SLIDE ONE: TITLE
Hello! Delighted to be here!
===
SLIDE TWO: WEBSITE
You can find my talk online at this website, which also
works on a smart phone. There you can follow along with the slides if you want,
and find handouts, bibliography and other resources for later use. So boot it
up now or later, as you like!
===
SLIDE THREE: HANDOUTS
There are paper handouts being passed around now too
that record this url as well, and expand on some of the points I will be making
as I talk. They too can be downloaded from my talksite.
Thank you so much for the invitation to gather with you all
to care with and about Queer Method!
===
SLIDE FOUR: QUEER FRIENDS
I admit that my way of doing queer stuff is often, well,
rather odd. I once did a presentation on Queer Transdisciplinarities, talking
about academic restructuring and distributed being at a time when that appeared
to many to be beside the queer point! But
even then I had gut feelings that at stake were the conditions for my
continuing…. My queer-dar was kicking in.
===
SLIDE FIVE: METHODS
Methods are companions here, companions in the middle of
everything as it happens, in
sensations at the edge of apprehension. In the midst of knowledge worlds restructuring.
===
SLIDE SIX: NOTICING
Companions for one’s practices of noticing what is happening when it is happening.
===
SLIDE SEVEN: QUEER
So what is it that’s queer here? What is the queer-dar
doing? In my own life it has meant, more often than not, jumping into what
doesn’t really make sense, sometimes too naïvely, other times too reactively, all
because I am unclear just how careful it all needs to be, and differently for
myself and others. Not at all sure just how dangerous and entangled in degree,
or perhaps not at all, everything might be….
===
SLIDE EIGHT: FUN
and also, actually, FUN!
===
SLIDE NINE: TANGLES
Lots of double bind feelings, and I cannot always tell the
difference between the kinds of double binds that are abusively dangerous, the kinds that are about initiation into new states of change, institutionalization, or
awareness, and the kinds that are puzzles to solve in games and play honing our double consciousness. Such
transcontextual confusions may be shifted
by
===
===
SLIDE TEN: BEFRIENDED
companionships, in queer gatherings, in care as befriended.
companionships, in queer gatherings, in care as befriended.
SLIDE ELEVEN: EVA
So this is far from the only time I will have drawn upon friendship as method. Pairing me now with
Eva Hayward is perfect, for Eva has companioned me among queer
transdisciplinarities….
===
Eva shares her process ontologies of transing as many reembodied sensory arts in transgendered practices. TEXTURES INDEED. She and Bailey Kier got me looking around and indexing networked methodologies of trans knowledges in flexible, global cognitions….
SLIDE TWELVE: TRANIMAL
Eva shares her process ontologies of transing as many reembodied sensory arts in transgendered practices. TEXTURES INDEED. She and Bailey Kier got me looking around and indexing networked methodologies of trans knowledges in flexible, global cognitions….
As viral vectors, their transgenic materials are always
carried now in my most underlying uses and understandings of trans….
and in my awareness that trans-disciplinary
work requires great friendships, and delights in the minds, presence, and embodiments
of companions and companion species, amid varying arts, relationalities, languages
and revectored meanings. I loved it when Eva and I used to meet in the distant
nearness of spacetime in the virtual world Second Life, as I researched my
distributed animality for a project with her, my bit was training an artificial
intelligence agent dog to heard sheep in this virtual world.
===
From quantum anthropologies to object-oriented feminisms to racial matters and animacies to postcarbon futures to carceral geographies to economies of abandonment, measures of nothingness, and methodologies of the oppressed…. Some people, objects, methods, processes arise to facilitate “passages between worlds” as Gloria Anzaldúa had it.
SLIDE THIRTEEN: TRANSCONTEXT
Many contexts, many worlds are inhabitations for feminisms.
