coursework > CI
744 > application
One of the regimes of truth (Foucault 1980) in an academic environment is that research and serious academic thought takes the form of "papers" -- stacks of thinly pressed wood/cotton pulp cut precisely to 8-1/2" x 11" and marked upon in black ink with alphanumeric symbols arranged sequentially in a linear fashion according to agreed upon (by "the community") styles. This is a constructed performative "truth" -- witnessed and performed repeatedly by myself and my peer group for most of our adult lives, to the extent that my identity as an academic is in many ways defined by my performance of it.
I have a second identity, however, as a computer geek. The letters "APA" and "MLA" that have guided my academic identity mean nothing to them. Theirs is a world defined by different Discourses. The hard-core computer geeks don't consider me one of them because I don't write code, but because I know the letters "HTML" and "CSS" and .MOV, and have a basic working knowledge of hardware and software, they nominally accept me. They allow me to sit at the peripheries of their circles because I understand snippets of their discourse, and they need members. I can be a member, as long as I keep my mouth shut. That's okay with me; I like it on the edge because the liminal spaces are where the patterns are visible. At the edge of the woods, one can see both forest and trees. It's harder to fully experience an embody either, but it's a great place to observe. Additionally, if one learns the discourses of both spaces well enough to penetrate both spaces, it affords a great amount of personal power. The danger, however, if not performed well enough, is that one becomes invisible to both.
Interestingly, the strength of my identity in each group is stronger in the other. While my computer skills are nearly insignificant to the computer geeks, they often know something of my academic life and, because they don't understand the performative discourse of academics, think of me as a great scholar. Many of my academic peers, on the other hand, because they don't understand the performative discourse of computer geeks, think of me as a great computer geek. Each group bestows upon me a degree of identity in the other that is often intimidating, and of course, expect me to perform accordingly. In a very limited sense I have double consciousness -- both an academic and a computer geek. A problem I have is one of balance. If I perform too much as an academic in either community, my computer geek identity diminishes or disappears. If I perform too much in the Discourse of a computer geek, I will be rejected as an academic. Luckily, for now, because the groups know so little about the discourse and performance standards (regimes of truth) of the other, it's possible for me to balance between the two -- to feel out the levels of performance needed in each discourse to satisfy their performance requirements.
Enter the concept of hybridity. As computers become more prevalent in academics, the liminal spaces are beginning to get crowded with people who are able to speak both languages. At this point they begin to interact and inevitably create their own discourses and practices (regimes of truth), and begin to form their own group identity, and recognize the performances of other members of this newly formed identity.
This web page is currently an excellent example of hybridity in practice. It is the offspring from a coupling of computer geek (HTML, CSS) and academic (writing). This web page pretends to be a paper in order to slip into (but barely) the range of acceptable performance of that particular regime of truth. It is designed in a very academic-styled one-column format that can be printed out and comfortably read by academics who are used to reading things on wood pulp. I initially designed it as a two-column site, but changed it to mimic traditional papers because a two-column site I had been working on (for another class) was panned by a colleague who reviewed it. His general view of a web-based medium is that it is "not as well suited [as paper-based writing] for communicating complex or robust concepts" (author's name withheld).
On the other hand, I am asserting my computer geek identity (or at least giving it a nod) by building this "paper" on an electronic computationally-based foundation. As a member of this emerging group in academics, I feel I need to take opportunities in safe, or semi-safe spaces within the academic circle to "push the agenda" of this identity with sympathetic members. A danger here is that if I push too hard at the wrong time or place, I am likely to get booted, or not fully accepted as a circumcised member of the inner circles. I have written about other reasons to work present in this format as well.
One concept not explicitly stated in class, that I hope to explore and develop in my writing, beyond the semester, is the concept I call "bending Discourse" -- a form of resistance within performative elements of a regime of truth to make room for greater arrays of expression. In some ways, this is similar to Judith Butler's ideas on using gender-bending, or drag, as a form of performative resistance to the repeated discourses and practices that "protect" (and limit) heterosexual regimes of truth (1990). I am developing it, however, as a concept that can be used on a broader structural level.
The final "paper" for my Fall 2004 "Multicultural Perspectives in Education" class with Gloria Ladson-Billings.
