Kyle > Recent Status Updates

After reading an article by Patricia Fumerton (1986) on miniature portraits and sonnets in Elizabethan court, it is revealing to notice how hidden love, the private thoughts of Armado and Berowne, make their way into Costard's hands, whose only thoughts are on the amount paid in his hands. Both the artist Hilliard and the poet Sydney were famous in the times for crafting these love tokens; like 16th century Facebook!

With all the posturing of the male characters so far (and lots more to come), it is with gentle mocking insight that Shakespeare create four ladies well-matched for each lord: although they may already be in love, each one knows the insubstantial faults of their counterparts. Berowne again comes off the worst for being a conceited joker, yet what does the supposedly honourable Boyet try to get away with these ladies?

Climbing up from the narrative sea, one supposes, and into the writer's workshop, the researcher gets to pull through drawers full of helpful advice: one of the most important is to trust fiction's conventions. In finding my inquiring voice I think back to the many encounters with Jasper Fforde (on the page and in person). Not only does he write from a problematizing perspective, he specifically includes time travel!

The editor of this play did well to point out how much it shares in common with the tragedy King Lear: a seemingly wise ruler expects the support from those closest to him. Two of them flatter while the last dissents. Berowne wit makes him more misunderstood than taciturn Cordelia. It is fitting that this lord has to deal directly with the clown Costard and the swaggering Armado, both fools full of wordplay.

The dissertation literature review serves a different purpose than most reviews: rather than demonstrating the graduate student's familiarity with the breadth of an area of interest, it must point towards the author's personal theory and support the paper's questions. For Rui, it meant having to delete a section of her review containing Vygotsky's sociocultural theories, scraping this scaffold with her mentor's help.

The first play for my Shakespearean diversions course, and it seems like the playwright has veered off the familiar, well-sourced path to create something that had little relationship to any other work of literature of the time. The editor celebrates this departure by claim the play has come into its own in the late 20th century,, exploring "the theatricality of culture" (p. 12) and the incivility of lovers for fame.

Of all the personal stories recounted so far, Youngjoo and Alan's is the most curious one yet. From the very start to their biographies at the chapter's end, I found myself asking the same question Alan shot out when reviewing after her dissertation: "where is Youngjoo?" And I can only guess that she was hidden behind a cloud of pronouns (we, she and he) and still not fully empowered. Note their short reference list.

Wonderful described visits to two women in their eighties, proof again (as in Casanave & Li, 2008, Ch. 2) that every yellowing scrap of paper, well-thumbed book lining the shelves and cherished item (not sure about Mona's Botswanan elephant stool, but still) tells a story. Reminds me of how my wife would travel to a far-flung corner of Japan to interview elderly folk; what a project it would be to narrate her photos!

The chapter shared between Yongyan and John approaches more of a dialogue not only in the explicit speakers identifying and back-and-forth with e-mail messages, but also with the between-the-lines drama. While Yongyan thinks highly of Dr. Flowerdew, who causally refers to himself as John, there is a tension in her writing, claiming that she does not always share his or other scholar's more sociopolitical perspective.

Moving beyond the foot-in-the-door advice for emerging academic found in the first part of the book, Steve and Paul share their working relationship as Steve "does" his part as a mentee. Paul appears as the solitary Japanese man standing at the back of a conference hall, even as he appears in this co-authored chapter: he's there but not as present in the conversation as the gushing grad Steve but still an influence.

The narrative conversation in this chapter is between stories: ones that participants tell researchers, and other that are within these stories. What makes this method of research so appealing are the "wheels within wheels" that Ryūnosuke Akutagawa writes so memorably about and the authors here connect to Bourdieu's "structuring structures." This theory leaves behind the finger-wagging Theory and goes metafictional.

Hard to imagine what was the appeal of this script, as written, with lengthy speeches, improbable deaths and unexplained patriotism for England amongst the Spanish. Seeing the action on stage, on the other hand, had thrills of all types: vengeful spirit from the underworld, a couple of hangings, several stabbing and at least two characters losing their minds. The Portuguese viceroy's subplot seemed a bit unnecessary.

Ruth gives some interior, three-dimensional space to give narrative inquiry "interaction, continuity, and situation." (p. 65) She also describes Curtis, a boy from a study, and calls to mind several insightful questions that Rosencrantz asks in the second act of Tom Stoppard's play, about being inside a box (Stoppard, p. 70-1): "Life in a box is better than no life at all." A musing for my research.

Taking a page or two from a fellow narrative inquirer, Sara Brock plans out her exclusive case study of her new-born daughter's first year. In the process, she raises the question about if one person already has a story in her sights, why muddy thing up by including other theorists and research. Rather than clouding the water, it gives her own story more depth, as well as a note-worthy dissertation for her final term

The authors continue to get nautical mileage from narrative sea metaphor, this chapter includes fishing for theorists, but the day's catch are more like cogs (cods?) in the inquiry machine. To answer some of their question: 1. Each story tells us, 2. Virtual theatre. 3. Online discussion post. Shows how digital natives study and play. 4. Co-author ethnodramatic dialogues that are staged in my virtual (Globe) theatre.

