BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Headshop Reading Group

 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
 
Tom Coates
17:33 / 05.11.06
It occurs to me that it's perfectly reasonable to run a few of these at the same time, if there's sufficient enthusiasm.
 
 
semioticrobotic
21:24 / 05.11.06
I'd be up for some Bruno Latour anytime, Tom.
 
 
petunia
11:40 / 06.11.06
it's perfectly reasonable to run a few of these at the same time

At first i wasn't too keen on this idea - it seems it could thin out the amount of people who were up for the reading group(s). I'm sure not everyone has time to read and discuss multiple texts.

But i suppose i had been thinking of the groups as a kind of on-going thing like a mailing list or an RL group where we all work it out at the same time. Perhaps this isnt necessary.

If we take on the idea of having a seperate thread for each chapter/section of a text, we could have the discussion left as pretty a-temporal. It should be easier this way for people to drop in and out of the discussion, or come to it later on. We could use the wiki as a hub for the threads, to make them easily found in the future.

There is the concern that if too many threads get started up, the discussion will end up being spread pretty thin so it might be better to keep some element of 'this is what we're reading now'. Keep it limited to (say) two or three texts ongoing at any point and maybe have a wishlist thread where people put in their dibs for the next text.

What think?

As for what to read - i have a slight aversion to olde style metaphysics, but i suppose it's good to work with one's fears. The Bruno Latour stuff seems pretty interesting, too.

I'd also like to have a bash at some Deleuze & Guattarri stuff at some point. I have a copy of anti-oedipus which sits on my bookshelf taunting me...
 
 
Saturn's nod
12:15 / 06.11.06
I'm a Latour fan (and a scientist) and I am willing to dig out my copy of Pandora's hope and join a reading group effort.
 
 
nighthawk
16:47 / 06.11.06
My library has a copy of the Latour so I'm happy to do that.

I'd also like to have a bash at some Deleuze & Guattarri stuff at some point. I have a copy of anti-oedipus which sits on my bookshelf taunting me...

I've always thought 1000 Plateaus would be a great text to read as a group - we could have one thread per plateau.
 
 
Cat Chant
11:32 / 07.11.06
i have a slight aversion to olde style metaphysics

Are you meaning the Spinoza, .trampetunia? I think the suggestion for that is that we'd read it in the light of (or to shed light upon) Deleuze & Guattari, so you might find it interesting despite its oldskoolity.

I'd be incredibly up for the Bruno Latour - he's being read by a few people in my department and name-checked a lot in the kind of debates about the nature of reality that I seem to get sucked into a lot.

(Spinoza might have to wait for a bit, to be honest, as I have just got an academic job and therefore am too busy for reading more than one academic book a year OH THE CRUEL IRONY).

Could the reading-group chapter-by-chapter threads work a bit like the Tarot threads in the Temple, with a central index thread? I really like that structure.
 
 
Disco is My Class War
12:11 / 07.11.06
I'd definitely be up for Latour, and I like the idea of separate threads for chapters, so no-one has to be on the same timeline.

Is anyone willing to scan the Latour and distribute PDF's to those who want to be involved? I can do it, but not until next week -- I'm a bit busy this week. (I'm happy to host pdf's, as I said, but if folks don't want to do that, then perhaps we can distribute them via PM or email, some more private and less copyright-breaching method.)
 
 
illmatic
13:52 / 07.11.06
I would love to have a go at the Latour. If anyone can PM a first chapter or intor, that'd be great..
 
 
sorenson
19:43 / 07.11.06
Can I add my voice to the Latour camp? I will also need someone to make it available to me though...pdf would be great.
 
 
nighthawk
19:48 / 07.11.06
Seems to be a consensus around Latour then? I might be able to make a .pdf of the first chapter this week, as long as noone else beats me to the copy in my library.
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
21:50 / 07.11.06
The first chapter (only) is available on his site here.

...

I'd love to join in if/when you read Deleuze & Guattarri. I'm slowly making my way through A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History by De Landa, at the moment, and want to know more.
 
 
petunia
11:04 / 08.11.06
Are you meaning the Spinoza, .trampetunia?

Yeah, this was what i meant. I have fear of big olde metaphysics, but i think it would be good for me to work against these fears. I imagine it could be quite rewarding to tackle some 'proper' philosophy (an old lecturer's distinction, not mine).

If this were to be combined with D&G, i'm sure it could be pretty damn worthwhile.

It seems the big preferences so far are Latour, D&G and Spinoza, so I propose:

We start first on a group reading of Latour, simply due to the fact that we have the first chapter available to us already.

Then, either after or during the Latour group, we start on D&G. A thousand plateaux seems to be a popular choice, and my understanding is that it's a good book to divvy up into its separate chapters. Also good for dipping in and out of, so it would be a good ongoing project as people needn't feel they have missed out on the earlier discussions (not sure how much an issue this will be if we use the wiki as an index).

