<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Recording Surface Comments</title>
	<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com</link>
	<description>Scratches, crackles, and interrupted takes</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:57:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: a european</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/25/calais/#comment-273</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:27:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/25/calais/#comment-273</guid>
					<description>i say get the refugee jungle, back to where it came from</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>i say get the refugee jungle, back to where it came from
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Eric</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/27/inevitable/#comment-272</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:37:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/27/inevitable/#comment-272</guid>
					<description>Shag, this is great. Thanks for this, especially spotting the deflectionary use of &quot;we,&quot; which I hadn't really picked up on. And yes, the demand -- expectation, waiting -- for heroic individuals, from people who know the futility of heroic individuals. Or in other contexts say they do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Shag, this is great. Thanks for this, especially spotting the deflectionary use of &#8220;we,&#8221; which I hadn&#8217;t really picked up on. And yes, the demand &#8212; expectation, waiting &#8212; for heroic individuals, from people who know the futility of heroic individuals. Or in other contexts say they do.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: shag carpet bomb</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/27/inevitable/#comment-271</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:25:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/27/inevitable/#comment-271</guid>
					<description>i think her inclinations were manifest early on in her book on feminism and the defense of Habermas. unf, it was an interlibrary loan, so no illustrative quotage.

the thing about teaching at a university, no matter how much you think you like teaching and think it's important, universities are about research. you're not really rewarded for being a teacher; indeed, at most of them, you are punished if you are seen as a good teacher who wins great evals and awards from students.

and even if you do love teaching, the daily drudge and dreariness of encountering students who are, even at the university where she teaches, ill-prepared for the work and often hostile to it, well it can make you feel as if students are the enemy. in the same way a cashier sees the customer as the enemy i suppose. of course, being an academic with more than a passing interest in social theories which recognize the structural sources of student apathy, ignorance, and so forth then you dress it up in the appropriate language: structural blame and making sure to include the we to which you belong as just another reason: why.

it's not just that they have been turned into apathetic people with no interest in learning; it's also that &quot;we&quot; aren't doing our job -- she says. but this is a ruse, an attempt to deflect. to pretend to take some responsibility because, after all, how can you speak in the language of stern, finger-wagging *at* others, if you don't perform a little defensive self-criticism where you demonstrate that you also criticize yourself. But it's not at the individual, the writer. Rather, the writer becomes a &quot;we&quot; (which needs a &quot;them&quot;): &quot;OH! it's not all their fault; it's also ours.&quot; where her &quot;i&quot; can stand alone, taking responsibility that she expects of others, but must be magnified by a &quot;we&quot; -- all of us are not taking responsibility. &quot;we&quot; academics. &quot;we&quot; teachers. &quot;we&quot; -- where the &quot;i&quot; recedes. because the writer doesn't really think she is part of the problem. it's this we she's a part of that is. whereas the students, they're expected to be heroic individuals capable of resisting all of it to leap out of history, heroically resisting.

