructors as well as methodologists. So thank you both so much for your time this afternoon. Liza MazzeiThank you, Jessica. And thanks for prompting us to think more about our own process. Alecia JacksonYeah, it's very nice to, to articulate it and, and be able to really appreciate, you know, what, what we've done, I don't think I really sat and thought about the, you know, I mean, I know what the differences are between first and second edition, that really going back on this journey in time and space has been a real treat. So thank you. Jessica Van CleaveThank you. Thank you. It's been a gift this afternoon.

In the first of a series of special episodes talking with neurodivergent and autistic filmmakers and film workers, we welcome video artist Alicia Radage to the podcast. Alicia's practice combines performance art, shamanistic ritual and videography that attempts to reach an understanding of neurodivergent connections to the 'more-than-human'. We discovered her through brilliant Shape Arts commission 'Quake', where she performs a ritualistic cycle of singing, meditating and dancing for worms - find the link to the work below. We discussed the possibilities of a neurodivergent aesthetic, how film allows performance artists to make enriched use of time and detail, and problems with the terms 'high and low functioning'. We also spent some time talking with John-James Laidlow, our regular host, about his video work Another Way is Possible and Peeling Tatties, available to view on his website. Recently, John-James has decided to step down from the podcast as a regular host so we'd like to say a big thank you to John-James for all his brilliant contributions to Autism Through Cinema.  A quick word of warning: there is some use of strong language in this episode, so please use caution if that is an issue for you. Also, Alicia's work that we link to below on her website contains nudity and some challenging themes. Huge thanks to Alicia for agreeing to be on the podcast and for being such a fascinating guest! Alicia Radage's website: https://www.aliciaradage.com/ Quake on Shape Arts: https://www.shapearts.org.uk/blog/watch-quake-a-new-performance-work-from-alicia-radage  Quake on Alicia's website: https://www.aliciaradage.com/quake (CW: nudity) Alicia at the Whitstable Biennale with MOTHER BENT, 11th June: https://whitstablebiennale.com/project/mother-bent/  Alicia as part of 'The Healing Collective' at Giant Gallery in Bournemouth from the 19th June: https://www.giant.space/upcoming  John-James Laidlow's video work: https://john-james.hotglue.me/  The philosopher Erin Manning's book Always More than One: https://www.dukeupress.edu/always-more-than-one  Autistic musician John Biddulph and his moss music: https://johnbiddulph.bandcamp.com/album/perambulations-i 

Gary Pageau of the Dead Pixels Society talks with Erin Manning of Erin Manning Media, about her start as a photo industry educator, her award-winning video projects, and her best tips for getting started using video to boost your business and connect with customers.Erin Manning is a professional photographer, author, educator, and media personality living in Los Angeles, California. She helps people understand photography and technology by translating technical jargon into everyday words and facilitating learning with a clear, friendly teaching style. Her production company, Erin Manning Media, specializes in "conception to completion" full-service production, creating inspiring educational content.Visual 1st Visual 1st is the premier global conference focused on the photo and video ecosystem. Mediaclip Mediaclip strives to continuously enhance the user experience while dramatically increasing revenue.Buzzsprout - Let's get your podcast launched! Start for FREEDisclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the show

The conversation: In this 'double interview' Michaela Gerussi and Alice Gale-Feeny (both initiators of the podcast) ask questions about each others' artistic practices, trace some of the ideas which inform them, and unpack different perspectives between their (respective) backgrounds in fine art and contemporary dance. The conversation departs from a place of friendship and familiarity, whereas Alice and Michaela have been working closely since 2019 as peers on the 'MFA Creative Practice: Dance Professional Practice' course with Trinity Laban and Independent Dance.They discuss:-Dialogue; facilitated or 'choreographed' conversations as frames (i.e. Quaker meetings; 'fishbowl conversations', Bohmian Dialogue)-Authorship and collaboration-Notions of ‘material' in both dance and fine art/performance contexts-Fine art training (the changing idea of the art history canon) -States of attention in artistic practice (i.e. distractions as generative)-Objects and written/spoken voice/language as material in physical practice; as extensions of the body; [“The post- in the human suggests not that we come afterways as prosthetic newcomers, but that we were always already embodied in excess of our organs.” (Erin Manning, Politics of touch : sense, movement, sovereignty. University of Minnesota Press, 2007. P. 157)]-Karen Barad, feminist science-Fascia studies-Choreographer and dance researcher Kevin O'Connor -Practice as Research; a perspective which values the tacit knowledge which is present in practice-Performance practice(s) vs dance-making practice(s)-Manchester-based dance-artist and researcher Amy Voris-Making a work vs its performance; witnessing. Where do we locate and emphasize the work?-The Solo performance; implications/optics of that as starting point, where attention is placed, possibilities of subtlety, detail, etc.Interviewee/interviewer: Michaela Gerrusi is a dance artist researching the complexities of how we sense ourselves. Informed by her studies in Craniosacral Biodynamics, her practice is concerned with the intersection of the nervous system, self-regulation, affect and dance-making. michaelagerussi.com Interviewer/interviewee: Alice Gale-Feeny is currently developing a performance practice that investigates the emergent potentials of speaking aloud and being with objects as a way to occupy a middle ground between self/selves and other(s). alicegale-feeny.com 
Read more (links):Bohm, D., & Nichol, L. (2004). On dialogue (Routledge classics). London ; New York: Routledge. (https://www.routledge.com/On-Dialogue/Bohm/p/book/9780415336413)The Cadbury's Bourneville model village (https://www.bvt.org.uk/our-business/the-bournville-story/)Alice Gale-Feeny, Fishbowl Conversations (https://alicegale-feeny.com/incirclesaroundtables)Karen Barad, (2007). Meeting the universe halfway : Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham and London: Duke University Press. https://www.dukeupress.edu/meeting-the-universe-halfway Rasmus Olme on magnets, from a SKH Dance Podcast conversation with Eleanor Bauer (https://www.spreaker.com/user/10974845/episode-4-rasmus-o-lme?utm_medium=widget&utm_source=user%3A10974845&utm_term=episode_title)Kevin O'Connor (https://www.ecologicalbodying.com/)Artist Placement Group: (http://flattimeho.org.uk/apg/)Amy Voris (https://www.amyvoris.com)Authentic Movement (https://www.authenticmovementinstitute.com/authenticmovement)The term double interview, and the approach taken for this podcast episode is inspired by a double interview between Mette Edvarsen and Mette Ingvarsten published in February 2016: http://www.metteingvartsen.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/2016--double-interview--mette-edvardsen-and-mette-ingvartsen.pdf Keywords:Dance Making; Performance Making; Practice as Research; Contemporary Art Practice; The Nervous System; Language; Writing; Fishbowl Conversation; Dialogue; Somatic Practice; Embodied Knowledge/Research; Post Humanism; Feminist Science.

