[SSC] SSC Digest, Vol 16, Issue 40

Fri Apr 27 10:03:08 UTC 2012

Dear all,

I have been following the discussion about representation, visibility, and
the request from the BBC. Apologies in advance for the long reflection here.

On the one hand, I have reservations about the way the project and our work
on the ground gets mediated, particularly through mainstream media. I would
like to hold on to, and be mindful of, discussions we've begun this week
about timing -- whose time frames and senses of urgency or interest we want
to be part of and legitimise; what our own senses of time and possibility
are. As David asks, this is part of the ongoing process of discovery of
'who' 'we' 'are' (if there can be any such unity, and I would worry if
there was an easy answer to this just now).

At the same time, I think highly of Joss's and David's points about
creating or contributing to spaces where we might be able to make these
sorts of considerations, or at the very least some critical perspectives on
the state of higher education, the politics of knowledge, the alternative
educational activities that are going on all over the place, more visible.
We organise plenty of conferences for academics, plenty of workshops for
people who are already engaged in these debates and/or creating
alternatives. But the issues and the possibilities are not necessarily
intelligible beyond these spaces. I don't know about others, but I, for
example, struggle to make sense of it even for people in my immediate
family who are not educationalists, academics, students or anticapitalist
activists. Throwing ourselves into some part of the world at the Collection
is one way of trying to create space to do this, and I think it's a good
one in many ways. Perhaps some wider visibility through such mediation
could be another, but I think this is not without its limitations and
contradictions.

My concern is that mainstream media and in particular a 'feature
story' mode of visibility may not be entirely conducive to enabling the
sort of dialogue that at least some people involved may think important,
around the purpose and work of the Social Science Centre. I am not sure
whether it enables real dialogue at all. But if people felt they could make
this work somehow without getting enfolded into dominant logics of existing
ways of framing debates about higher education and society, then fine. The
question for me would be, *how might we make it pedagogical? *'Prefigurative
politics' is a name for trying to create different ways of doing things
here and now, with what we've got. Is there a prefigurative sort of
politics that might be possible for something like a BBC interview?

I feel strongly that if any group of people in the SSC is to take this up,
then we should at least discuss it with our colleagues and comrades working
in other projects. On the one hand, throwing everyone together into a short
feature piece would in my opinion do more harm than good to the overall
movement and to each of the individual alternatives, which are, as we saw
at the 'FUN' meeting in Birmingham, very different indeed. On the other
hand, I think accepting the invitation as if the SSC is some sort of
exemplar of 'an alternative', working in a vacuum or some other popular
vanguardist narrative would be an even worse political, pedagogical and
ethical mistake. On a third hand, if there could be some serious and
informed presentation of the *different* projects, then that could be a
really great thing.

None of this is original. While obviously from a very different context, I
like the following:

'We have a choice. We can have a cynical attitude in the face of the media
and say that nothing can be done about the dollar power that creates itself
in image, words, digital communication, and computer systems that invade
not just with an invasion of power but with a way of seeing the world, of
how they think the world should look. We could say, "well, that's the way
it is," and do nothing. Or we can simply assume incredulity. We can say
that any communication by the media monopolies is a total lie. We can
ignore it and go about our lives. But there is a third option that is
neither conformity, nor skepticism, nor distrust. It's the option to
construct a different way: to show the world what is really happening, to
have a critical worldview, to become interseted in the truth of what
happens to the people who inhabit every corner of this world. The work of
the independent media is to...' ('On independent media', a message from
Subcommondante Insurgente Marcos to 'Free Media' teach-in, NYC, 1997)

Can an interview be autonomous, pedagogical, opening-up possibilities for
people beyond this discussion list and the current membership of the SSC?
If so, good, and how so? I'd be interested to discuss.

Those are my two cents for now.