i'm fascinated by how, everywhere these days, i see this demand for heroic individuals to overcome history and rescue us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>i think her inclinations were manifest early on in her book on feminism and the defense of Habermas. unf, it was an interlibrary loan, so no illustrative quotage.</p>
	<p>the thing about teaching at a university, no matter how much you think you like teaching and think it&#8217;s important, universities are about research. you&#8217;re not really rewarded for being a teacher; indeed, at most of them, you are punished if you are seen as a good teacher who wins great evals and awards from students.</p>
	<p>and even if you do love teaching, the daily drudge and dreariness of encountering students who are, even at the university where she teaches, ill-prepared for the work and often hostile to it, well it can make you feel as if students are the enemy. in the same way a cashier sees the customer as the enemy i suppose. of course, being an academic with more than a passing interest in social theories which recognize the structural sources of student apathy, ignorance, and so forth then you dress it up in the appropriate language: structural blame and making sure to include the we to which you belong as just another reason: why.</p>
	<p>it&#8217;s not just that they have been turned into apathetic people with no interest in learning; it&#8217;s also that &#8220;we&#8221; aren&#8217;t doing our job &#8212; she says. but this is a ruse, an attempt to deflect. to pretend to take some responsibility because, after all, how can you speak in the language of stern, finger-wagging *at* others, if you don&#8217;t perform a little defensive self-criticism where you demonstrate that you also criticize yourself. But it&#8217;s not at the individual, the writer. Rather, the writer becomes a &#8220;we&#8221; (which needs a &#8220;them&#8221;): &#8220;OH! it&#8217;s not all their fault; it&#8217;s also ours.&#8221; where her &#8220;i&#8221; can stand alone, taking responsibility that she expects of others, but must be magnified by a &#8220;we&#8221; &#8212; all of us are not taking responsibility. &#8220;we&#8221; academics. &#8220;we&#8221; teachers. &#8220;we&#8221; &#8212; where the &#8220;i&#8221; recedes. because the writer doesn&#8217;t really think she is part of the problem. it&#8217;s this we she&#8217;s a part of that is. whereas the students, they&#8217;re expected to be heroic individuals capable of resisting all of it to leap out of history, heroically resisting.</p>
	<p>i&#8217;m fascinated by how, everywhere these days, i see this demand for heroic individuals to overcome history and rescue us.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Tim</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/10/27/sadness/#comment-270</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:40:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/10/27/sadness/#comment-270</guid>
					<description>Thanks. And I'd value your comments. I always find something interesting over here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thanks. And I&#8217;d value your comments. I always find something interesting over here.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Eric</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2007/08/24/justice/#comment-269</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:07:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2007/08/24/justice/#comment-269</guid>
					<description>Yes, Tim, I like your comment very much and agree with it. I think what I wrote above was not nearly &quot;complicated&quot; enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Yes, Tim, I like your comment very much and agree with it. I think what I wrote above was not nearly &#8220;complicated&#8221; enough.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Eric</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/10/27/sadness/#comment-268</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/10/27/sadness/#comment-268</guid>
					<description>Thanks, Tim. And I'm enjoying your blog.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thanks, Tim. And I&#8217;m enjoying your blog.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Tim</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2007/08/24/justice/#comment-267</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 03:17:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2007/08/24/justice/#comment-267</guid>
					<description>I'm simply concerned that any valorisation of desire (as yet another absolute, and whether D&amp;amp;G mean this or not), remains problematic. I often evoke their image of Spinoza's liking of battles between spiders (in WIP) as an image of 'justice' beyond the human register, which of course runs the similar risk of valorising a superior natural order or crude (and misunderstood) Nietzschean model of justice through force. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I&#8217;m simply concerned that any valorisation of desire (as yet another absolute, and whether D&amp;G mean this or not), remains problematic. I often evoke their image of Spinoza&#8217;s liking of battles between spiders (in WIP) as an image of &#8216;justice&#8217; beyond the human register, which of course runs the similar risk of valorising a superior natural order or crude (and misunderstood) Nietzschean model of justice through force.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Tim</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/10/27/sadness/#comment-266</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 03:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/10/27/sadness/#comment-266</guid>
					<description>Super post</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Super post
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Eric</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/27/inevitable/#comment-265</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:18:32 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/27/inevitable/#comment-265</guid>
					<description>Thanks for the comment, all of which I agree with. Academics are structurally predisposed to react this way, but it's nonetheless disappointing when it actually happens. Disappointing, but also the result of a decision. I think it's interesting to wonder if similar arguments would be put forward if a different institution were involved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thanks for the comment, all of which I agree with. Academics are structurally predisposed to react this way, but it&#8217;s nonetheless disappointing when it actually happens. Disappointing, but also the result of a decision. I think it&#8217;s interesting to wonder if similar arguments would be put forward if a different institution were involved.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: eli</title>
		<link>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/27/inevitable/#comment-264</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:28:40 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://recordingsurface.blogsome.com/2009/09/27/inevitable/#comment-264</guid>
					<description>Yes, it's kinda sad how supposedly radical academics react to the occupations with fear and dismissal.  I take it as another point of effectiveness of the occupations: to highlight the antagonism between, on the one hand, academics with vested interests in the given university institution, and on the other hand, the academics of the majority precarious class who need to create some new form of organization of academic labor and life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Yes, it&#8217;s kinda sad how supposedly radical academics react to the occupations with fear and dismissal.  I take it as another point of effectiveness of the occupations: to highlight the antagonism between, on the one hand, academics with vested interests in the given university institution, and on the other hand, the academics of the majority precarious class who need to create some new form of organization of academic labor and life.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