Welcome. Tervetuloa. My name is Mirka Koro, I come from ASU, and I go by she and hers. I would like to acknowledge the land on which I am standing here in Phoenix and the original Hohokam caretakers of this land. I would also like to thank the Egon Guba awards committee and QRSIG chair Jessica VanCleave and her executive committee for this amazing honor and opportunity to share my thoughts with you all. Despite my indefinitely youthful appearance and my love of Apocalyptica, I have a somewhat lengthy past with qualitative inquiry. Aaron, Juha, who are my stimulating discussants, Egon Guba, and I are entangled in our past and hopefully our experimental and philosophical qualitative inquiries will keep forming and shaping new relationalities among us and others in the future. I think it was 1998 when I attended my first AERA, heard amazing talks, and met Egon and Yvonna. At that time, I also attended my first QRSIG business meeting and thought to myself how excited I was about qualitative inquiry, stimulating scholarly exchanges, thinking, doing, theories, and paradigms. Egon’s Paradigm dialogue and Yvonna and Norman’s leadership with QI and ICQI were very inspiring for a beginning scholar. Since early 2000s Aaron’s work on methodology, Foucault, philosophy, ethics, and responsibility has been intellectually engaging and provocative for me. My entanglements with Juha, in turn, extends even further in linear time. I met Juha during my master’s studies and he introduced me to the world and practice of qualitative inquiry. I remember vividly attending Juha’s lectures and methodological seminars describing his exciting field work. His critical scholarship, philosophical knowledge, work with Freire’s legacy, and intersecting lines of methodology are truly inspiring. Mahtavaa etta olet taalla tanaan Juha videon valityksella! Entangled narratives, shared professional and personal histories, paradigm dialogues, multiple matter of and within factory and working-class town of Tampere Finland, meetings rooms of SQUICK in Athens GA, endless sunlight and scented orange blossoms of Phoenix AZ come together today. I have multiple titles for this presentation yet all of them are quite inaccurate. Title 1: Restless methodologies and speculative wonderings multiplied Title 2: What does the light have to do with this? Title 3: Lived scholarly possibilities of (methodological) multiplicity Title 4: If we take speculation seriously…we need to multiply- also methodologically Title 5: Lost in the words but still alive-- many methodological lives of qualitative matter As you can tell, I deliver this talk with much speculation and hesitation. My methodological wonderings will not have core components or clear argumentative logic. The talk might not even offer anything new especially if one considers the relational nature of knowing and situatedness of being as simultaneously historical, already already here, and always multiple. Light encounters, in turn, have everything and nothing to do with my presentation today. This talk is designed to be light in its effects- dizzy, requesting little effort, having little weight, move away from inner light and truth, something that informs, to ignite and spark. I hope this talk may offer some provocations in the form of thoughts, wild ideas, images, light effects, and conceptual and theoretical movements and more. Maybe something I will say or do will enable you to enter the difference, feel affect, sense and live the methodological light/lightness and darkness differently, and access alternative spaces through unthought connections and different ways to work through and live realities of inquiry, methodologies, and qualitative relations. Still designs fail and continue with their hesitation. Provocation 1: Close your eyes and see. What methodologies become possible? I will wonder about the potential and possibility embedded in speculation and speculative practices in a methodological world where many worlds fit. Some of my thoughts today are prompted by the way I live and experience qualitative inquiry as a contemporary reflection, mirror, and actor in our complex and political global world. Many qualitative scholars are excited about opportunities related to experimentation, theoretical connections, onto-epistemological freedom, justice and ethical orientations research can offer. We have been inspired by the post, (new, feminist) materialisms, and more-than-human movements. We showed that qualitative research is needed, driven by practice, and can create different knowledges and knowledges differently. Recently, the field has also experienced ontological and relational turns paying more attention to ecologies of life and inquiry. However, some of my excitement has been tamed by artificial theoretical boundaries, conceptual regulations, standardized citation practices, overly descriptive guidelines, and other political ways to manage learning of qualitative inquiry and monitor experimentation processes. Occasionally I find myself mourning for more liberatory practices, worlds within worlds that stay open and welcoming in infinitum. Sometimes I feel saddened by the epistemological and ontological violence that we might have practiced against our community members, sisters, and brothers. It is also possible that I am late to the game, delayed in my reflections, dwelled in the past and we have already lived methodological pluriversity quite productively and practiced responsible collectivity for some time. However, I am truly inspired by visible and hidden potential, more inclusive vision and unthinkable hope for qualitative inquiry as a methodologically pluriverse community. This talk includes interrelated flows of relationality including speculative, experimentative, methodological, and plural flows. Speculation offers opportunities for creative imagination, hesitation, reflective questioning, and thinking with unthinkable futures. Experimentation reminds us that much of qualitative research is crafted in shifting practice, in artistic relations (Hannula et.al., 2014), and within different and internally creative and active time-space-matterings (Barad, 2007). Responsible methodologies and methodologists (see Kuntz, 2015) are needed while current methodological practices are radically re-visioned. Pluriversity and pluralism, in turn, are thoughtful choices toward more collective equity and ecological diversity. Finally, all of these relational flows ask for open-endedness and creative potentiality embedded in our ecological and relational onto-epistemological systems and practices. The flows come and go, relating and connecting logical and illogical ways while always creating alternative time-spaces. About experimentation Some years ago, I wrote about methodologies without methodologies, about methodological spaces without faces, names, and predetermined categories. I was interested in methodologies with inaccuracies and defects, abnormalities. At that time, my problem was the insufficiency of language, methodological non-imagination and inflexibility and my focus was on theoretical and methodological difference in infinitum. Now my breakdowns are more relational and material. Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2018) reminds us about a scary and lonely world without others, specter of difference, and the cruel and toxic identitarian politics. Now I see more clearly the vitality in pluralism, caring and sharing communities, and perceive the endless becoming of many. Worlds within worlds, methodologies within methodologies, researchers within researchers – in other words the multiplicity and methodological pluriverse are the worlds I want to talk about today. I also argue that for us to live the plural and many (also plural and many methodologies) we have to imagine. Qualitative inquiry is not a world without a difference and since its first visionaries and documented imaginations qualitative inquiries have been conceptualized as the other, multiple, and diversified. However, somewhere during the journey we may have lost our vision of this kind of relationality and collectivity. The paradigm and dialogue of difference can also be problematic since it is often guided by dualism and hierarchization leading toward methodological barricades, partition, ontological erasure, and epistemological colonialization. Furthermore, from the perspective/paradigm of difference one can also more easily locate and narrow down the ‘toxic methodological other’ simultaneously forming master subjects and methodological narratives. I think it is important to remember that perceived methodological differences are not natural but constructed. Provocation 2: Turn off the lights and sense the material you are sitting on. What methodologies become possible? If your momentary relationality to matter could speak, what might it say? In addition, I want to remind us about qualitative dreams, dreams of qualitative researchers, and the power of the unexpected. How might us, qualitative scholars, live our inquiries and allow more and infinite spaces for adventures of ideas and concepts created and crafted by scholars, surrounding materiality and all citizens of the entire world- not just the citizens of global North. For Whitehead (1967) adventures (of ideas) illustrate slow drifts of mankind toward betterment and civilization; a historical movement and adventures of framing the explanations influencing history. Not only the western history but the history of all humans (and non-humans). Adventures include a wide variety of mental experiences shaping human lives and their histories in diverse global contexts. Ideas also experience their own local histories. How do ideas arise and are infused, how ideas and concepts related and blend? How do ideas multiply in the infinite pluriverse? Furthermore, it is interesting to think with Whitehead also in the context of methodology. Methodological language has rarely been ‘correct’ and accurate and more importantly methodology has rarely been independent from other processes. Rather, I imagined methodologies outside the fixed, pre-determined and premeditated steps. Methodologies function as spaces for experimentation and as experiential experiences themselves. These processes have always had drifts, movements, and own collective histories potentially without causal and individual history and necessary linear logic. These kinds of methodologies still excite me. More specifically, speculative methodologies and experimental plurality seduce. Thinking with thought pragmatically—guided by transformation, application, and practice—has produced a series of experiments in my work including experiments with text, language, discourse, concepts such as data, slowness, seduction, academic conference machine, (methodological) darkness, methodological landscapes of desert, write-scapes, matter such as writing-feeling flamingos, ghost, shadows, monsters… and more. I practice methodologies while simultaneously recreating, reshaping, and reformulating the world we collectively live with and within. Methods do not order or predict the world, but they create an emerging sense of worldly events. Erin Manning (2016) noted that “Thought must not be mapped onto practice: it is an emergent, incipient tendency to be discovered in the field of activation of practices co-composing. To map thought in advance of its speculative propositions would diminish the force of study