===
SLIDE FOURTEEN: NEPANTLERAS
From quantum anthropologies to object-oriented feminisms to racial matters and animacies to postcarbon futures to carceral geographies to economies of abandonment, measures of nothingness, and methodologies of the oppressed…. Some people, objects, methods, processes arise to facilitate “passages between worlds” as Gloria Anzaldúa had it.
Both local knowledges and also “cross-layering”
coordinations are necessities in restructuring knowledge worlds. We find ourselves
needing to work together, even mandated to collaborate, in workarounds
where consensus is not always possible or even desirable, although sometimes it is a possibility still in
process.
===
SLIDE FIFTEEN: NOTICING
Thus, when a series of groups needs a shared something in order to work things out
together, perhaps to revise concepts, methods, activities, protocols that seem to be missing that which is newly
crucial, at that point, boundary objects
open up.
===
SLIDE SIXTEEN: INDIVIDUALISM
These may jump around in meaning precisely to keep
differences and boundaries from getting in the way of feminists working
together. This usually happens without everyone being particularly aware of
what is going on. These jumps of meaning allow groups to work cooperatively, thus
boundary objects often do not make
boundaries but rather keep boundaries from
getting in the way.
(This is a screenshot from my class website on the day we
discuss how the book Our Bodies Ourselves
and its different translations become boundary objects, as they re-examine
“individualism” for its divergent politics in different places: Bulgaria, Latin
America, Mexico and the US. Kathy Davis’ book demonstrates the work the term
does, the translations do, what the many versions of the book bring into being,
as they come together in one and more boundary objects: books, words,
collectives of people, processes of translation, and the politics of health in
different economies.)
===
SLIDE SEVENTEEN: JELLY
In other words, boundary
objects open up
=as spaces for communication, in which collaborations
without agreement together in levels of generality, can begin, in between the very knowledge worlds;
=where at the same time intensive negotiations are going on,
perhaps over practice and terminologies, evidence and argument, activisms and
social change processes, at closer grains of detail; and
=thus, between the spaces working at high levels of
generality, and the knowledge worlds of detail and practice they coordinate and
layer, any paradoxical mismatches are at this point tacit, perhaps unnoticed while
altering.
<<YES, in my
mind’s eye, this looks like a jellyfish! Must be Eva’s influence!>>
===
SLIDE EIGHTEEN: EXAMPLES
At first the local tailoring that each group does, like the
translation collectives for Our Bodies
Ourselves, perhaps needed to fill in the detail that allows them to use this shared something, this local
tailoring tends to be tacit, sometimes even unconscious. Everyone assumes and instrumentalizes
a degree of agreement and shared detail that is meaningful to them locally.
===
SLIDE NINETEEN: CYCLE
But as the boundary object goes through its ontological
cycle of makings, the general elements and the specific ones tense up about mismatches more obvious
now. Some of the participants and processes involved may work to standardize these originally enabling
mismatches. Other times, this is a
moment for problematizing a desire for standardization, or for looking to one’s
own communities of practice for referential authority. And in the course of standardization
processes what is now shared may very well throw off residual elements, those now
outside a particular standardization. Then, new boundary objects are needed,
and begin being made as alternative alliances and co-operations now emerge. This
image is from Susan Leigh Star’s last essay, which jokes very seriously about
this process in its title “This is not a boundary object”: especially meaningful
because this very thing “boundary object” is still in the process of shifting
in these ways now itself. That boundary objects may paradoxically refer to
themselves multiply, with meanings jumping about, may goad some standardizations
when all this begins to become frustratingly obvious. Star jokes too that just
because she was an originator of this whole idea, she is not its owner: that is
the whole point after all: it’s shared. A gathering.
Standardization is always double-edged and bound in
spacetime. There just is never only one way of getting things right, and there
are always reasons to keep generalizing from what next might look to work.