Best
Sarah

>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:17:32 +0100
> From: "Richard Keeble" <rkeeble at lincoln.ac.uk>
> To: "Richard Hall" <RHall1 at dmu.ac.uk>,  <ssc at lists.aktivix.org>
> Subject: [SSC] Representation
> Message-ID:
>        <6A2C225F32AD154D9D822F00DF34D8CB04C082D5 at AEXCMS02.network.uni>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> Dear all,
> I have received this invite from the BBC Breakfast team (see below).
> Given the discussion yesterday about how we represent ourselves to the
> media, how would you like us to proceed?
> Would someone offer themselves to be interviewed and filmed?
> Bestest,
> Richard
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> From: Claire Kendall [mailto:claire.kendall at bbc.co.uk]
> Sent: 26 April 2012 16:42
> To: Richard Keeble
> Subject: BBC News
>
>
> Dear Professor Keeble,
>
>
>
> I read recently, on the BBC Lincolnshire website, about your plans to
> start a free university, offering courses to students who will struggle
> with the high tuition fees coming in this year.
>
>
>
> I work with Chris Buckler, UK Affairs Correspondent for BBC News. I'd be
> interested in some more information about your plans, with a view to
> offering BBC Breakfast a piece, featuring some filming and an interview
> with you. The report also mentioned that you'd been to a conference in
> Birmingham recently, where you'd heard of others planning something
> similar to yourself...which I'd also be interested in any details on.
>
>
>
> Many thanks for any help you can offer,
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
> Claire
>
>
>
>
>
> Claire Kendall
>
> UK Affairs producer
>
> BBC News
>
> 07703 205806
>
> claire.kendall at bbc.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 21:16:56 +0100
> From: Joss Winn <joss at josswinn.org>
> To: "ssc at lists.aktivix.org ssc at lists.aktivix.org"
>        <ssc at lists.aktivix.org>
> Subject: Re: [SSC] Representation
> Message-ID: <7EDF94A6-C2FC-4D1F-9CFE-83B81A96B5F6 at josswinn.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Richard,
>
> I am not offering myself to be interviewed, but I think that if you or
> other members wish to speak to the BBC, you should. It sounds like they
> want to do a general piece on different groups and organisations that are
> experimenting with higher education in the face of the cuts and tuition fee
> rises. That is a good thing. If we do get involved, we should be prepared
> for lots of follow up interest on the back of it. The open day publicity
> has generated lots of emails that need answering (as you know!), 25 new
> members, 800+ hits on the website over the weekend and (it feels to me) a
> gear change in our activity around the SSC.
>
> If you do the interview, I may need help with the SSC Inbox!
>
> Following our conversations at last night's meeting, I would encourage you
> to play down your role at the University of Lincoln (it may also be
> unwanted publicity for the university), but ultimately it's your call. This
> may actually be a time when an SSC member not connected to the University
> of Lincoln is better placed to talk to the media?
>
> Joss
>
>
> >
> >
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 22:23:05 +0100
> From: David McAleavey <davidmcaleavey at virginmedia.com>
> To: Richard Keeble <rkeeble at lincoln.ac.uk>
> Cc: ssc at lists.aktivix.org
> Subject: Re: [SSC] Representation
> Message-ID:
>        <CADx5COrq_z9b=tm5XfhV-4ejaJQUcYEyaCLhmSKJoSEQYTc2PQ at mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dear All,
>
> I agree with Joss that we should respond positively to the invitation, and
> I think we should involve the other FUN programmes asap by inviting them to
> comment ahead of the researcher contacting them, as they might value the
> opportunity to reflect on their position about being in public, their
> relation to the SSC, the BBC, their respective 'day jobs'... before the BBC
> email appears in their respective inboxes... I thought Edwin's reflections
> last night on the feeling of being bounced (and in Edwin's case learning
> how to resist!) into the media's time frames/game was a valuable one.
>
> Gosh, that is a clumsy paragraph!
>
> My feeling is that a student scholar, and a teaching scholar, should
> represent us (the SSC) whenever possible; and on this occasion (an
> establishing item/feature on the BBC about Socially Engaged Education
> Practice), an active member(s) from one of the parallel programmes MUST be
> included. We (the SSC) will insist!
>
> So, to all SSC Scholars... any volunteers?
>
>
> Respectfully yours,
>
> David
>
> PS
>
> Joss, I will share the mail bag!
>
>
> So, 'who' are 'we'?
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/ssc/attachments/20120427/5533c525/attachment.html>