and reduce the operation to the status of the creation of false problems and badly stated questions.” (p.41). Experimental and plural methodological history does not start or end. Slowly and gradually, one may become interested in open-ended inquiry, problematization, and been drawn toward multiple simultaneous and conceptual shifts. Theoretical and pragmatic ruptures lead to inquiry and seductive forces of matter and images. For example, some years ago I was drawn to Baudrillard. Baudrillard’s work prompted me to consider how the signs of reality create a duplication, a virtuality, hyperreal, which made it impossible to separate true and false, real and imaginary data, matter, and concepts. Baudrillard helped me to see that objects and data can have their escapes, strategies, and resistance. “The more object is persecuted by experimental procedures, the more it invents strategies of counterfeit, evasion, disguise, disappearance” (Baudrillard, 2000, p. 79). During my qualitative research methods courses students produced virtual and hyperreal data, they ate their interview transcripts and documented the possibilities and impossibilities outside Cartesian dualism. Collectively with my peers I sensed methodologies and processes in dark rainy forests, words formed 3-dimensional cartographies, and sounds moved me toward more than human and beyond singular and humanistic dialogues. My scholarly body grew tired of linear logic, clear argumentation structures, and valid research processes. Academic conference machine took over my international collaborations and our ‘crazy gang’ willingly allowed tables, dolls, gorillas, pacifiers to take over and participate in our becoming and knowing. Materiality produced us slowly but steadily, relationality heavily guided our collective thinking-doing and enabled us to sense the world around us and thinking in action. The AcademicConferenceMachine and its striated spaces and regulatory intellectual organization created disturbing effects and we saw this machine as a reliable, regulatory, structured organizational space, a space of (non)repetition — which runs the risk of becoming so regulating, normalizing and standardizing. We had to conference otherwise and desire to craft alternative spacetimes collective grew upon us. Later, our sensing outside sensibilities and exploring text outside textual practices were guided by Poly-experimentalism, a multifaceted experimentation addressing multiplicity and plurality in their various forms. Following the practices of Delamont and colleagues (2010) who encouraged scholars to make the familiar strange, listening Norman Denzin’s (1970) proposal that sociological imagination should shape methodological thinking and practices, and more recently being inspired by imagination and performance philosophies that have emerged through representational innovations such as interactional theaters where “scientific” research is performed. Furthermore, methodological experimentation acknowledges the diverse processual, intellectual, and methodologic examining and forays that take place when scholars extend discourses and habits of thought as well as extend on common routines that seem to become habitual practice in research projects. Drawing from my work with Linda Knight we argue that methodological experimentation is difficult to pin down with a singular author, text, meaning, practice, discipline, tradition, discourse, or even example because it can vary in scale and impact as experimentations are diversifying practices. Instead of focusing on conceptual singularity and practical linearity of the methodological past, seemingly fragmented thoughts and acts are united through the concept of “poly” and multiplicity of methodologies across different flows. In my recent work on navel gazing my collaborators and I started thinking about research assumptions and practices that we keep hidden. This led us to think about ‘navel-gazing’ as one practice of excessive focus on the ‘self’ through aggrandizement, ornate reflection, or even self-plagiarism and self-citation. We laughed at the idea of looking at one’s navel--the image is a silly one--but we decided to try it. One by one, we tried gazing at our own navels and then discussed the experience, theoretical and methodological insights, and silly recordings of our philosophical conversations. The proximity of navel created an interesting paradox. One’s navel (including one’s scholarship, knowledge, reality, truth, practices and so on) became intimately connected to the physical body of the researcher while at the same time it was acknowledged that navel is rarely seen, closely inspected, and infrequently deep-cleaned. Yet (researchers’) navels form intimate connection to internal organs, trace baby’s connections to their mother, bridge the external with the internal, and also offer ultimately useless space and unused place of human cavity and relationality. According to Whitehead (1967) experimental inquiry avoids routines which force intellect to vanish and conditioned reflexes to take over. “The very essence of real actuality… is process. Thus each actual thing is only to be understood in terms of its becoming and perishing” (p.274). “A learned orthodoxy suppresses adventure” (p.277). Experimental work forms a fertile ground for troubling our learned orthodoxies and problematizing simplicity in its’ various forms. Wonderings about many possibilities of theory shaping inquiries, thinking beyond the thinkable methodological practices and countering existing practices can be generative. Methodological experimentation also offers endless possibilities to reinvent inquiries and re-conceptualize qualitative research approaches especially when experimentation functions as a vehicle and strategy to live our lives as inquirers. Whitehead (1959) distances speculative Reason from its (scientific and traditional) methods. Speculative reason’s “function is to pierce into the general reasons…to understand all methods as coordinated in a nature of things... the speculative Reason turns east and west, to the source and to the end, alike hidden below the rim of the world” (p.65). Speculative reason questions the methods not allowing them to rest. Whitehead explains how Greek thinkers advanced speculation by being curious, probing, questioning and trying to understand - everything. About speculative speculation Next, I will discuss some speculations of speculation. Speculation offers multiple strategies to think beyond the known, recognizable, and predictable. Speculation slows one down and forces us to think about alternative scenarios and differences. It does not take anything for granted and it is fueled by adventure. Created knowledges can travel from one location to another. Since 2007 speculative scholarship has taken many turns. Meillassoux’s speculative materialism, Harman’s object oriented philosophy, Grant’s neovitalism, Brassier’s radical nihilism, Bennet’s vital materiality, Barad’s agential realism, Whitehead’s process philosophy to name a few. In many ways speculation offers a response to the slow, hesitant, complex and uncertain world of methodological multiplicity and diversity that many of us live in and hope to acknowledge as a reality found and reflected in our scholarship. Speculative scholarship is tentative and thus rather impossible to repeat, teach, and even describe partially because language always fails. Speculative experimentation is less concerned about how materiality and research matter might talk back or have human agency and more interested in acknowledging that research matter’s dialogue and agency is possible and likely beyond human understanding, language, and consciousness. Like any theory, speculative theories are meaningless if they do not enable scholar to experiment and figure out things in the world. According to Weisman and Gandorfer (2021) “theory inhabits the gap between sensing and sense making. It is a sketch, a set of speculations of how to ethically and politically understand what we experience” (p.401). Weisman and Gandorfer exemplify speculation through forensic architecture which builds on a split of a second as a durational and lethal concept. Duration and spatial coordinates of a split of the second are in the continuous flux of matter, actions, and meanings. The indeterminate nature of split of the second makes this time-space lethal and extremely dangerous since it reveals the larger picture which unfolds within this molecular scale of time. A split of the second also functions as a zone of endless exceptions. In addition, Weisman and Gandorfer offers us matterphorical concepts as concepts that express the entanglements of matter and meaning within specific time-space frames. One might ask who benefits from speculation and why I propose that speculation is potentially needed and necessary in today’s Academia, scholarly climate, and field of qualitative inquiry. Our world is rapidly changing and we can no longer predict the most suitable methodological futures. Speculations may form infinite ways of life beyond academic capitalism, rigid citation indexes, and tenure clocks. Puig de la Bellacasa (2017) referred to caring as a speculative mode promoting interventions to become. Methodologies that speculate also wonder yet they don’t verify, offer fixed solutions, or pretend to understand the other and different. Instead, they care, connect and create educated guesses and various scenarios of possibility building on the exploratory, imaginative, and visionary powers of speculation (see also, Somekh, 2007). In some ways, speculation is about choosing and deciding without predictability and foreseeable future. Speculation also raises many questions without answers. For example, does speculation carry with itself an immanent critique of stability, norm, and of the anthropocentric? What critiques and collective discursive practices become possible within flat ontologies? Kaljonen et al (2019) described speculative approach to experimentation building from the philosophy of science, being open, hesitant, and involving participatory events. In this kind of experimentation, ‘participants’ can imagine and create new practices and framings. In speculative pragmatism qualities and knowledge are not mental building-blocks of real but practices ontologically emergent within nature. They are pre-objective and pre-personal functioning in shifting time frames. According to Manning (2016) “speculative pragmatism means taking the work’s affirmation, its urge of appetition, at face value, asking what though-feeling does in this instance, and how it does it. It means inquiring into the modes of existence generated by the act of “hypothetical sympathy”, honoring the minor gestures produced at this interstice, and seeing what these open up, in a transversal maneuvering (p.39-40)”. What might speculation do to a thought, to a thinking in action? Speculative inquiries, hesitant and slow scholarly projects are choices and these choices often come with bodily and material consequences. For example, speculative inquiry might emerge from collective subjects, immanent concepts, and relational objects urgently functioning as a crisis, pause, hesitation, horror, and revolt. New non-linear logic of speculative experimentation could function as non-consistent forces and dispersive matter. Can speculative projects forget their material and affective pasts? one might ask. How