Data Dumps

DWYL and Higher Ed: yes BUT OUTCOME

passion, higher calling, faith

personal identity=work output

__Tokumitsu’s contrast between passion of DWYL work and silence about lack of thought__ is surprisingly different than __Marx’s analysis of the contrast between the individual and intellectual power of the pre-capitalist laborer from the dependence and routine of the capitalist worker_ in terms of _reasoning__.By this, I mean _____the reasoning__ is ____ based on how a worker buys into an idea of spiritual fulfillment and thus ignores the actual conditions__ in ____Tokumitsu’s contrast___ while there is a striking difference in ___Marx’s analysis___ in terms of ____the worker losing personal individuality and intellectual power to a system as a whole__. Noticing this pattern of ____reasoning based on individual fulfilment rather than loss to a repeated process¬___ suggests that ____hand-crafting____ is also a part of this collation because it _____ fits into a Marxian set of lost values of personal control and specialization as opposed to serving a larger system __.

caused great damage to the professions it portends to celebrate, especially those jobs existing within institutional structures

intense identification=staying silent

compensation=afterthought

Karl Marx outcomes of labor yes BUT

capitalist

life-long speciality of serving one and the same machine

helpless dependence upon the factory as a whole

the machine makes use of him

movements of the machine that he must follow

miserable routine of endless drudgery and toil in which the same mechanical process is gone through over and over again (Engels)

separation of the intellectual powers of production from the manual labour, and the conversion of those powers into the might of capital over labour

identify themselves with the unvarying regularity of the complex automaton

pre-capitalist

life-long speciality of handling one and the same tool

the workman makes use of a tool

a social division of labour, with different people involved in different branches of production or crafts

implied: intellectual powers part of creation

implied: time is free and desultory

Marx: Das Kapital

Although then, technically speaking, the old system of division of labour is thrown overboard by machinery, it hangs on in the factory, as a traditional habit handed down from Manufacture, and is afterwards systematically re-moulded and established in a more hideous form by capital, as a means of exploiting labour-power. The life-long speciality of handling one and the same tool, now becomes the life-long speciality of serving one and the same machine. Machinery is put to a wrong use, with the object of transforming the workman, from his very childhood, into a part of a detail-machine. [103] In this way, not only are the expenses of his reproduction considerably lessened, but at the same time his helpless dependence upon the factory as a whole, and therefore upon the capitalist, is rendered complete. Here as everywhere else, we must distinguish between the increased productiveness due to the development of the social process of production, and that due to the capitalist exploitation of that process. In handicrafts and manufacture, the workman makes use of a tool, in the factory, the machine makes use of him. There the movements of the instrument of labour proceed from him, here it is the movements of the machine that he must follow. In manufacture the workmen are parts of a living mechanism. In the factory we have a lifeless mechanism independent of the workman, who becomes its mere living appendage.

“The miserable routine of endless drudgery and toil in which the same mechanical process is gone through over and over again, is like the labour of Sisyphus. The burden of labour, like the rock, keeps ever falling back on the worn-out labourer.” [104]

At the same time that factory work exhausts the nervous system to the uttermost, it does away with the many-sided play of the muscles, and confiscates every atom of freedom, both in bodily and intellectual activity. [105] The lightening of the labour, even, becomes a sort of torture, since the machine does not free the labourer from work, but deprives the work of all interest. Every kind of capitalist production, in so far as it is not only a labour-process, but also a process of creating surplus-value, has this in common, that it is not the workman that employs the instruments of labour, but the instruments of labour that employ the workman. But it is only in the factory system that this inversion for the first time acquires technical and palpable reality. By means of its conversion into an automaton, the instrument of labour confronts the labourer, during the labour-process, in the shape of capital, of dead labour, that dominates, and pumps dry, living labour-power. The separation of the intellectual powers of production from the manual labour, and the conversion of those powers into the might of capital over labour, is, as we have already shown, finally completed by modern industry erected on the foundation of machinery. The special skill of each individual insignificant factory operative vanishes as an infinitesimal quantity before the science, the gigantic physical forces, and the mass of labour that are embodied in the factory mechanism and, together with that mechanism, constitute the power of the “master.” This “master,” therefore, in whose brain the machinery and his monopoly of it are inseparably united, whenever he falls out with his “hands,” contemptuously tells them:

What assumptions about work and creativity do we see in both DWYL and pre-capitalist ideas of work?

So What?: Explaining the payoff of your thinking/ writing

Data Dumps

The fact that Tokumitsu's focus on creativity and doing what you love does not take into account a pre-capitalist ideas of work changes

our analysis of the assumptions of academic laborers

by

explaining the historical reasons for valuing of hand-crafting products and self-directed creativity.

You're

Going to Need to Click

One thing which Tokumitsu doesn’t really discuss is the idea that the DWYL mantra is actually harking back to a precapitalist idea, rejecting the regularised monotony of the sort of jobs found in Fordist mass production in favour of feudal arts and crafts; part of its power is its evocation of an idealised pre-modern, pre-industrial economy, but with social media. At any rate this tends, I think, to shape the reactions of many academics to changes in higher education: expansion of class sizes means that we can no longer lovingly hand-craft our students, external constraints on research activity set limits on the free play of our creativity and try to force us into regular boxes. It all presupposes that I ought to have the freedom, as an academic, to do exactly what I like in the way I want to; we are, I think, for the most part at least partly aware of what a rare and privileged position this would be, dependent upon the labour of countless others, which is why we’re willing to open ourselves up to exploitation to such an extent – without necessarily realising that this is what we’re doing.