We could start on Spinoza too. Maybe waiting 'til we have 'done' Latour (are my worries of thinning the discussion out unfounded?). The Spinoza would be good to combine with D&G - the two bouncing off each other.

What think?
 
 
nighthawk
15:07 / 08.11.06
The Spinoza would be good to combine with D&G - the two bouncing off each other.

Hmm I'm not so keen on this to be honest. If we're going to read Deleuze, lets read Deleuze; likewise with Spinoza. Obviously we can look at Deleuze's work on Spinoza as part of that, but if we're reading Spinoza himself I think it would be better to focus on his texts, rather than Deleuze's readings of them. I mean I love both of Deleuze's books on Spinoza, but you've got to remember what he said about "taking an author from behind and giving him a child that would be his own offspring, yet monstrous" - that's how those texts are written.

So basically I'd agree with Mr Disco's suggestion that we stick to original texts rather than commentaries.
 
 
semioticrobotic
15:18 / 08.11.06
I know I was the one who opened the Spinoza box upthread, but the suggestion of Latour intrigues me even more. I just grabbed a copy of _Pandora's Hope_, and if that's what we finally choose to read, I'm all for it.
 
 
petunia
16:15 / 08.11.06
"taking an author from behind and giving him a child that would be his own offspring, yet monstrous"

That is a brilliant quotation.

You may be right about keeping readings directed at actual works. As you say; focussing on the actual authors and their works, rather than later interpretations. Though I do feel that interpretations can help with comprehension of a work. But I suppose it's better to get a grasp of a work for what it is to begin with.

What you said, really.
 
 
Tom Coates
09:10 / 11.11.06
Okay then - so what's the plan with the Latour?
 
 
Disco is My Class War
09:38 / 11.11.06
The plan with Latour seems to be that nighthawk is going to get the book and turn it digital. Then we're going to start different threads on each chapter (i guess whoever feels like starting one does it, yes?), possibly starting first with the Introduction to get everyone on board at the same-ish time.

Does this agree with everyone?
 
 
semioticrobotic
13:03 / 11.11.06
Sounds like a plan to me, Disco. Latour it is.
 
 
Saturn's nod
15:27 / 11.11.06
Great. Plan sounds good, Disco.

The only reading groups I've done before are journal clubs for reading academic papers and bible studies. I was thinking about what kind of questions to ask for discussing each chapter. This might be a bit too odd, but how do you all like the questions in the Spears' Friendly Bible Study method?

The relevant bit is the questions each participant is asked to answer, and it occurred to me they might act as a starting point for discussion:


"1. What is the author's main point in this passage? (MAIN POINT)

This question helps each member focus on what the author says. It often helps to state the question again in another form: "What is the author saying about God?" Each person must address the text directly in a relationship formed between reader and author.

This is not the time to share the ideas of a commentator, minister, priest, or other authority figure. The search here is for the main point the author was making in this passage and the author's understanding of God working in our world. It is easy to respond with what we would like for the author to have said.

It is easy to express our own ideas on the subject. However, the target of the question is what the author actually said. To help those who may be unsure and timid about Bible study, remind the group again that a variety of responses can help the group see the whole of the passage more clearly. After one or two sessions, this will be easily understood and liberating to most participants.

2. What new light do I find in this particular reading of this passage of the text? (NEW LIGHT)

This question provides opportunity for the working of the Spirit in our silence. This question reminds us of the continuing revelation in our lives from both unfamiliar and familiar passages. The focus here is on each member's new insight, observation, or understanding during this particular reading of this passage on this particular occasion.

Each reading can bring some new or renewed insight. That insight may be small or great. This answer may grow with more and more points as the group works through the passage with other questions.

The new light may be something that is seen now, but had never been seen before. It may be a new understanding of a word or phrase. It may be a new way of seeing a particular problem that this passage triggers in a member's mind. It may be the last in the sequence of questions answered in the silence. It may grow with more and more points as the group works through the passage with other questions.

3. Is this passage true to my experience? (TRUTH)

The focus here is on comparing the message of the Bible passage with each person's experience in life. Our spiritual journeys are ``experimental'' as we search toward fuller understanding. Our personal experience and our community experience are sources of authority which we bring to the study to understand and supplement the Biblical text.

For those who come from other religious traditions, this question may come as a shock. Few of us have lived in other traditions in which we have been allowed to question the ``truth'' of the Bible. Yet we are accustomed to answering this question, if not with the Bible, with other written materials. This question is often a freedom experience and consistently will open up new insights for everyone in the group.

Recognition that our present understanding of the passage is not consistent with our experience may require reassessment of the meaning of our experience, deeper study of the meaning of the Bible passage, or recognition that our individual spiritual journeys, as with those of the Biblical authors, are searches in the dark in which full clarity is not given at every moment.

4. What are the implications of this passage for my life? (IMPLICATIONS)

The answer to this question may provide implications for living at any of several levels of spiritual life. The center of the question is, "What difference, if any, does the passage make for my life?" There is a reaching from the text back to our lives in this question. It brings the role of ethics and daily living practices to our attention. This holding together of faith and action is central to our tradition.