might spontaneous/restless/lightless inquiry feel? What might methodological hospitality look like? What degrees of freedom could today’s methodologies afford? How might speculation and speculative practices function in responsible ways? How might qualitative scholars think in knots and by tying themselves into knots in relation to spacetime and place? How could methodology as a matter of persuasion appeal to the experience of the other? Finally, “speculative philosophy has an irreducibly aesthetic dimension; it requires new, bold inventions rather than pacifying resolutions” (Shaviro, 2014, p.43). Shaviro writes that aesthetics includes feelings an object for its own sake beyond its legitimacy, usefulness, and interpretation. Aesthetics of methods offer affective potentialities through their relations and senses. More things are felt and sensed than known. Methods are a matter of degree and the world of methods is the world of experiencing relational differences. What happens to methods when the observer, individualism, and capitalisms are being removed? Maybe Alien phenomenology (Bogost, 2012) could offer some examples. Bogost draws attention to strange relational life of non-humans which could be analyzed through units, lists, excessive betweenness, configurations, and non-linear patterns. For example, when we can eliminate likeness-in-human-terms (within our scholarship), we may be able to attain the innerness of things of un-nameable units. What it is for the bat itself? Caring is creating and scholars could be moving from the problem of access to the problem of being with. Shaviro also proposes that “Knowledge is just one particular sort of relation- and not even an especially important one at that. Most of the time, entities affect other entities blindly, without knowledge playing a part at all” (p.105). Thus, Shaviro encourages us to speculate about things and experiences that we cannot access directly. Touch can be felt but not necessarily known. Every instance of beauty is something new. About (speculative) pluriverse Stengers (2018) in her book Another science is possible emphasizes the power of curiosity to bring things together, collectively and slowly change our world. [Slowing down science] “should involve an active taking into account of the plurality of the sciences, in dialogue with a plural, negotiated and pragmatic (that is, evaluated on its effects) definition of the modes of evaluation and valorisation relevant to different types of research” (p.52). After all sciences and inquiries are collective and value of individual and individualization is measured as a part of collective dynamics. According to Stengers speed also creates insensitivity. “Slowing down means becoming capable of learning again, becoming acquainted with things again, reweaving the bounds of interdependency. It means thinking and imagining, and in the process creating relationships with others that are not those of capture… the kind of relation… what a life worth living demands, and the knowledges that are worth being cultivated” (p.81-82). Could we imagine and experiment with methodologies which do not belong to ontological hierarchy? “All entities, of all sizes and scales, have the same degree of reality. They all interact with each other in the same way, and they all exhibit the same sorts of properties…Ontological equality comes from contact and mutual implication…They all become what they are by prehending other entities” (Shaviro, 2014, p. 29). The flattening of ontological hierarchies such as form and ground, past and future, foreground and distance could serve as productive provocations. Within this logic all methods are also embedded in other methods. Methods interact with each other also without human involvement. Methodological entities are distinct from each other only due to hesitant decision and spontaneous selection while still functioning within shared methodological and relational ecologies. Novelty arises from the act of positive decision and the act of decision is spontaneous and it cannot be predicted. A decision about methods needs to be done but it cannot be predicted or determined in advance. However, the creation of enabling constrains may assist scholars with these decisions and guide the processes of choosing, adding, subtracting, relating, juxtaposing, tweaking, and recombining and more. Provocation 3: Travel with a light beam in your home office/current workspace. Where does it take you? What methodologies could be added and subtracted? I conclude by advocating for methodological multiplicity in a worldly and experiential way (see Reiter, 2018). The world of multiple worlds, Pluriversity, is not an ontological project but a project of praxis. Escobar’s (2020) vision of pluriverse, following the Zapatistas concept “a world in which many worlds might fit” (p. 26) oscillates “between a politics of the real and a politics of the possible – between pragmatism and utopianism” (p. 226). Cultural, ecological, and methodological transitions characterize methodological movement within the pluriverse. In addition, this kind of methodological pluriverse takes into account biophysical, human, and spiritual elements. Diverse zones of contact beyond anthropocentricism become increasingly important. A methodological pluriverse of justices, matter(ings), and forms of critical qualitative inquiry offer new and alternative imaginaries. Mignold (2018) proposed that “pluriversity is not cultural relativism, but the entanglement of several cosmologies connected today in a power differential” (p.x). In methodological pluriversity methods and methodologies do not function as independent units but they are entangled through and by networks. One schema for methodological organization and design is no longer sufficient and different methodological approaches lay next to each other as pieces of mosaic. Mosaic methodologies search for alternative, limited, and contextual methodologies which potential is endless. Any form of knowledge is always in relation to other knowledges and methodologies. When methodologies are recognized as many physical, material, spiritual sites they are also brought closer to human and non-human lives and many materialities of these entangled spaces. Life maintaining and communal methodologies of the South and consuming and possessively individualistic methodologies of the North come together various hesitant but important ways. We desperately need more qualitative methodological sites outside the North America and qualitative research practice needs geographical decentering. As we further consider critical qualitative research that focuses on the complexities of justice matters(ings), the politics of research cannot be denied. Escobar (2018) provides a vantage point from which research can be approached as a political practice. He envisions a relational future which entails “the steady decentering and displacement of the capitalist economy…decentering of representative democracy and settling into the place of direct, autonomous, and communal forms of democracy; and the establishment of mechanisms of epistemic and cultural pluralism (interculturality) among various ontologies and cultural worlds” (p.76). In this kind of methodological world, methodological development is no longer the organizing principle but, rather, a variety of experiences and strategies are considered valid. Methodological processes are always under construction and criticality of our worlds and scholarship is a relational task and imperative. More specifically, this alternative world, a pluriverse, would carry forward epistemic decolonization, alternatives to methodological development, transitions to post extractivism, notions of civilization crisis, and communal logics. In addition, pluriversal methodologies build networks, assemblages, naturecultures, socionatures and strengthen distributed agency (Bennett, 2010) and and. Maybe it is a time for negomethodologies drawing from Shaw’s (2014) African feminism beyond individual methodological ecos and a move toward expanded ecological methodologies. It is clear that qualitative scholars are faced with modern methodological problems which do not have modern methodological solutions. The current methodological crisis has to do with specific kinds of world-making practices and fundamental methodological dualisms (theory-practice, mind-body, researcher-participants, reason-emotion, insider-outsider etc). More so, dualism itself is not the problem but hierarchies established around the binaries and hierarchical classification of difference shape our practices in problematic ways. Enacting non-binary and flat methodologies could be seen as a requirement for transformation and radical change. Healing of our fragmented methodological past and ontological practices by acknowledging hurt feelings and emotions could serve as one point of relationality. Massei (2004) encourages us, also qualitative researchers, to engage in the geographies of responsibility. It is good to remember that by designing methods/studies we design beings. Methodological design is as much ontological as relational task. About (methodological) futuring Escobar encourages us to think of the act, process, and design of futures; futuring- in this context methodological futuring. Methodological futurings can redesign themselves and work through breakdowns. It could be argued that the field of qualitative inquiry does not have methodological problems but methodological breakdowns. Methodological breakdowns bring to the forefront our current practices and tools. Some of these breakdowns might be anticipated and the insufficiency of current methodological tools offers opportunities for creation, experimentation, and invention. The shift from problems to breakdowns also positions knowing as relating and highlights connections rather than taking distance from the problems. How might methodologically sustainable futurings and productive breakdowns function? I agree with Ziai (2018) who problematizes progress and development especially since methodological progress and development does not always lead to democracy but potentially to various forms of violence and oppression. “There is no objectivity that can determine other people’s position and what they need. Socialization and economic planning are not necessarily the keys to a better world” (Ziai, 2018, p.124). A vision of different methodological world could include multiple scenarios. For example, existing ‘methodological rules’ could be changed at any time, all scholars could modify ‘rules’ based on comparable consequences, scholars would be able to leave methodological communities without exploitation and exclusion, dependency on specific kind of scholarly connections and citations would need to be eliminated so methodological dependency does not limit alternatives and make it impossible to leave the field and move across subdisciplines. Focus would be shifted from politics of discipline toward the politics of relationships. These kinds of scenarios might also mean that we need to unlearn various forms of hierarchical cooperation and expand our theories of free methodological connectivity and relationality. What if, …theories of systems and ecologies could help us to understand challenging problems. …objects and materiality could provoke thinking-doing without being themselves thought. …we could create diverse methodologies that protect