===
SLIDE TWENTY: RESTRUCTURING
What are some of these boundary objects? Well, what is transdisciplinary is one, and one that
will keep coming back in and out of focus as I talk. What the Director of
Research at my university means by transdisciplinary is both similar to and
subtly different from what one of the NTT scientists doing contract research
means by it: the Director uses it at a grand scale to donors to get enthusiasm
going at a time when economic restructuring generally demands that universities
justify their use of public money by also attracting private investment; the
research scientist is only too aware that what she does on contract, which
makes the university look good, is at her professional expense, as she will get
no academic credit for it.
===
SLIDE TWENTY ONE: NGRAM EXAMPLES
What is transdisciplinary in my women’s studies department?
as we begin a new search, now that the LGBTQ program at UMD is moving from
under the umbrella of undergraduate studies, to merging with women’s studies,
and we have to come up with a new way of institutionalizing the relationships
between these fields, their histories and activisms, not to mention staff,
procedures, and signature events, all this happens amid our local hopes for
graduate training, which assume forms of membership and authority that are differently volatile across our, yes,
transdisciplinary meanings. Lots of boundary objects are involved.
===
SLIDE TWENTY TWO: METHODS CYCLE
What is transdisciplinary is in process and change,
entangled in large, even global economic systems, national debates on
innovation, education reform and same sex politics, racial and economic
disparities, specific sites for creating, sharing, demonstrating, storing, and
teaching folks to use new knowledges.
===
===
SLIDE TWENTY THREE: TRANSXENO
And transdisciplinary is also a resource to those of us
wondering how to work among many interacting agencies, such as those Eva has called
“transxenoestrogenesis.” In a forthcoming essay she remarks:
"Neither utopic nor dystopic, transxenoestrogenesis
opens the realization that bodies are lively and practical responses to
environments and changing ecosystems, even when those same engines of change promise
exposure to carcinogens, neurotoxins, asthmagens and mutagens, and
possibilities of cancer, diabetes, immune system breakdown, and heart disease.
And in the double binds of biochemistry, some phytoestrogens and mycoestrogens,
both xenoestrogens, promote heart health and cancer prevention. Another double
bind for transgender studies: is there a way to reevaluate ecological
resilience—such as the sex-changing response—and meet the future organisms that
we are all becoming?" (Hayward “Transxenoestrogenesis,” Transgender Quarterly
1:1: forthcoming)
===
SLIDE TWENTY FOUR: NGRAM TRANS
One of the most confusing elements of boundary objects is
how utterly self-referential they tend to be and how interacting are their
names as words, their referentialities as plural and enfoldings, their
slipperiness as neither simply representation or object of representation. They
track as words and names, and are lively
agencies as such, and yet that is never all that they are.
Here is a google ngram, a small experience of big data
sharing with us one slice into the entanglements among boundary objects named
transcontextual, transdisciplinary, and transgender. Now we start to feel out
the confusions and enfoldings that object-ness offers us as among agencies for caring with queer method….
===
SLIDE TWENTY FIVE: STIGMERGY
Once we really take boundary objects as companions in queer
method, befriending and being befriended, feelings
for complexity get stronger, take up more room, participate in activities of
cross-layering coordinations….
From the languages of complex systems analysis and
cybernetics, in which as an undergrad I was offered one knowledge worlding home, I take as companion some of what the
term stigmergy enlivens…. You may
know it as the sort of indirect coordinations some insects depend upon and that
flash mobs arise from. Its being-ness enfolds singularity and multiplicity, and
I recognize it as an affect, not just
a mechanism, as not a gods-eye-view analytic, but as how to feel it all happening WITH…
===
SLIDE TWENTY SIX: SPIDERS
===
SLIDE TWENTY SEVEN: FRIENDS ON GOOGLE
Stigmergy and boundary objects are friends. They google here
with big data.
===
SLIDE TWENTY EIGHT: BEHAR
Big data is an environment in which we need our feeling with stigmergy, which befriends us in its
environment whether we like that or not.
Our embodiments are altered here among the ngrams as they are among the
estrogens. Transxenoestrogenesis and object-oriented feminisms, the bigger and
the closer newly in flux and play.