(http://thesphinxblog.com/2014/01/16/antiquity-and-modernity-cest-moi/)

The A to Z Method

for Thinking, Reading, and Writing

So What?: Explaining the payoff of your thinking/ writing

The contrast in reasoning as to fulfilling individuality rather than losing agency and individuality changes

the analysis of the causation

by

suggesting that workers who have a chance of keeping some sort of individuality and personal control will do so, even as it exploits others .

Data Collations

• Yes AND; Yes BUT;
• Again, look to make any connections: don't prejudge
• Can be very recursive

Shape

Size

Placement/Timing (either in terms of plot or in terms of the actual text)

Make-up/components/ function within a group

Use/Purpose

Outcome

Definitions

Reasoning

Causes

Data Dumps

• Suspend Judgment
• Use guides as ways to guide what you look for
• You may end up going back: once you notice, say, a weird pause in one line of poetry, you may realize it also happened in an earlier line

reasoning

calling gozer a "prehistoric bitch"

outcome

being shot from below

shooting from below

outcome

shifts the focus to the fact that it is a woman who causes loss of power and she is a "bitch" they sem to particularly dislike her for being a strong woman

shooting from below makes the men seem less powerful and the women way more powerful

outcome

portraying and attacking female power

outcome

shooting from below

holding guns at crotch level/referring to them as tools

what creates power? it seems split between natural power (they look up to Gozer) and technologucal power

Gozer's masculine appearance

this suggests that there is a way for met to gain power through the tools that they use

We are presented with a strong female, but she is seen as "inapropriate" in that she does not look feminine

Let's Get Recursive

• return to same text
• use what you've noticed to focus in, while remaining open

Outcome Yes AND: Female Power

Use/Purpose Yes AND: Religious symbols

__The fact the scene is shot from below__ is surprisingly like __calling Gozer a "prehistoric bitch"_ in terms of _outcome._

By this, I mean _____the outcome__ is ____making women seem powerful because they are visually bigger (description of how it fulfills the term in the box)__ in ____being shot from below___ and the same holds true in ___calling Gozer a prehistoric bitch___ in terms of ____bitch being a term that connotes a strong woman who is attacked for her power (description of how it fulfills the term in the box) __. Noticing this pattern of ____portraying and attacking female power (a more precise definition of term from the box above¬)___ suggests that ____Gozer's masculine appearance (new detail not in original collation/dump)____ is also a part of this collation because it _____ portrays a female power while suggesting it is not appropriate (description of how it fulfills the term in the box) __.

description of collation

churches, pyramids,

"no one steps on a church in my town"

"are you a god"

are you a God?

power over animals

NOTE THAT SHOWING MORE AS THINKNG--ENCOURAGE TO USE WORKSHHET

Makeup of Group: Yes BUT: Human vs Animal

"Prehistoric bitch", dogs, "nimble little minx" vs "we have the tools we have the technology" "Dr."

Outcome: Yes BUT: female power vs phallic symbols

Definition: Yes AND: Phallic Symbols

tall towers, buildings, hold guns at crotch level, call them "sticks" "tools," marshmallow man explodes into white goo...

Where is the eye attracted first? Why? tall buildings; churches; pyramids--frames all the shots; column to sky;

o Angle. High, low, or eye-level? shot from below/looking up;

o What words/ideas/images keep coming up? List the specifics."prehistoric bitch" "we neutronized her"

o What values and beliefs are reflected in the text? Through what means?"we have the tools"

hold guns at crotch level; "sticks";

How much space is there between the characters? african american man off to side; men usually shot in groups;

marshmallow man dressed like sailor;

"my town"

Yes BUT: Makeup of Group Rcial Unity

African-American man is often portrayed as off the side, on his own vs 3 Caucasian men shot as a group, touch each other often, cross streams

2 BASIC FLAVORS OF COLLATIONS

Yes, and.....

critical claim

data dump

collation

Yes, but.....

1060: Collating Your Source with Other's Encounters

1. Write out the encounter you are now thinking about, shaped by the research you've been doing. It should be more specific than your starting one.

So "How does satire work in visual images?" may, based on your reseach, now be "how does the use of reversal coupled with icons modify thecorrective measures of visual satire?"

Encounter Templates:

• Why does [COLLATION] surface in [PARTICULAR WAY]?

• How does [COLLATION] modify [PARTICULAR PRACTICE/ANALYSIS/ UNDERSTANDING]?

• To what extent does [ELEMENT OF COLLATION] replace/change [OTHER ELEMENT OF COLLATION]?

2. Write a tenative, 1-2 sentence answer to your encounter, based on your research and thinking. This is what's called a "working thesis."

3. Pair up with another person. Read each other's steps 1 and 2. Then, suggest one of your sources and a particular so what/collation from it (so one of the sentances of your summary--not the more general mega so what) that might relate to theior encounter/so what and tell them why. Write that so what down on their paper.

4. Pair up with another another person. Read each other's steps 1 and 2. Then, suggest one of your sources and a particular so what/collation from it (so one of the sentances of your summary--not the more general mega so what) that might relate to theior encounter/so what and tell them why. Write that so what down on their paper.

5. Pair up with another another another person. Read each other's steps 1 and 2. Then, suggest one of your sources and a particular so what/collation from it (so one of the sentances of your summary--not the more general mega so what) that might relate to theior encounter/so what and tell them why. Write that so what down on their paper.

6. Choose the one you think will be most useful to _your_ paper, return to that person and their prezi, and copy down the collation details taht led to that so what.