and restore ecologies. …everyday life would serve as a context for methodological experiments. …we could support more place-based and globally networked methodologies. …we might utilize emergent encounters and participatory solutions and processes. …qualitative inquiry would build on continuously changing and diverse transdisciplinary knowledges and minor practices. …there are no more of the same but scholar go more frequently for the impossible. … the field of qualitative inquiry rotates methodological obligations and responsibilities. …the field of qualitative inquiry could create communities of radical methodologies. If light makes vision possible, I would like to end with one additional alternative title: “Other methodologies are possible and new methodological sensibilities on their way. It is time to dim our lights and see (the invisible)”. Thank you. Jessica: Thank you so much Mirka for your inspiring and thought provoking talk as always. You always leave me with a lot to process. So, we are lucky that we have two fabulous respondents this evening to help us process and think through some of what you presented us with. So, our first discussing is Aaron Kuntz. Dr Kuntz: Thank you. Oh geez you turn on the zoom video and I feel like I'm staring at my driver's license photo which isn't a great thing so my apologies in advance. Well thanks so much for the paper and for inviting me to respond. I'd like to thank, of course Mirka for this provocative paper. My mother always told me that I don't listen well and she's right so it was a delight to have the paper and material form as engaged with the ideas and to see I was privileged enough to see some drafts, as it went through so it's really neat to see how things are processed. So there's much to engage within this paper and Mirka's work more generally. So, for the sake of time. I think I'll focus in on notions of experimentation, plurality and ethical engagement in somewhat entangled order and offer a sense of inquiry, as an experimental way of making the just imbued with an ethical force for change. I'll begin my offering to overarching questions that this talk, provoked for me. Question one, what are the problems, to which speculative experimentation, respond or engage, or question to what problems are made possible through speculative experimentation. What breakdowns are enabled. So these questions arise because problems and practices and strategies are productively entangled, as do lose in glossary note, all concepts are connected to problems, without which they would have no meaning. And so I wonder about how the very notion of speculative experimentation are connected to problems and particular context, one potential issue might have to deal with the anxiety inducing problem of chaos anxiety for me anyways, that if we have no definitive future, nor defined present, then we live in a chaotic world, and speculative and experimental practices only amplify that multiplicity. Importantly, Elizabeth Grosz notes that chaos need not be understood as absolute or complete disorder, but in her words, rather as a plethora of orders forms with forces that cannot be distinguished or differentiated from each other. It's, it's for me it's the blurring of definition that manifest chaos. the overabundance of order, not its absence. So perhaps this is part of the effect of sadness or worry that permeates some work today, and creates I think into Marcus words that we have too much order, we have too much form too much will the excess of which overwhelmed and chaos ensues. As there was a braid it notes. This in her terms, too much this is one of the sources of exhaustion, which mass marks, so much of our current predicament, and ultimately brings about a shrinkage of our ability to take in and on the world that we are in, simply because it hurts too much to take in, and on. So, we perhaps turn to experimental engagements with this too much this this xxs that exhausts, which brings its own problems, of course, and that's a good thing. So on experimentation. I'm not creative, never claimed to be at least not in the conventional sense of the term, I can't sing, or I can but my singing does not mean even the most progressive claims of aesthetic worth. I'm also not a visual artist as such things such as experimental inquiry approaches, often simultaneously astound me scare me move me and closed me off from engagement, a multiplicity of effects, indeed, if I am creative I suppose it is through a sense of conceptual creativity, but I have manifest through an ongoing engagement with philosophy. Again I turned to Elizabeth gross who considers philosophy, the way would wayward sibling of art, a kinship as both enactments emphasize the degree of experimentalism as a means to create new relations, new problems, a few future not yet created as gross so eloquently writes, I love this phrasing she has twin wraps over chaos philosophy and art, along with their more serious sibling, the sciences in frame chaos. Each in its own way, in order to extend something consistent composed eminent, which it uses for its own ordering and also the ranging resources. There's a double mess here, right, of course that calls forth the productive potential and reduction of philosophy art and science, in one sense speech allows for a means to encounter chaos in meaningful ways. And another sense such processes of ordering might well lead to attaining of difference, a closing off of potential in order to allow for things to, Well make sense. And so as we engage with Marcus provocations, wondering what methodology is become possible when we dim the lights. I wonder about what might orient us how we might enact and eminent positioning that is not dependent on the prolific ordering have a past yet does not transcribe pure relativism through derangements either. This is a question I think of ethics. And I wonder about the potential for inquiry work to think the just as Michel Foucault termed it or more deliberately inquiry as a means to make the just because for co thinking that just requires an overt political stance that begins with an ethical positioning, a determination that normalized governing processes are untenable. Further, thinking as deludes notes, means to experiment and to problem that's thinking that just begins with an act of experimental refusal no longer abiding by the claims of convention and entails an imminent, making thinking that just dust becomes making the adjust and making the just might articulate as a process of entangling an ethical determination to produce a difference with an orienting belief in another future potential that we might become differently, through different relations animated by different forces within a materially generative world. I'm interested in in inquiry is making the just because I sense within Marcus work and ethical commitment, one that emphasizes and affirmative ethical engagement with potential, and a determination to experiment with that potential to speculate on what might yet become so hers would seem to be more than a neutral stance and what is to be done. This is important to note and contemporary work that engages with flattened hierarchies, how does one and unethical engagement with the world admits such flattening indeed a flattened hierarchical perspective is often critiqued for its political naivete and refusal to acknowledge histories of asymmetrical relations of power that is some would argue that flattening traditional hierarchies conveniently erase historical context that disproportionately govern some groups and privilege others, such a perspective may conveniently overlook a legacy of exploitative relations that are only extended through a dismissal of material hierarchy. In short, it is quite possible that the rush to lay claim to rise a medic expressions of flattened hierarchies extends from a privilege of not experiencing a legacy of power claims on one's person. As such, this theoretical embrace of a dispersed system stems from privileges gained from conventional hierarchies and systems of power. Such context situated, even the most well intentioned critique as reformist in order. Born from and transcribing the very exploited to relations they claim to disrupt. As an alternative, a materialist critique might complicate the smoothing of conventional hierarchies, for what Thomas nail terms, a twisted ontology in which different regions of matter are unevenly developed and circulated this twisted ontology remains vital to considerations of exploitation and material inequity that seemed to have fallen out of theoretical favor of late, our contemporary moment is rife with uneven material agencies, and that unevenness matters. Further our inquiry work certainly has a generative role in twisting ontology locating some ways of living as important for recognition, even critique and excluding others. As a consequence that remains important to locate those uneven exploitative relations map their intersections, even exclusions and consider their effect on ontological levels. As a practice of transgression inquiry martyred articulate as a type of challenge from within one and habits a limit in order to manifest a transgression. Because limits, always hold the material for transgressive potential experimental inquiry uses the condition of limits to manifest the rupture, and acting a future yet unknown. Recognizing the symbiotically productive relations of limits and transgressions shifts the intention and work of the inquiry. It's not simply enough to strive to break and limit, one must use the material of the limit to generate something else. This is a creative or experimental experimental relation to limit, one that manufacturers difference, were once there was only repetition such it is that inquiry must be decided the materialists in order to generate transgressions through governing limits, one must discern and intervene within the material conditions that make our governance possible. And this word begins from a place of ethical determination that are present exploitative relations are untenable. We cannot bear them anymore transgressive change extends from the very sensation of living then through the material world. 