Yes, I am completely sold on the idea of narrative inquiry and cannot wait to find out more: with the well-worn but still evocative image of a sea voyage at the start of the chapter and the suggestion that data on galaxies recorded by the "time machine"-like Hubble telescope at the end of the chapter, there are more stories to tell from heaven and earth (and subconscious sea) than dreamt of in other research methods.

Re-reading the first two tragedies for a course on Shakespeare, it is revealing to see what contemporary playwrights (even the anonymous ones) were doing within a very familiar genre. With as much subtly for international relations as 1980's World Wrestling Federation caricatures, 17th century Londoners were treated to the histrionic need to get back at those Spaniards or French who did grievous wrong to Gio Averages

Tracey discover the dark side of graduate schooling: the distinctions being made with first-generation and non-traditional students, both opposed to the unspoken sense of belonging for those who can brag about ancestors in educational institutions. Setting aside this snobby hierarchy doesn't make it go away but rather emphasizes what actually matters in grad school, learning to do rather than to be.

Mayumi gives an impressive, in media res start to her story of advisory committee change, choosing two key moments of despair and decision-making. The comforting and oddly straightforward storytelling which follows demonstrates it is not the end of world if someone on the committee needs to be replaced. The actual, scarier truth revealed is how everything will run smoothly as long as someone is able to cover tuition.

Only the third chapter in and I am already getting weary of the "on my desk sits my master thesis" gambit used by numerous authors. Nevertheless, it is a common starting point for all academics, writing about a written piece nobody asides from an instructor and possible proofreader would have set their eyes upon. Xiaoming describes her journey to the argumentative west as moving beyond the bluff and being more there.

In keeping with the autoethnotheatrical, the next chapter has a scene set in a professor's office, with a desk full of manila folders containing writing samples dating back to the author's high school five-paragraph "sandwiches" to publishable "textual infusion" assignments. Each step in this scholar's journey underlines one of the most important rules of writing like a writer: never throw out anything! Keep storage!

Not only am I sold on the idea of this literacy practice guidebook for grad studies, there is a strange sense that the editor and author of the first chapter is living through experiences that are yet-to-come: she took six and a half years to finish her thesis and is now a professor in Japan! Her main idea about being open with what scholars don't know seems like a prime topic to discuss as an autoethnotheatre study.

I believe I have just stumbled upon a terrific academic discovery, hidden in the text of a puzzlingly complex literacy study. Nevertheless, various points in my post-graduate life as far back as September 7th, 2008 have led up to understanding this book. To tell it all in this update will just not do, so here's my e-palimpsest: Technological Sea-Change.

First of all, I find it comforting that the authors find a balance between the alarming drop-out rate at most graduate schools and the self-confidence attributed to first-year students who enter their studies with a game plan (reading ahead helps understand the unwritten rules!). Moreover, I am impressed with the number of Asian, as opposed to the usual Anglo-American, authors represented in soon-to-be-read chapters.

The brief history of ethnography in language and literacy studies was similar enough to the history of the East India Trading Company as observed by a tea leaf: some much of what every researcher has already done has its place within the grand scheme. Fortunately, the authors limited their examples to two scenes, British and American, and mention the importance of reflexivity. It seems I have been drafted into ethno.

While there are a bewildering variety of ethnographic styles to choose from, many of the assorted theories that were introduced in my theoretical frameworks class, the authors keep me grounded with the reminder about the juggler's performance: simply a matter of keeping two or more bits in the air while handling one item. The trick comes with transcribing all of it so it makes sense later on, a true act of balancing!

How timely that learning about research questions coincide topically with organic farming, with me reading this chapter on a day usually reserved for a trip to the farmer's market. With so many questions that come up at nearly every stage of research, from proposal to dissertation, it seems very daunting that the ever-present demand to be concise is met with the reply: not enough details. Where do researchers begin?

Proceeding in a very academic manner, the authors consider the importance of literature reviews as indicators of what has been said and done before. They each bring up the impetus behind their name-making publications: Literacy in Theory and Practice and Way with Words. They emphasize, too, that the researcher must also bring something new to the language and literacy table, and authenticity counts.

Once the researchers have got the idea for what to study, the main focus to be constantly curious about is how things happen, leaving aside questions of why for others to pick up on: how is all that they can observe. Much of what has happened before needs to be referenced, and a good ethnographer will find valuable resources. The participants will provide answers to many how questions: how often, how easy and how so?

Hard to believe that this is the first book that Street and Heath both collaborated on, but obviously not their last project. Am glad that I started reading On Ethnography so soon after my first assignment was graded and returned to me. Seems like I was doing a few things right without knowing the technical process of juggling various details of institutional and organizational forces on everyday practices.