5. What problems do I have with this passage? (PROBLEMS)

Here we identify problems of language in the text, of interpretation, of meaning, or of applying the text to our lives. These problems may generate interest in seeking answers from other sources during the days before the next Bible study.

Problems can be identified without being solved. This question reminds us that study of a passage is a continuing process. Like life, understanding is never complete at any one time. It is a continuing dialogue between the text and life. "



Or if those questions are not the right ones, maybe we could come up with a different list of five questions. Process-wise I think it helps to have a framework of fairly simple questions. Each person can write in their answers to start off the discussion?
 
 
nighthawk
15:32 / 11.11.06
We're ok for chapter one, right? Someone can start that thread up if they've read the text. I'll hopefully get the next few done this week.
 
 
Tom Coates
09:26 / 12.11.06
I don't know if we need to be quite as rigorous as with Bible reading. Passage by passage conversation may be too detailed and intricate an approach and may drain much of the entertainment out of the process.

Clearly though I think we're trying to block through it in chunks with one another, so I suspect a good technique would be for us to try and collectively come to an accomodation on what we think he's arguing for in each section and then draw out some points in each section that we either find particularly illuminating or have trouble with either for us to collectively expand upon or to interrogate. When we feel like we've savaged a section enough so that we've each come to our own personal accomodation with it, then we move to the next.

I'm around the third chapter of initial reading already and I can tell you in a theoretical way I found the first chapter so full of entertainment value that I was grinning my head off for great chunks of it - although that's mostly to do with his critique of previous world/mind divisions. There's some big idea stuff going on here, even if - as I suspect - it's rather less rigorous and slightly weirder than it should be...
 
 
semioticrobotic
12:13 / 12.11.06
Would you like to be the one to kick off a shiny new thread then, Tom?
 
 
Psi-L is working in hell
14:43 / 12.11.06
I'd like to join in with the Latour, though will say now I'm a bit bogged down with other theories in science studies in the mad panic to write up my PhD over the next few months to perhaps be of much use...hopefully I'll be able to contribute a bit though as I really like his writing, as Tom said he can be an enjoyable read.
 
 
pangloss
21:25 / 12.11.06
The Latour seems like a great book to read, judging by the first chapter. Count me in, provided I can get my hands on a copy (or somebody digitises it).

I like the idea of questions too - maybe not making them obligatory, but having them around as something for people like me, who need some kind of framework to work out what they think.
 
 
sdv (non-human)
12:16 / 13.11.06
I've done and run a few of these online reading groups over the years - and this is showing the common problems that online reading groups often seem to have - the desire for the text to be 'free', the tendency for it to never start, and eventually the tendency for it never to reach any conclusion...

I'd suggest that someone should start.... preferably with a resonably detailed reading of the text...


s
 
 
Saturn's nod
12:20 / 13.11.06
I don't know if we need to be quite as rigorous as with Bible reading. Passage by passage conversation may be too detailed and intricate an approach and may drain much of the entertainment out of the process.

Yes indeed. What I had in mind was answering those questions (or others) for each chapter of the Latour, not more fine-grained sections, just as a way to begin discussion.

And as you suggest, pangloss, it makes sense to me as well if the qs are available as a framework rather than mandatory.
 
 
nighthawk
16:58 / 14.11.06
I have a copy now. I'll probably read a bit of it tonight, and start making .pdfs of Chapter 2 ff. tommorrow. Is someone going to kick things off? Tom?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
18:32 / 14.11.06
I'd like to do this too, if there's a PDF available can someone whack it over to me?
 
 
Saturn's nod
12:48 / 21.11.06
Now I'm reading Latour again it reminds me how sometimes it works best for me to start at the end of his argument and work backwards. I don't know if others read him the same way: if so, it might be useful to get the Conclusion of Pandora's hope distributed soonish, because I think it makes the introduction easier to understand.

If I recall correctly the introduction and conclusion of Pandora's hope are the most abstract parts, with the chapters in the body of the text each illustrating Latour's approach to a specific scientific investigation. If you're put off by his loosely argued abstraction in the introduction I can appreciate your point of view but I'd recommend persevering anyway with one of the chapters because it's in the examples I've found his work most enjoyable.
 
 
nighthawk
13:48 / 28.11.06
Just in case people are relying on me for copies of the Latour: my scanner is not making useable copies for some reason, so I'll have to try to get access to the one at work, which might take a while.
 
 
Disco is My Class War
01:03 / 29.11.06
I read the Latour introduction -- can't access the rest of the book as it's out of the library still. I guess I'm vaguely intereted but not that much, hence my lack of posting new threads and discussion/questions/commentary.
 
 
Saturn's nod
08:50 / 03.12.06
I've put up a topic post to start the chapter one discussion of Pandora's hope and bumped the Pager thread in Conversation, in case there are others interested who aren't following Headshop at the moment. I plan to write my own answers soon, but feel free to jump in if you've already thought about yours.
 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
  
Add Your Reply