00:43:18.000 --> 00:43:36.000 In her provocative book entitled, what comes after entanglement ever Gerard advocates for an ethical engagement with exclusion, recognizing in her words the entities practices and ways of being that are for closed when other entangled realities are materialized. This perspective aligns with the notion of twisted ontology as I spoke of earlier is one locates those become things that are short circuited by the layered build up that occurs when some ontological formations are twisted together governed into relation, and others are necessarily excluded the landscape of twisted ontology is is one of uneven development and exclusion some relations are deemed to matter more than others and the processes of such mattering requires ethical deliberation and an emergent sense of responsibility as Gerard goes on to right attention also needs to be paid to the frictions foreclosures and exclusions that play a constituent a role in the composition of lives reality centralizing and politicizing these exclusions is vital and carving out space for intervention, examining rational exclusions is constitutive of our contemporary moment is an ethical act of inquiry for Gerard when that generates the conditions necessary for intervention. And for Gerard those constitutive fictions frictions foreclosures and exclusions serve as an important and often theoretically overlooked entry point for material analysis, more than the density of the entanglements themselves, it is their limits, those spaces were identified relations fade into necessary exclusions that provide opportunities for ethical engagement deliberation and contingent action. Let's it is that experimental inquiry necessary necessarily an X, X of difficult recognition, we are bound by and responsible for these tragic circumstances belief, we might be otherwise, and virtue, we must become differently. Experimental inquiry is in short and ethically laden making a means of generating the Justin circumstances that overwhelm through perpetuating injustice. This might bring us to a series of provocative, I think questions that call and Krugman asks, and I think extend from Marcus work. Here are the questions, what are the problems we cannot be, what are the problems we cannot but feel the force of over what and why are we constantly anxious and inevitably distraught. What are the problems with which we wrap and work our lives in burning intensities. In many ways I remain emboldened through Brady's notion that we practice a pragmatic engagement with the present in order to collectively construct conditions that transform and empower our capacity to act ethically and produce social horizons of hope, or sustainable futures for me inquiry is part and parcel of such resistive and productive practice. This is inquiry as an ontological way of living, motivated by ethical force, a way of reading the future into the present to borrow the phrasing of JK get some grand and work is work reminds us, this can be joyful experimentation, an exuberant experimental engagement with the not yet. And similarly, as for co admonished. Do not think that one has to be said in order to be militant, even though the thing one is fighting is abominable through inquiry we engage with the president as a delusion and music witness blurring the governing processes and practices of fascism, such that they lose their precise purpose, creating relational conditions through which specific forms of resistive potential become a new through inquiry we might engage the present to break its violent hold on our very being utilizing the circumstances that enforce our exhaustion such that we might become otherwise through inquiry we stand vigil look out for potential change, refusing the governing limitations of the status quo and using the material of our contemporary moment to generate a transformative difference. My thanks to Mirka's paper for helping to provide provoke these thoughts, and to all of you for listening. Thank you. Jessica: Thank you so much, Aaron such an exciting response I'm like all jazzed up now after here in New York I'm hearing you. I'm really looking forward to this being on the podcast so that we can revisit and re listen and continue to learn. So our next. Our next response is from Juha and I am going to do my best to share a YouTube video, and play. Perfect. Juha: Thank you miracle for your mind provoking talk, and for inviting me to comment on it. It's been my great pleasure to follow your career and success over the years. And here are my comments. Just let you put it in your speech global anti capitalist perspective is necessary. If we are to survive as a species. During the past year, a virus known as covert 19 halted the world. It's a biological fact that we can't wish away, but it has had tremendous social and political consequences worldwide. We cannot change the mechanisms, the wireless works and mutates, but like navigators who sense the strength of the wind, and its direction. We can take those laws into account in our actions. Neglecting them can result in a fatal multi organism disease. Like a mistake in a vacation can cause a shipwreck. Therefore, I must say all the sheep and take the storm caused by the wires into account in at least two ways. First, I may reason that life is dangerous. In any case, continue to meet people and ignore possible consequences for my health. Second, I can think that health is wider and therefore, I want to follow safety measures, wash my hands. Keep social distance and wear a mask. As I cannot escape the fact of covert 19. I still have the freedom to choose what effects. I allow it to have on me and my actions. Besides, by following the necessary safety measures. I take care of myself and my fellow beings. And by doing so, carry my collective responsibility. Indeed, many have had to consider how to live, not to become infected, or infect others, the recommendations of health experts have been clear. But humans are not machines. They take the official messages in their judgment and relate them to the totality of the individual lives. The weighing of these options on human decision and meaning making interests me as a qualitative researcher and a social scientist. The options can be seen in a continuum where at the other end of the other end. People lot live their lives as useful. And at the other follow safety measures, quite literally. The rationales and logics for these options vary. Perhaps the most exciting answers come from the unresponsive and individualistic risk takers. Who otter. Yes, of course, there is a risk of infection. And it makes me think. But even then, the philosopher gh fun rate has presented a general model of action, in which he distinguishes the result and consequence of an act. On the one hand, the result of the act of opening a window. Is that a certain window is open these consequences. A state of affairs, which by virtue of course or necessity, come about. When the Act has been done. On the other hand, a consequence of the act of opening a window, may be the temperature in the room goes down, or as the famous poet bent this article ski writes about a possible consequence. The bird could fly in. What makes makes the logic of human action and decision making, related to the covert 19, so special is the collective nature. My individual decisions are associated with a type global network of others choices. The post pandemic time will finally tell if the window has been open or closed. And how many black Corbett 19 ravens have flown in We managed to transform our teaching online early on, even during the pandemic my workplace down but a university succeeded to produce or produce enough degrees to fulfill its promise to the Ministry of Education and Culture, The largest funder of the universities in Finland. We have proven to be good academic workers, perhaps too good for the success came at a price, the temporary University's campus plan approved by the University Board in Fall 2020 states that, and I quote, the experience gained through the covert 19 pandemic highlights the need for flexible learning and working solutions. In particular, where digital and physical environments merge to support that user's data lives, and well being. Quote ends. In addition, the plan includes the promise and I quote, dumper the university's goal is to be carbon neutral by 2030. As part of the target, its office and teaching spaces, will be reduced by 25%, quote, and I guess no one sees anything wrong with the carbon neutrality. but many made the math and calculated. One plus one equaling that the university would eliminate our faculty building. In fact, carbon neutrality may be mayor smoke and mirrors the true reason being cost savings. under the neoliberal regime. The canvas planned. You know University is another example of the new management University managerial capitalist University. To add insult to injury. Due to the COVID 19 restrictions on the campus. The university managers could launch the plan without fearing that we teachers and students occupy the University, University building, as we did a few years ago, consequence. Consequently, it's possible that we lose our office spaces seminar rooms lecture halls, and more importantly, our sense of community, and perhaps turn into digital nomads without any other social existence than our digital presence. Many might feel betrayed. Maybe we managed to do our job too well and won the race to the bottom, the capitalist neoliberal University. As the world doesn't seem to follow the Broadway. The harder you work, the luckier you get, but quite reverse. Perhaps tomorrow we don't say that. We do killed the radio star. But that digital shift at our office space In the future, we might not teach in the shadow of the Corbett 19 anymore, or under the mango tree as Paulo Ferreira in Finland it's too cold for that. But carry on our solitary talk only in the Digital's fair. Okay, I do know the world though there is much, much crazier and uglier than this, and the ills of the world are last. But God is in detail. We cannot take our position as educational and social scientists for granted anymore. For it's not only the managerial University. That is after the critical scholar, but also the news media. Believe it or not, we have only one national newspaper in Finland Helsingin Sanomat plus few other regionals. A couple of days ago Helsingin Sanomat published but an editorial in which one of the editors in chief stated as follows, and I quote, the father, one goes from the core of science to the social humanistic and ultimately artistic research, the less empirical evidence, there is in academic competition. And the more ideological the reshoots becomes the editor then shared the editorial on Twitter and wrote. It seems that this editorial has raised diverse debate, the speculative assumption in the text was that academic competition would seem to have a greater tendency to become idealized. When there are no clear criteria in the field to compare theories, Ideally, just to become ideal a choice. Yes. When there are no clear criteria in the field or to compare theories. Quote ends, a sociologist, then asked, and I quote, I continue your speculation by asking what is in your view, the clear criteria to compare those theories in science lacking in social sciences, which prevents the power of ideologies. The editor replies Scientific Method. Then the philosopher of science intervenes. Would you like to tell us what is that what is the scientific method that we philosophers of science, despite many attempts, haven't been able to find one. This was also a quote. It seems to me that the powerful national media outlets mighty editor has aligned with the populist right, the conservative right, the racist right and the matches. And we have had a wake up call in so many places in the biological, psychological, social and political spheres. We cannot stay in our coupon compartments any longer. We need, what miracle was talking about poor diversity. We need to join forces as miracle and Fred, poor thing. Put it in a few years back, and I quote, this quote ends my comments. Scholars need to stop engaging in research activities for research sake, only research needs to serve the public citizens, students, parents, teachers and so on. Social Science Research should be a collaborative effort, and a form of public science. It's time to consider how to increase methodological attentiveness and the potential of collaborative inquiry that builds on collective yet contradictory stories extract and material life experiences. Thank you so much and congratulations Mirka.