===
For example, I learned the term “experimental metaphysics” only recently, in the context of completing an article on the work of feminist physicist Karen Barad. I started to credit her with this term, where indeed it originates for me, but on google I discover its boundary-object-ness in one slice across enfoldings:
SLIDE TWENTY NINE: BARAD
It gets queerer still. All this touching oneself, these
recursions that we try to keep straight, the enfoldings we cannot figure out
where the insides and outsides are, these queer intimacies are transdisciplinary: and they mix
knowledge worlds in ways that can feel only too …delicate.
===
SLIDE THIRTY: METAPHYSICS
For example, I learned the term “experimental metaphysics” only recently, in the context of completing an article on the work of feminist physicist Karen Barad. I started to credit her with this term, where indeed it originates for me, but on google I discover its boundary-object-ness in one slice across enfoldings:
Its dance begins in the early 19th c. An early
20th c. back and forth between “ontological turn” and “experimental
metaphysics” is then joined in the 30s by “experimental epistemology” when
“ontological turn” virtually disappears until the 60s when it comes in to dance
again in non-stop activity that overtook the other two in couples completely in
the 90s.
===
And it all needs scoping and scaling, moving in and among the systems big data only gives us a glimpse into, altho that glimpse can shift our sensory and cognitive attachments, the very edges of embodiments. Our queer-dar may jump around, transing….
SLIDE THIRTY ONE: POSTHUMANITIES
And it all needs scoping and scaling, moving in and among the systems big data only gives us a glimpse into, altho that glimpse can shift our sensory and cognitive attachments, the very edges of embodiments. Our queer-dar may jump around, transing….
Once I got going on these ngrams, I couldn’t help noticing
how different they look if you graph something by itself, and with companions.
Notice how nearly invisible the posthumanities are drawn next to that
uncomfortable post human….
===
Clarity
can be overvalued.
===
SLIDE THIRTY TWO: NEWS
How counter-intuitively historically lengthy the hot
boundary objects are. But then it is important to notice that an ngram is another
and genuinely new standardization: there are knowledge worlds short changed in
this ngram, because there is not just one past, but many. What systems folks call
hysteresis requires an awareness that
many states are present simultaneously as complex systems entangle, and each
one’s temporal enfoldings are not simply linear, however dependent on pasts
they may be. In practice that means that new is not a misnomer, but another
knot of connectedness across worlds that may genuinely effect unique
emergences.
===
SLIDE THIRTY THREE: GAPS
Responding to all this reality touching itself, these queer
intimacies, a desire to get outside, to get to clarity in the midst of
confusion and frustration, finds us creating gaps for these knowings. Gaps
manage the paradoxes of self-referentiality and enfolding, work apart to part
so we know which are the objects to look at, and which are the god’s eye
languages to analyze them.
But that gap of representation has a big price tag: its
control is illusory and very much gets in the way of participations among the
very complex systems we do actually companion and enfold among and as.
===
SLIDE THIRTY FOUR: BOOF
The background picture for this slide comes from an artist
Eva introduced me to, Erica Rutherford. There is a link to more of and about
her work on the talksite.
So this is my last meditation on queer method, on feminist
boundary-object oriented ontologies or boundary object-oriented feminisms. When
are we also boundary objects and why might we happily care with queer method
this way? How might we trade in mirroring realities for inhabiting them, for
gathering together WITH?
===
SLIDE THIRTY FIVE: WEBSITE
Thank you!
===
King, K. 2013. “toward a feminist boundary object-oriented ontology...or should it be a boundary object-oriented feminism? these are both queer methods.” For Queer Method, University of Pennsylvania, 31 October 2013; at: http://fembooo.blogspot.com
===
King, K. 2013. “toward a feminist boundary object-oriented ontology...or should it be a boundary object-oriented feminism? these are both queer methods.” For Queer Method, University of Pennsylvania, 31 October 2013; at: http://fembooo.blogspot.com
===