In Episode 3 of Series 2 we continue our discussion with Erin Manning and Brian Massumi from the SenseLab in Canada - (please listen to Part 1 if you haven't already). We discuss the emerging 3 Ecologies Process Seed Bank, and how post-Blockchain technologies could reverse today’s economic balance, to collectively emphasize our qualities of experience, making monetary aspects peripheral to our everyday lives. Further links On the revaluation of Value, Economies to come by Brian Massumi    

In Episode 2 of Series 2 Erin Manning and Brian Massumi talk to Doerte Weig about schizo-somatic workshops at the Senselab, and how new ways of thinking and moving with relational openness and group subjectivity would benefit teaching and learning in universities of the future. Further links and resources SenseLab website Three Ecologies Institute

Following the publication of "Pensée en acte, vingt propositions pour la recherche-création" (Presses du réel, 2018), we met with Erin Manning and Brian Massumi asking them six questions towards sharing their philosophical vision of research-creation. This new book offers a partial translation of their 2014 work "Thought in the Act, Passages in the Ecology of Experience".  Continue your exploration of research-creation on:rec.hexagram.ca

Following the publication of "Pensée en acte, vingt propositions pour la recherche-création" (Presses du réel, 2018), we met with Erin Manning and Brian Massumi asking them six questions towards sharing their philosophical vision of research-creation. This new book offers a partial translation of their 2014 work "Thought in the Act, Passages in the Ecology of Experience".  Continue your exploration of research-creation on:rec.hexagram.ca

Following the publication of "Pensée en acte, vingt propositions pour la recherche-création" (Presses du réel, 2018), we met with Erin Manning and Brian Massumi asking them six questions towards sharing their philosophical vision of research-creation. This new book offers a partial translation of their 2014 work "Thought in the Act, Passages in the Ecology of Experience".  Continue your exploration of research-creation on:rec.hexagram.ca

A Christchurch mother who was diagnosed with postnatal depression more than seven months ago is still waiting for help.Advocates say Amy Payne's story is one of many showing a nationwide gap in support for mums seeking help for maternal mental health.Richard Green spoke to Erin Manning from Postnatal Depression Canterbury who says unfortunately this is a common story they are hearing.Of the 11,000 women experiencing postnatal depression and anxiety each year, about three-quarters were affected by delays in diagnosis and treatment. 

In this episode, Caleb and Todd talk with professional photographer, Erin Manning, about how to take better quality photos. ------------- *Guest Links* ------------- Erin's Website ( http://erinmanning.com ) Erin on Facebook ( https://www.facebook.com/erinmanning/ ) Erin on Twitter ( https://twitter.com/ErinManning ) Erin on Instagram ( https://www.instagram.com/erinmanning/ ) Erin on YouTube ( https://www.youtube.com/user/ErinManning ) ----------------- *Links Mentioned* ----------------- Shutterstock ( https://www.shutterstock.com ) Getty Images ( https://www.gettyimages.com ) iStock Photo ( https://www.istockphoto.com ) FaceTune ( https://www.facetuneapp.com ) Waterlouge ( https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/waterlogue/id764925064?mt=8 ) Prisma ( https://prisma-ai.com ) iWatermark ( https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/iwatermark-watermark-photos/id357577420?mt=8 ) Phonto ( http://www.phon.to ) Vont ( https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/vont-text-on-videos/id857842841?mt=8 ) Ditty ( https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ditty-by-zya/id957529556?mt=8 ) Rollworld ( https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/rollworld-tiny-planet-photos-and-more/id867960225?mt=8 ) --------------------------------------- *Learner's Corner Recommended Resource* --------------------------------------- Origins with James Andrew Miller ( https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/origins-with-james-andrew-miller/id1266445999?mt=2 ) ----------------- *What We Learned* ----------------- *Tips for the Average Person* * Understand where the light is coming from. * Make people visible in photograph * Pay attention to composition * Eliminate distractions * Have the angle be at the eye line or slightly above the eye line * Have different distances *How Do You Tell A Story Through Photography?* * Wide shot. * Medium shot. * Close-up shot. *How Do Your Improve Your Craft?* * Teaching * Doing * Experimenting *What Do Photographers Underestimate?* * Get out of automatic mode. * Don't be afraid to experiment with shots and your camera. ---------------- *Click to Tweet* ---------------- "Photographers are capturing an instant in reality. Painters make up their own reality." - @ErinManning @LearnersPodcast Click to Tweet ( https://ctt.ec/7zxea ) "You learn a lot through taking a lot photos." - @ErinManning @LearnersPodcast Click to Tweet ( https://ctt.ec/9qI5T ) "It's easier to teach people the technical side of photography than the creative side of photography." - @ErinManning @LearnersPodcast Click to Tweet ( https://ctt.ec/1S9cV ) --------------------------- *New Episode Every Tuesday* --------------------------- ----------------------- *Join Us Every Tuesday* ----------------------- Thank you for listening to the Learner's Corner Podcast. We hope you'll join us for next week's episode. Until next time, keep learning and keep growing.

This week, Rachel + Hannah talk to Akash Inbakumar about his textile work, his love of Erin Manning and his general iconic status. Tune in for very thoughtful chats on tactility and also, a lot of tongue popping. https://www.instagram.com/akashinbakumar/

We're taking thousands of smartphone photos, but where are they when we need to find them? The #TalkingTech panel weighs in with tips. Guests: Adobe's Josh Haftel, photographer Erin Manning and search expert Danny Sullivan.

How to tame that ever growing smartphone photo collection--tips from Adobe's Josh Haftel, search expert Danny Sullivan and photographer Erin Manning, with host Jefferson Graham. The full show also includes a look at Adobe's new Lightroom app for IOS 10, which shoots and processes photos in DNG, a RAW format.

Maryse Jobin a d’abord demandé à Erin Manning, professeure à la Faculté des beaux-arts de l’Université Concordia, comment est né cette démarche de mêler tissus et ingrédients de table.

Erin Manning the former host of the DIY network "The Whole Picture" sits down with me to discuss her background in photography and her new projects. Erin provides tips, and advice for new and upcoming photographers. She says, learn lighting first, don't worry about the technical stuff. Shoot in Program mode when you just starting out. Its more important to get the shot. Look for her new Video Web base, Photography show coming later in the year. She will continue to share her success and knowledge in photography. She is as nice and bubbly to interview as she appears on the "air". Don't miss this fun interview.

Conversation recorded with Erin Manning in New York on January 19, 2014. http://the-archipelago.net/2014/01/20/erin-manning-what-can-the-body-do/

Erin Manning discovered photography at age seven when she received an instamatic camera and found a book of photographs, The Family of Man. A fascination with images of people in that book and her own family photographs helped lead her to a successful career as a portrait and commercial photographer. As well as being a great photographer, she is also an author and the host of , a television show focusing on making better photographs. You can discover more about Erin and her work by visiting .For streaming audio or subscribe to the podcast for free viaErin Manning recommends the work of .Book Recommendation: